When you said you had/have a SW77 I checked it
out because I mistakingly thought it was a Hallicrafters....mixing up
the SW for the SX - follow me?

I read the reviews on that piece on eham and other than one
guy....everyone said it's a great receiver.
****BUT**** the MSRP was $699.99!!!!!


I know the MSRP isn't usually what it sells for.
You didn't pay that for it did you? I wonder how that piece would
stack up against the fully loaded DX398
on hams and UTES.

On 12/20/2009 9:45 AM, Gregg wrote:
When you said you had/have a SW77 I checked it
out because I mistakingly thought it was a Hallicrafters....mixing up
the SW for the SX - follow me?

I read the reviews on that piece on eham and other than one
guy....everyone said it's a great receiver.
****BUT**** the MSRP was $699.99!!!!!


I know the MSRP isn't usually what it sells for.
You didn't pay that for it did you? I wonder how that piece would
stack up against the fully loaded DX398
on hams and UTES.

Gregg. The SW77 is a nice port. it was an update/ replacement for
the 2010. at the time it was good, but, not as good as the 2010,
in mho. myself, i screwed up, and let my 2010 go. at the time i
picked up 2 Sw77, at the free shop in Porto Rico. was a good deal.
got them at 299.00 each. so, used one, and the other is unopened.
nobody paid MSRP. OK, it's a good receiver, but, in a portable,
the 2010 is better. the 77 does not have the weak front-end the
2010 has. between the 2, take the 2010. or, get the E1. the Eaton
is a super port if you can find one that works. if your looking,
go to the yahoo groups first. that's what i do, then make your
decision. don't get me wrong, eHam is cool, but all it takes is
one post to screw up a good receiver. BTW, the 398 is good, but
the front end won't take too much antenna. off the whip it's
good. hope this helps.

Drifter...

On Dec 20, 7:08*am, Drifter wrote:
On 12/20/2009 9:45 AM, Gregg wrote:

When you said you had/have a SW77 I checked it
out because I mistakingly thought it was a Hallicrafters....mixing up
the SW for the SX - follow me?

I read the reviews on that piece on eham and other than one
guy....everyone said it's a great receiver.
****BUT**** the MSRP was $699.99!!!!!

I know the MSRP isn't usually what it sells for.
You didn't pay that for it did you? I wonder how that piece would
stack up against the fully loaded DX398
on hams and UTES.

Gregg. The SW77 is a nice port. it was an update/ replacement for
the 2010. at the time it was good, but, not as good as the 2010,
in mho. myself, i screwed up, and let my 2010 go. at the time i
picked up 2 Sw77, at the free shop in Porto Rico. was a good deal.
got them at 299.00 each. so, used one, and the other is unopened.
nobody paid MSRP. OK, it's a good receiver, but, in a portable,
the 2010 is better. the 77 does not have the weak front-end the
2010 has. between the 2, take the 2010. or, get the E1. the Eaton
is a super port if you can find one that works. if your looking,
go to the yahoo groups first. that's what i do, then make your
decision. don't get me wrong, eHam is cool, but all it takes is
one post to screw up a good receiver. BTW, the 398 is good, but
the front end won't take too much antenna. off the whip it's
good. hope this helps.

Drifter...

Thanks for the response Drifter.

Oilrightttttt,,,, Liberty Post is backkkk,,,
www.libertypost.org
cuhulin

Bob Dobbs wrote:
Gregg wrote:
When you said you had/have a SW77 I checked it
out because I mistakingly thought it was a Hallicrafters....mixing up
the SW for the SX - follow me?

I should have said the ICF-SW77 an exalted Sony 'upgrade' to the venerable
ICF-2010. It had more memories and an equivalent quantity of difficulty in
programming the alphanumeric tags and group assignments, but the fatal flaw in
addition to the dirt prone tuning wheel was the chuffing sound when using it.
About the only positive point over thw 2010 was the syncdet was selectable,
even though it didn't lock and perform as tight.

I read the reviews on that piece on eham and other than one
guy....everyone said it's a great receiver.

See how many of those multi-star reviewers have one on eBay. ;-)

****BUT**** the MSRP was $699.99!!!!!

That's just a setup number so when it actually sells for about two thirds from
some dealer that can't advertise, you feel like you've gotten a good deal, like
the bad cop good cop routine, you still confess but don't feel so bad about it.

I know the MSRP isn't usually what it sells for.
You didn't pay that for it did you?

A frustrated prior owner gave it to a mutual friend and I traded one of the
first Uniden Bearcat trunk tracking handheld scanners to him for it.
Hard to say who came out ahead.

I wonder how that piece would
stack up against the fully loaded DX398
on hams and UTES.

Not familiar with the DX398, RS I believe, who makes it for them?
never mind,
I googled it to be the very favorably regarded Sangean ATS-909
which I haven't ever had so still can't compare,
But I bet there are those in this group who can. g

OK for Europe and E. NAm. Lacks wide open sensitivity.

Bob Dobbs wrote:

I should have said the ICF-SW77 an exalted Sony 'upgrade' to the venerable
ICF-2010. It had more memories and an equivalent quantity of difficulty in
programming the alphanumeric tags and group assignments, but the fatal flaw in
addition to the dirt prone tuning wheel was the chuffing sound when using it.
About the only positive point over thw 2010 was the syncdet was selectable,
even though it didn't lock and perform as tight.

I've never used a SW-77, although I had one of the first '2010 in the US.
A friend of mine at the time was a gray market importer, and air-freighted
the first batch from Japan.

It's a great receiver, although I no longer use it, I occasionaly take it down,
replace the micropressor memory/clock batteries and stroke it. Along the way, I
lost my 240 volt AC adapator for it, and I guess I'll replace it real soon
now. I still have the original 100 volt one that came with it.

With the sync detector, it receives AM well. IMHO the tuning is too coarse
for SSB or CW, but it's ok for casual listening. I always found that it was
lacking sensitivity for UTEs. Adding an AMECO PT-3 (18db preamp with a tuned
front end) fixed that deficency.

At this point, I think though if you were going to use it for UTEs, I would go
for something more capable in that range, e.g. a Kenwood R5000. If you can get
one with no add ons, but a resonably fresh battery and the PLL fix, it would
be a good start. You don't really need to add anything at all, although a
narrow filter might be nice if you want to dig that CW signal out of
the QRM, but I'm not sure there is very much of it left outside the ham bands.

There is lots of QRM from digital sources, but a narrow filter is not going
to help with that.

Geoff.


--
Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jerusalem, Israel N3OWJ/4X1GM
New word I coined 12/13/09, "Sub-Wikipedia" adj, describing knowledge or
understanding, as in he has a sub-wikipedia understanding of the situation.
i.e possessing less facts or information than can be found in the Wikipedia.