Re: Fake - comment from another list
Hi Guys,
I believe we can all afford the modest luxury of waiting until mid-year, to
see whether or not the promised announcement materialises.
A product such as the IC-7000 makes sense, as it is
By
Adam Farson
·
#285
·
|
Re: Fake - comment from another list
I belive it is a hoax. Hell... I was fooled by a website with a
annoucement of the "new" Yaesu FT 958.
I remember we had the same discussion before the Yaesu 857 came out.
What finally ended the
By
kyradio101 <kyradio@...>
·
#284
·
|
Re: Fake - comment from another list
A radio that will be built in Asia, and there's no mention in the
Asian trade mags...
A radio whose largest target market is North America, and Icom-North
America knows nothing about it.
And to
By
Clint Bradford <clintbrad4d@...>
·
#283
·
|
Re: Fake - comment from another list
Ladies and gentlemen,
May I suggest that we stop quarrelling about whether the IC-7000 really
exists or not, and simply wait until 2Q/2005 - as the web page "sez"?
As I remarked last week:
If the
By
Adam Farson
·
#282
·
|
Re: Fake?
N1PXB wrote:
<snip>
Well ,for now I would like it to be true, since it sounds like a nice
That's the nice thing about it. It is what you want it to be. Until it's announced by Icom, everything
By
Keith V <kavan@...>
·
#281
·
|
Re: Fake?
That is what the original article in the French ham magazine said it was.
{^_^}
By
jdow <jdow@...>
·
#280
·
|
Fake?
Hello all,
Here is why
- There is no natural picture like shadows and shines - The picture is
bright less
- The scope meter shows a very high resolution...I think even on those
modern digital
By
Rodrigo <yid_grps@...>
·
#279
·
|
Re: Fake - comment from another list
Not my comment, don't shoot the messenger.
If it's like most other products, many of
the reps have no idea what it looks like.
Tom NU4G
By
Tom Norris <r390a@...>
·
#278
·
|
Re: Fake?
Here Here Me Too Cant wait to see what's in store.
73 De k9ghz Frank
Rob Boux <boux@...> wrote:
Hi all,
Could it be a proto type drawing using computer software? Hey, we all know the 706xxx
By
Frank
·
#277
·
|
Re: Fake?
--- Rodrigo <yid_grps@...> wrote:.>
When the pic was released by the French magazine it was admittedly a CAD
drawing. But I guess they all start that way!
73,
Paul
By
Paul Manuel <k4pdm@...>
·
#276
·
|
Re: Fake?
Hi all,
Could it be a proto type drawing using computer software? Hey, we all know the 706xxx days are coming to an end. The radio has been around for darn near 10 years already (706, 706mkII,
By
Rob Boux <boux@...>
·
#275
·
|
Fake?
Hello
After looking at that only picture for a few minutes of this "new" radio from Icom I started to think it is a drawing rather than a picture...
Anyone share the same idea?
73 Rod
By
Rodrigo <yid_grps@...>
·
#274
·
|
Re: New details
Well, I would think that these specs are best guess on their part.
They took the rumors and blended them with the existing 706 specs. I mean look at the weight, power consumption etc..exact same copy
By
MKM <starlight04@...>
·
#273
·
|
Re: New details
http://www.elkel.qc.ca/Liste/ic-7000.htm
and another from Canada
Marty
By
Marty <kt4k@...>
·
#272
·
|
New details
http://www.rys.nl/ic7000.html
Did I miss an announcement?
Marty
By
Marty <kt4k@...>
·
#271
·
|
Re: TEST
Hi Greg,
As the radio is not yet on the market, there is no test report.
Cheers for now, 73,
Adam VA7OJ/AB4OJ
By
Adam Farson
·
#270
·
|
Re: TEST
Hi all just asking
dose anybody have one please could you give me a test or RTS report
on the radio.
gregory
Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT
---------------------------------
Yahoo!
By
gregory fox
·
#269
·
|
Web site
Group,
This site can also be accessed for the ic7000
http://www.ham.dmz.ro/icom/general_news
73
Jim w3mrb
By
J.W. Bursler <w8mjb@...>
·
#268
·
|
Web Site
Group,
Here is a web site that you might be interested in.
http://www.ham.dmz.ro/icom-7000.php
73
Jim w3mrb
By
J.W. Bursler <w8mjb@...>
·
#267
·
|
Re: RadCom
Same here in Sweden.
They sell the mk2g to ham clubs for 50% off now, but only to clubs, and they
“have no information” of a new rig in the same product category :)
/Per
_____
Fr?n:
By
Per Eriksson <sm4xiu@...>
·
#266
·
|