...but I went with the 8500. The reasons are that it is
a good solid piece of equipment, well designed, and focuses
more on doing the basics right than adding fancy features.
The marks against the downside were classic AOR ergonomics
and suspicion on the quality of construction, another AOR
weakness.
HOWEVER... the AOR does have several things going for it.
It wins the "bang-for-the-buck" contest hands down, and has
far better filtering in it than the ICOM.
Would I still stick with the ICOM? yup. The quality of
construction and design are why.
Eric
--
"Nature abhors a vacuum tube." -- J. R. Pierce, Bell Labs, c. 1940
I think most people from recent posts about the differences between the two
preferred the AOR, as it has more bells and whistles, but they don't justify
the added cost IMHO, and I still think the 8500 is more of a solid
'workhorse' reciever. It is an excellent performer in all bands and is built
like a tank.
Besides, my experiences with AOR products (the 8200 in particular) have
taught me that they would rather build a reciever with mediocre performance
and a lot of features, than one with excellent performance on fewer
features - seems backwards to me.
I think it bears noting too that Icom has been very helpful in tech support
and operational questions for the 8500, while AOR has consistently given me
wrong answers and even ignored my questions or service problems all
together, an experience shared by many of the 8200 owners I know.
John Porter
> > Which one would you buy or not buy and why or why not.
> Well the "+3" wasn't around when I made my purchase...
> ...but I went with the 8500. The reasons are that it is
> a good solid piece of equipment, well designed, and focuses
> more on doing the basics right than adding fancy features.
> The marks against the downside were classic AOR ergonomics
> and suspicion on the quality of construction, another AOR
> weakness.
> HOWEVER... the AOR does have several things going for it.
> It wins the "bang-for-the-buck" contest hands down, and has
> far better filtering in it than the ICOM.
> Would I still stick with the ICOM? yup. The quality of
> construction and design are why.
> Eric
> --
> "Nature abhors a vacuum tube." -- J. R. Pierce, Bell Labs, c. 1940
Both are really over-priced if all you want to do is listen to the cops,
fire, neighbors and cell phone users. Neither is much of a scanner, in the
true sense of the word and neither compare to scanners selling for 1/4 the
price.
If you want a good scanner, go with the BC9000 or PRO-2042/2006 with an Opto
board. If you also want to listen to SW get a decent SW radio and in the end
you'll pay a lot less than either the AOR or Icom.
1. AOR AR5000 +3 OR ICOM IC-R8500
2. which is better: Icom's R8500 or the AOR AR5000?
3. Icom R8500 and AOR AR5000 owners report please
4. which is better: Icom's R8500 or the AOR AR5000?
5. FS: AOR AR5000+3 with CTCSS board installed
6. AOR-AR5000+3 comments please...
7. AOR AR5000+3 as a SW and BCB AM receiver
9. FS: 9 Relm HS200's, Icom IC-R8500, AOR AR8200
10. WTT, WTB AOR-R5000 or IC-R8500
11. WTT, WTB AOR -5000 or IC-R8500