Wednesday, June 23, 2010


I am gonna sell my Yaesu FT-450. Why using a QRO rig when I always transmit with 5 or 10 watt. Just like Dick N2UGB said: "I decided that it was silly running it at 5 watts full-time when it was capable of 100 watts. As for performance, it was no better than my FT-817ND which is now back on the desk." [link] At the moment my FT817nd is my main rig again. I love that lil' devil. The FT-450 is on Marktplaats (A sort of Dutch eBay) and Doutzen Kroes is back! I love that beautiful picture as a background on my blog. My daughter saw it and says: what site are you looking at? 'My site,' I said.

Tonight I worked on 40 meter with 2,5 watt PSK31: RW3AF Alex from Moscow, Russia 2143 km. And a mobile station in Italy IØ/S5ØAL/M Andi. The second part of the qso was lost because of qrm and qsb.


  1. Je hebt gedeeltelijk gelijk Paul.
    Alleen als ik naar mijn FT817nd luister of mijn FT950 is er toch een wereld van verschil.

  2. Hoi Tjeerd, de FT950 ken ik niet. Misschien is die wel beter in ontvangst, bedoel je dat? 73 Paul

  3. Good for you, Paul. The FT-450 is a highly regarded QRO rig at a reasonable price. I suspect you will not have too much problem selling it.

    These economic times necessitate the purchase of used equipment for many hams.

    The FT-817 is so great. I can't imagine being without it.


  4. Hi Dick, if I can't sell the rig then I keep it, but it will not be used as my main rig. 73 Paul

  5. Hallo Paul, je hebt gelijk. Als je uitsluitend QRP wilt draaien kun je beter alleen een QRP set hebben.
    73, Bas

  6. Ja Paul,

    Ik vind de ontvangst van de FT950 veel beter dan de FT817nd. Is het verschil bij de FT450 en FT817nd niet merkbaar?
    Helaas gaat mijn FT950 niet lager dan 5 watts.

  7. Hallo Tjeerd, ik merk geen verschil met de FT450 en de FT817. Ik verbaasde mij dat de ontvangst van de FT817 soms zelfs beter was. Ik vind ook dat ik met de FT817 zelfs met 500 milliwatt kan werken toch erg plezierig. 73 Paul

  8. What ever suits you best Paul. I find that the FT-450 IF DSP is excellent, along with the advance filter settings, I often can copy signals through the noise which I can't copy at all on my FT-817ND. I don't have the after market narrow filters on the FT-817 so can't say how well the FT-817 works with say a 300Hz CW filter, but I do have the bHI DSP.

    The FT-950 uses similar technology as the FT-450, just better and with more filter selections. There is no harm in running a "QRO" rig at 5 watts all the time. The PA might just last that much longer! hi hi.

    On the other hand, one would like to be able to work what you hear. If one can copy weak signals, but they can't copy your 5 watts, then sure, that can be frustrating. If you can't hear them, you won't know that they are there, so no harm done, hi hi!

    73 de André

  9. Hello Andre, thanks for your comment. What about the PA at 5 watt, your right. I did some comparison with both receivers. But the FT817 did a good job. I can't say the FT450 is much better. Your last point is absolutely true. I can't work weak signals with QRP, signals must at least S5 or higher. 73 Paul

  10. Hello Paul,

    I think this is an excellent choice. I too admire the FT450 and as you know almost bought it myself as my main rig. It should be easy to sell. And then you can return to the wonderful little 817, which is what I always imagine when I think of your station there in Heiloo.

    I think a little, QRP, cool rig like the 703 or 817 is the best kind of TX for us low-prfile stations.

    Best news I've had all week!

    Keep the sexy lady as well! It's nice to be a bit avant-garde! 73 and goodluck with the sale. Adam

  11. Hello Adam, I hope I can sell it, but I am not sure because new the rig is not too expensive. We'll wait and see. Now I had a QRP rig for about a half year and I know now that QRP is the best thing what I like to do. 73 Paul


Thank you for dropping by and leaving a comment. 73 Paul

Popular Posts