someone told me that they really like their modified DX-394. can other
people with a modified one tell me what they think of it ? I might
want to buy one.

One word, JUNK

"the captain" wrote in message
om...
someone told me that they really like their modified DX-394. can other
people with a modified one tell me what they think of it ? I might
want to buy one.

Don't believe "WG"!
Join the RadioShack dx394 Group at Yahoo Groups and find out the truth.
Chuck


the captain wrote:

someone told me that they really like their modified DX-394. can other
people with a modified one tell me what they think of it ? I might
want to buy one.

Not too bad on AM (with mods and after market filter) very wide on SSB.

gil

--
Please remove NOSPAM to reply
the captain wrote in message
om...
someone told me that they really like their modified DX-394. can other
people with a modified one tell me what they think of it ? I might
want to buy one.

"the captain" wrote in message
om...
someone told me that they really like their modified DX-394. can other
people with a modified one tell me what they think of it ? I might
want to buy one.
I've owned the B model- very disappointing performance. Synthesizer chuffs,
filters are wide with poor skirts.
Maybe I'm just spoiled.

Dale W4OP

your answer is useless for me.

you need to be much more specific.

please do not reply with useless answers.




"WG" wrote in message news:TLm8c.6883$Ct5.4014@edtnps89...
One word, JUNK

"the captain" wrote in message
om...
someone told me that they really like their modified DX-394. can other
people with a modified one tell me what they think of it ? I might
want to buy one.

You can get much better radios for less money and not have to do any
modifications to them. the DX-394 has a bad drift on SSB and is a basic
brick compared to other radios that I have had like my old Drake SSR-1 or my
Yeasu FRG-7. My DX-394 is a better radio then my DX-300 was and much better
then the old DX-440. I could go on and on but this went around and around
about 2 weeks ago. Stick with the professional grade communications
receivers from people like Kenwood, Icom, Drake and Yeasu. The ones of the
same aria as the 394 are about the same price at Ham Swap Meets with better
features and one hell of a lot better sensitive.

"the captain" wrote in message
om...
your answer is useless for me.

you need to be much more specific.

please do not reply with useless answers.




"WG" wrote in message
news:TLm8c.6883$Ct5.4014@edtnps89...
One word, JUNK

"the captain" wrote in message
om...
someone told me that they really like their modified DX-394. can other
people with a modified one tell me what they think of it ? I might
want to buy one.

ka6uup wrote in message ...
Don't believe "WG"!
Join the RadioShack dx394 Group at Yahoo Groups and find out the truth.
Chuck


He was told the truth: The DX394 is a poor performer. Better radios
can be had for about the same money, so why should he settle for an
entry-level piece of junk?

I'd rather have a DX398 portable than the DX394. Even with all the
mods I could find it was still a poor radio. The memory scheme is
completely stupid, there is awful IF bleed-through, it has lousy
selectivity without replacement filters, and the audio is only
tolerable.

If the truth will save him some grief and money, why would you tell
him otherwise?

Comparisons are often invidious. The SSR-1 was made 20 years before the
DX-394. Its published specs suggest it had superior selectivity, similar
sensitivity, but had poorer tuning accuracy, resolution, image and IF
suppression compared to the stock DX-394. The SSR-1 had no tuning memories;
the DX-394 has 160 plus remembers the last frequency tuned on every one of
16 bands and is much easier to tune - the pre-selector auto tracks. A modded
DX-394 can have improved selectivity.

The FRG-7 is also almost 20 years before the DX-394's time. Interestingly,
it, too, was the subject of modifications similar to some performed on the
DX-394 - AGC, selectivity and noise limiter being common. Had
rec.radio.shortwave been around then, I'm sure it would have had many more.
The published specs are skimpy but the stock DX-394 matches on selectivity
and betters it by 6dB in sensitivity. FRG-7 tuning is cumbersome and has no
memories. There is a 194 member FRG-7 user group on Yahoo vs a nearly 600
member DX-394 group.

The DX-394 is a very stable, microprocessor controlled radio, exhibiting
negligible drift from turn-on. If WG's has a bad drift, then it's
exceptional. However, there have been reports of ment that adversely affects
SSB/CW operation - whether factory or user misalignment or aging has caused
it remains a mystery. I have 3 of them; one was off by 1kHz but was usable -
there was a decidedly different spectral distribution for USB vs LSB speech.

If you can afford a higher class radio go for it. If you can't, you'll get a
great bang for your buck from a DX-394. For more info about the DX-394 and
the myriad mods that can be done to it, join
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RADIOSHACKDX394/.

Tom

WG wrote:
You can get much better radios for less money and not
have to do any modifications to them. the DX-394 has a
bad drift on SSB and is a basic brick compared to other
radios that I have had like my old Drake SSR-1 or my
Yeasu FRG-7. My DX-394 is a better radio then my DX-300
was and much better then the old DX-440. I could go on
and on but this went around and around about 2 weeks ago.
Stick with the professional grade communications
receivers from people like Kenwood, Icom, Drake and
Yeasu. The ones of the same aria as the 394 are about the
same price at Ham Swap Meets with better features and one
hell of a lot better sensitive.

"the captain" wrote in message
om...
your answer is useless for me.

you need to be much more specific.

please do not reply with useless answers.




"WG" wrote in message
news:TLm8c.6883$Ct5.4014@edtnps89...
One word, JUNK

"the captain" wrote in message
om...
someone told me that they really like their modified
DX-394. can other people with a modified one tell me
what they think of it ? I might want to buy one.

Tom Holden wrote:
Comparisons are often invidious. The SSR-1 was made 20 years before the
DX-394. Its published specs suggest it had superior selectivity, similar
sensitivity, but had poorer tuning accuracy, resolution, image and IF
suppression compared to the stock DX-394. The SSR-1 had no tuning memories;
the DX-394 has 160 plus remembers the last frequency tuned on every one of
16 bands and is much easier to tune - the pre-selector auto tracks. A modded
DX-394 can have improved selectivity.

The FRG-7 is also almost 20 years before the DX-394's time. Interestingly,
it, too, was the subject of modifications similar to some performed on the
DX-394 - AGC, selectivity and noise limiter being common. Had
rec.radio.shortwave been around then, I'm sure it would have had many more.
The published specs are skimpy but the stock DX-394 matches on selectivity
and betters it by 6dB in sensitivity. FRG-7 tuning is cumbersome and has no
memories. There is a 194 member FRG-7 user group on Yahoo vs a nearly 600
member DX-394 group.

The DX-394 is a very stable, microprocessor controlled radio, exhibiting
negligible drift from turn-on. If WG's has a bad drift, then it's
exceptional. However, there have been reports of ment that adversely affects
SSB/CW operation - whether factory or user misalignment or aging has caused
it remains a mystery. I have 3 of them; one was off by 1kHz but was usable -
there was a decidedly different spectral distribution for USB vs LSB speech.

If you can afford a higher class radio go for it. If you can't, you'll get a
great bang for your buck from a DX-394. For more info about the DX-394 and
the myriad mods that can be done to it, join
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RADIOSHACKDX394/.

Tom

Tom - great last name!

I think the point is the DX-394 tends to be getting expensive on ebay.

I've seen some dx-394's bring $250.

Quite a few close in the general range of $200.

Personal tastes vary, but I think a used ten-tec rx-320 offers more bang
for the buck in the $200-$225 range.