Kenwood Tuner Question

[Dealer]

Would like to know the what is different between the AT200 @ AT230 operation wise ?

I know the 200 was made for the TS420 @ 230 for TS530, TS830 ect.

Seems a AT-200 can be bought for much less ?? This might be one for you Doc.

Thanks for any information.

Best Regards,
John KD5WJY

 

[W5LZ]

Dealer,
Hate to say it, but I didn't even know there was a '230. I've got a '200, at least I think it's a '200, and know that it will do an 'automatic' thing with a TS430 (requires a serial cable).
Oh man, now I'm going to go dig out that @#$ thing and see what it is...
- 'Doc

 

[mackmobile43]

Dealer,
Hate to say it, but I didn't even know there was a '230. I've got a '200, at least I think it's a '200, and know that it will do an 'automatic' thing with a TS430 (requires a serial cable).
Oh man, now I'm going to go dig out that @#$ thing and see what it is...
- 'Doc

Everything's better with beer

 

[Moleculo]

The AT-230 has settings on the band switch for the WARC bands. Other than that they are practically the same. If you look at both manuals side by side they are almost word for word the same.

 

[Dealer]

The AT-230 has settings on the band switch for the WARC bands. Other than that they are practically the same. If you look at both manuals side by side they are almost word for word the same.

____________________________________________________________________________
I kinda thought that was the case or something sorta kinda not much to speak.

D**n, reading to many of Doc`s post got me doing that.... Geezzzz

BTW I did edit post to reflect what I was asking about !! AT200 not TS200
least some may wonder.

I think that the AT200 might be a good replacement for MFJ 269.

Got to admit, I would rather have the AT 230 for my Kenwood just for looks sake
However not at 4 times the price or more..

Doc,are you sure that you have a AT200


Regards, John

 

[Beetle]

Ah! NOW the question makes sense. You changed it from "TS-200" and "TS-230". The TS-200 was in fact a tuner made by Kenwood, but not an autotuner.

 

[Dealer]

Ah! NOW the question makes sense. You changed it from "TS-200" and "TS-230". The TS-200 was in fact a tuner made by Kenwood, but not an autotuner.

___________________________________________________________________________

I changed it from TS 200 and TS 230 to AT 200 and AT 230....

Both are manual tuners and BTW are not true peak reading meters on them, also
the 200 has no lighting on the meters.

TS = Transceivers

AT= Antenna Tuner...... Not Auto Tuner

Of coarse You already knew that which means sometimes my fingers are quicker
than the brain! which is kinda a a a a well you get the idea.

Regards, John

 

[W5LZ]

John,
No, I'm not sure now. I haven't the slightest idea what I've done with it, so it'll take a while to find. To make things a bit trickier, an AT-250 seems to be sticking in my mind for some reason (hate that, as if it wasn't bothering me enough as it is!).

While I'm certainly a Kenwood fan, I do think that considering prices, and capabilities, an MFJ tuner might be a better bet. There are a lot of "but's" and "if's" in that so don't take it as gospel! Having 'more' capability is fine, but it can be carried to a ridiculous point. Then again, considering what I try to use for antennas sometimes, that ridiculous point isn't as ridiculous as it may seem, sort of. (In other words, sometimes I really goof, you know? Ah, that lovely smell of 'magic' electrical smoke! @#$%$$#!!) Not just MFJ, any -good- tuner, by the way.
- 'Doc

Personally, I don't care what a device looks like as long as it works well. There are a few qualifications with that, but not many.