ÿWPC, ûÿ2Bÿÿ˜ÿÿW©ÿÿ#|xxxx ôU^Ûx Œ @ɇÏÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCourier 10 Pitchûÿ2ðV2ˆ W™ðÿÿzNxxx ôU^Ûx Œ @ɇÏÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCourier 10 Pitchûÿ2ÿÿ"ÿÿNJ*#|xSubject: FT-470, the continuing saga... Message-ID: <2585B035.27433@paris.ics.uci.edu> The latest in the continuing saga of the Yaesu FT-470 dual bander HT: I spoke to an engineer at Yaesu (in Cerritos, CA.) about the only problem I have with the HT - intermod in RF hot areas here in Orange county, CA. - and he explained to me that the receiver is so hot (this appears to be true when comparing to other HT's I own) that some intermod is unavoidable if you use a gain antenna and are in a hot area. Of course, I would like to have an attenuator for the receiver built in to the rig to take care of such problems, anyone out there ever attempt such a thing? Looks like Kenwood put one into their dual band HT, (but the specs for recieve sensitivity are not the same), does this help you Kenwood users? As I have said before, I would buy the Yaesu instead of the Icom and the Kenwood again because of the size and better feature set. (But the new mini icom dual bander is one to watch?) I have experienced some intermod on the Icom in the same areas of CA, although it is not quite as bad. Again, if you plan to buy a dual band HT, try each one carefully and in your own time if possible, then make the choice that is best for you.