[amsat-bb] 736 vs. 2000X

Christopher Maness christopher.maness at gmail.com
Thu May 12 13:49:54 UTC 2016

> On May 12, 2016, at 4:57 AM, Jeff Lamb <nx9b at comcast.net> wrote:
> Hi, Chris. I was reading the thread on the AMSATbb about choosing between the 736 and a 2000X. 
> One thing I think everyone missed is that the 2000X also has 23cm built in. Does the 736 have the 23cm module? If so, that evens it out a little but from strictly a power point the 100/50/10 from the Kenwood would trump the 25watts of the 736. Plus the 736 is an older design and while it 'might' have a better receiver, the differences would be negligible.
> Yes, the 2000 has a birdy on the SO50 (& AO27) downlink but there are work-arounds for that too.
> Plus computer control of the 2000 is easy while the 736 barely works with a computer. It's just older tech that does not do bidirectional signaling between rig and computer which the 2000 does with ease. 
> I envy you for having to make such a decision. Most guys would take either one and be happy. 
> Good luck with your choice. 
> 73 de Jeff, NX9B, EM66sj

It has the 1.2GHz card, but I think it has an issue (the card), but hopefully it can be repaired.  Everything else seems to work.  Also, I am thinking the TS-2000X does not do SSB full duplex, correct?  Someone in this thread mentioned the 736 does full duplex in both modes.  Part of the deal included an SSB 150W brick from RFConcepts.  However, it needs 40W to drive it to 150W.  Another pro for the TS-2000X is that it has built in TNC’s.  I do a bit of packet, so that is kind of neat.  The manual mentioned 9k6 too, but I am not sure if any birds are running 9k6 packet anymore.  If the TNC can do KISS, I can use my jnos running in linux again.

Chris KQ6UP

More information about the AMSAT-BB mailing list