I recall last year sometime your post comparing a pair of borrowed radios, a Panasonic RF-2200 and RF-2600, and your conclusion that you preferred the look, the heft, and most of all the reception (mainly FM, as I recall) of the 2600 which struck me at the time as near anathema as the RF-2200 seems have long been the Holy Grail of portable receivers.
I have both a SONY ICF-2010 and Pan RF-2200, so I really didn't NEED another radio of the same ilk. But a RF-2600 appeared on eBay (apparently only minutes before I went there) described as in excellent condition cosmetically and functionally, and with a BIN price of $100. Well, I'd seen a 2600 in fair to good condition go for something like $160 a few days earlier, so I just did not want to leave this fine specimen behind for someone else to pluck. So, relying on the calculus of # of radios you need = number you currently have + 1, I bought it.
The radio arrived yesterday and it is everything the seller described; if anything, even better than I expected. The cosmetics are near flawless, the antenna straight and true, the carry strap perfect, the LED readout bright. I installed 6 D cells, fired it up (on our classical station, 89.9) and was dazzled by the rich, resonant, room-filling sound coming out of the 5" speaker. Damn close to the audio of my GE Superadio II and bigger in every way than that of the 2200 and WAY bigger than the 2010's.
This thing, as you described it in your post, is a TANK: Heavy and substantial and giving off a high-quality vibe at every look and touch.
Now, reception. In a word: Superb. In both sensitivity and selectivity. The equal in every way to the 2200 on FM, ditto AM. As for long range DXing, I don't do it, so I really can't compare the two. Perhaps the 2200 would win this one due to its gyro antenna but, to me, it's irrelevant. I dabble in SW, and did a comparison this morning pitting the 2600 against the SONY 2010 from 5800 kHz through 9500 kHz with a 40-foot longwire attached by alligator clip. The 2600 more than held its own; in fact, it surpassed the 2010 on several stations, often with less background noise and, with its larger speaker, produced a more pleasant listening experience. No presets on the 2600, so the SONY is much easier to hop around on.
I am not putting down the SONY, not at all. It has always been, and remains, one of my favorite radios. Perhaps it is just the combination of location, the room I use for SW listening, how well the radio adapts to the longwire, etc. A lot of factors at play here. But as a SW receiver, the 2600 shines. I couldn't be more thrilled with it.
For the same 100 bucks one would pay for a Grundig S350DL, I have 3x the radio (functionally and aesthetically) in the 2600. I know most Herculodegers out there are in love with the 350 but I have never been one of them. I sold mine a few weeks back. Reception was mediocre (89.9 never came in clearly and static free and SW reception was ordinary at best), the sound okay to good (though not as full and rich as that of the 2600) and the whole unit always just looked and felt light and cheap from the case to the controls to the overall heft, or lack thereof. Pre-emptive apologies to all those offended.
BTW: Can anyone out there tell me the function of the "SW Cal" dial (lower right hand corner)
Recent Comments