| Author |
Message |
    
RFmaster
| | Posted on Sunday, April 20, 2003 - 2:53 pm: | 
|
im looking to purchase either 2 cobra 148nwst s or 2 galaxy dx959 s ive talked to people who swear by those galaxy's and to someone who works on radios for a living who says the galaxy's are junk, if im gonna spend the cash i want quality, and reliability who can tell me the pros and cons between these two radios. |
Hitech
| | Posted on Sunday, April 20, 2003 - 5:40 pm: |
|
RFmaster, try typing in a search on the forum of this radio, usually a lot of info on there. Nick 189 WV |
Barracuda
| | Posted on Sunday, April 20, 2003 - 7:44 pm: |
|
RFMaster,
I have a Galaxy DX959 and think it's a decent radio. Since I've never owned a Cobra 148 I can't give you an honsest side by side comparison, though. However, to give you an example of the 959, I use it in a mobile rig, barefoot with a 102" whip. In that configuration I have been able to occasionally talk skip to texas and other similar distances when the band is open and I'm not drown out by heavily amplified stations.
When I bought the radio from Copper I had it peaked and tuned. I also put a power mic on it and get very good groundwave distance and audio reports.
The only issue I would mention is the clarifier on SSB. In cold weather before the radio warms up, the clarifier gives me almost no downside. Once it does warm up it gives me the +/- 1KHz advertised, though even that is a bit limited. I have been thinking of performing one of the clarifier mods and also putting in a multi-turn pot for the clairifier to give greater "fine-tune" capability as well as the greater range from the mod.
All-in-all, I'm have no regrets buying my 959.
Hope that helps, post any questions you may have about the radio and I'll be happy to try to answer them.
Barracuda |
Tech671
| | Posted on Sunday, April 20, 2003 - 9:06 pm: |
|
Nothing wrong with the Q of a 959. More features, similar cost. |
619
| | Posted on Sunday, April 20, 2003 - 10:23 pm: |
|
hello, i have the 949, it is the same as the 959 with out the freq. counter, i think you will like the galaxy. you should use a external speaker because the stock one is of poor quality. as for the cobra i have never had one, but from the other posts that i have read the new ones are not as good as the pre 1997's, but the texas ranger 296 is a real good copy the the old 148's. 619 |
N4ari
| | Posted on Monday, April 21, 2003 - 9:14 pm: |
|
Get the '959 or the Texas Ranger '696 (same radio but Ranger has a better freq. counter). I have had many Cobra 148 and currently have a 148 NW ST right beside my Ranger '696. The Ranger/Galaxy IS BETTER. Quality & engineering is also better then the Cobra. My experience since 1973. |
rattle snake
| | Posted on Sunday, April 27, 2003 - 10:35 pm: |
|
The cobra 148 nw st is nothing like a regular 148 however if the 959 was like the regular 148 then go with the 148, for one reason it has been around longer and knows whats best, but the 148 ne st is a little newer model and may not be crafted as good as the old dynoscan corp. intended it to be years earlier, i have never owned either radio, but me, set in my old school ways, would go with the cobra, it was the best in its day but now i dont know. My experience since 1958. |
Weakeststation
| | Posted on Thursday, May 01, 2003 - 7:27 pm: |
|
For the money, i would buy a 10 meter rig that could be expanded for the cb channels... You are in the neighbor hood already.. check it out, you may or may not agree.. enjoy just the same... |
Hawk1
Junior Member
Username: Hawk1
Post Number: 24
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, February 19, 2004 - 5:04 pm: |
|
ive had 2 949,s fine am radio.drifts way too much on sideband tho,its a shame too becauce i like the clarifier on this radio ,,it has a short range and is real easy to use..hk |
Cuddlebear
Member
Username: Cuddlebear
Post Number: 81
Registered: 3-2002
| | Posted on Monday, March 15, 2004 - 5:22 am: |
|
Something I've been curious about.
Why is it all the new radios I've seen have had their limits on the clarifier cut so short? I can remember a time when most radios like my old cobra had a clarifier that slid almost a full channel. Now, there are radios like the galaxy that do only 1.2Khz or even less at 1Khz. Can someone please explain why this is? Not a gripe, just puzzles me is all. |
Highlander
Intermediate Member
Username: Highlander
Post Number: 451
Registered: 12-2001
| | Posted on Monday, March 15, 2004 - 7:41 am: |
|
FCC type acceptance requires it. |
Cuddlebear
Member
Username: Cuddlebear
Post Number: 84
Registered: 3-2002
| | Posted on Monday, March 15, 2004 - 4:42 pm: |
|
Highlander,
I do understand the FCC thing. But hasn't that always been the case? I thought that was always the rule of thumb on CB. But what I mean is, are the electronics getting tighter by manufactures due to them being better? or is it something else? I:E, were the pots etc, much looser back then in the 70's-80's etc to as where they had more give to them? |
Highlander
Intermediate Member
Username: Highlander
Post Number: 455
Registered: 12-2001
| | Posted on Monday, March 15, 2004 - 6:58 pm: |
|
The requirements for type-acceptance have been getting more stringent, so no, it hasn't always been the case. The rules for type-acceptance are different now than what they were in the 70's and 80's. I don't think it has anything to do with the type or quality of components, such as the pots, etc. Just that the rules have changed. |
Bruce
Senior Member
Username: Bruce
Post Number: 1077
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 16, 2004 - 7:43 am: |
|
this is why ALL 23 ch radios are illeagal the rest of the story is the manufactors wanted to crush the 23's so they could sell the new 40's |
|
