The question remains: what rig seems “best” at a given price point and how is it rated by other hams?
All of the work that Rob Sherwood NC0B has put into his very popular set of bench tests has resulted in a lot of attention to his results. This independent resource has been a boon for amateur radio operators worldwide. It has also perhaps produced too much attention to the precise ranking of rigs without careful consideration of how they are ranked, why, and what is not included in any set of bench tests alone. Rob NC0B has stated as much on numerous occasions. This has been one motivation for me to publish a set of tools to assist Sherwood Table users to better understand how they fit into the picture of receive performance, price and collective satisfaction with the rigs that are in Rob’s Tables.
The research that I’ve conducted cannot just give the reader an answer in terms of a single rig to purchase. But it can reduce the number of candidate rigs to a smaller number if the reader wants a rational listing of radios based upon Rob’s tests and has a price point to consider. Moreover, if the opinion of other hams gives any comfort in that consumer thought process, then here’s a pair of lists based upon my Golden Quads analysis. Make no mistake: this set of lists should not be used to just purchase the rig listed at the top without evaluating your needs regarding features, ergonomics, availability, and so forth. There is always what I call the farfegnugen principle: some radios just give pleasure to the operators, independent of the objective performance measurements of the receiver, transmitter, or other elements of rational evaluation.
There are two categories to these lists resulting from the current analysis of my database: unlimited price and performance-to-price ratio. In response to a question raised by Bob K0NR in reviewing a draft of these pages, I’ve added two more versions of these two price-unlimited and bang-for-buck lists, limited to rigs released to the market from 2000 to the present.
Each list has it’s own merits for the reader to use in their research. They are ranked, as stipulated, by eHam rating and the respective performance measure, but do not get “out-ranked” by thinking that the rig just above a particular one is importantly “better” than the one below it. They are already pre-selected in terms of their eHam ratings and the composite Sherwood Table tests (SPI). The distinction among rigs in these lists is for the reader to decide. Moreover, I’ve published the original Sherwood Tables in an Excel spreadsheet that the reader can download to perform their own customized analysis (see the Tools list page). Jim W6LG, for instance, is already doing this by adding additional attributes of each rig to suite his tastes for rig evaluation. However, I’ve also placed the data for the Golden Quads Lists in an Excel spreadsheet here so the viewer can sort them however they desire in Excel or a comparable tool.
The eHam ratings are likely to change as Rob NC0B adds additional rigs to his table and more hams rate individual rigs on the eHam website. Please bear that in mind.
