<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Kenwood TH-F7E vs ICOM IC-E90</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.iw5edi.com/ham-radio/55/kenwood-th-f7e-vs-icom-ic-e90/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.iw5edi.com/ham-radio/55/kenwood-th-f7e-vs-icom-ic-e90</link>
	<description>Amateur Radio Experience</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 19 Jan 2012 10:07:43 +0100</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andrea</title>
		<link>http://www.iw5edi.com/ham-radio/55/kenwood-th-f7e-vs-icom-ic-e90/comment-page-1#comment-32296</link>
		<dc:creator>Andrea</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Aug 2011 20:29:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.iw5edi.com/ham-radio/55/kenwood-th-f7e-vs-icom-ic-e90#comment-32296</guid>
		<description>icom ic-e90 original antenna VS wouxun kg-uvd1p original antenna ..... is better the wouxun... icom rx is down -3-4 db... china in better 80e vs 230e ....</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>icom ic-e90 original antenna VS wouxun kg-uvd1p original antenna &#8230;.. is better the wouxun&#8230; icom rx is down -3-4 db&#8230; china in better 80e vs 230e &#8230;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: zu1nj</title>
		<link>http://www.iw5edi.com/ham-radio/55/kenwood-th-f7e-vs-icom-ic-e90/comment-page-1#comment-4573</link>
		<dc:creator>zu1nj</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 25 Apr 2010 09:07:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.iw5edi.com/ham-radio/55/kenwood-th-f7e-vs-icom-ic-e90#comment-4573</guid>
		<description>i find the kenwood very user freindly .the long lasting bat pac &quot;&#039;the best&#039;&quot; .very light weight.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>i find the kenwood very user freindly .the long lasting bat pac &#8220;&#8216;the best&#8217;&#8221; .very light weight.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matti</title>
		<link>http://www.iw5edi.com/ham-radio/55/kenwood-th-f7e-vs-icom-ic-e90/comment-page-1#comment-3702</link>
		<dc:creator>Matti</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Mar 2009 11:30:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.iw5edi.com/ham-radio/55/kenwood-th-f7e-vs-icom-ic-e90#comment-3702</guid>
		<description>I have used this TH-F7E for local QSOs since 2004. The &#039;high&#039; output power is only 3 watts when using battery, and the deviation is not the best among handhelds. 
The SSB works fine when tuning and listening to local hams or &#039;stronger&#039; BC stations on HF - even with the tiny antenna. 
73 de Matti, OH1GPU</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have used this TH-F7E for local QSOs since 2004. The &#8216;high&#8217; output power is only 3 watts when using battery, and the deviation is not the best among handhelds.<br />
The SSB works fine when tuning and listening to local hams or &#8216;stronger&#8217; BC stations on HF &#8211; even with the tiny antenna.<br />
73 de Matti, OH1GPU</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Erik</title>
		<link>http://www.iw5edi.com/ham-radio/55/kenwood-th-f7e-vs-icom-ic-e90/comment-page-1#comment-3392</link>
		<dc:creator>Erik</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 08 Jun 2008 06:48:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.iw5edi.com/ham-radio/55/kenwood-th-f7e-vs-icom-ic-e90#comment-3392</guid>
		<description>I just needed this compare, while I want to get a multiband handhold with reciever. I want to listen also HF stations, but find it interesting also to use 50 mhz. I do not know what is best, if it is difficult to listen HF ssb on the kenwood, and I do not use it. Then it will be better to use 50mhz. I tkink it over and it depend on what prices I can find on net.

73 Erik oz6ep</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I just needed this compare, while I want to get a multiband handhold with reciever. I want to listen also HF stations, but find it interesting also to use 50 mhz. I do not know what is best, if it is difficult to listen HF ssb on the kenwood, and I do not use it. Then it will be better to use 50mhz. I tkink it over and it depend on what prices I can find on net.</p>
<p>73 Erik oz6ep</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dave</title>
		<link>http://www.iw5edi.com/ham-radio/55/kenwood-th-f7e-vs-icom-ic-e90/comment-page-1#comment-2987</link>
		<dc:creator>Dave</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 08 Mar 2008 19:01:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.iw5edi.com/ham-radio/55/kenwood-th-f7e-vs-icom-ic-e90#comment-2987</guid>
		<description>I have to agree with you on this, the Kenwood is a nicer radio to use. I have big fingers and find pretty much all the new handheld&#039;s buttons to hard to use, so the difference isn&#039;t that big of a deal. Nice article.

73 Dave WA3YAY</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have to agree with you on this, the Kenwood is a nicer radio to use. I have big fingers and find pretty much all the new handheld&#8217;s buttons to hard to use, so the difference isn&#8217;t that big of a deal. Nice article.</p>
<p>73 Dave WA3YAY</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

