Icom R 9500

Status
Not open for further replies.

Cellbaseman

Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2007
Messages
18
I just bought a Icom R 9500 receiver ($13,500). The advertisements say coverage 0.005 - 3335 Mhz (Cellular Blocked).

Well let me tell you its a lot more than cellular frequencies that are blocked. Icom told me that they had to block more than cellular frequencies to meet FCC limits, in other words poor design & engineering.

75% of the local RCS trunking system cannot be received by the Icom R 9500 receiver.

The design is also lacking in that the channel you are on remains the same as you move thru the banks, unlike the Icom R 8500 that remained on the previously selected channel in each bank.

Do not purchase this receiver unless you can first personally get your hands on it & verify the exact frequency coverage of that exact receiver.
 

Viper43

Member
Joined
Jul 23, 2005
Messages
3,272
Ummm, I think if it didn't meet the requirements you thought it you'd return it, if they complain then tell them the advertising didn't mention additional blocked frequencies.
Thats an expensive paperweight though :(
V
 

Cellbaseman

Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2007
Messages
18
Icom R9500

I purchased it from AES. Luke at AES Las Vegas REFUSED to take it back.
Ray Novak at Icom REFUSED to take it back.

Let the buyer beware !!!

Don't buy Icom.
 

Air490

Member
Joined
Jun 2, 2004
Messages
399
Location
Tamworth, NSW, Australia
Buyer beware is absolutely correct.

It is up to the buyer to do their research before they buy. The issue of other parts of the 800MHz allocation being blocked on Icom receivers is commonly known. That is the reason that many buyers don't buy the butchered US versions, or if they do they factor in the fact that Icom has blocked additional frequencies.

I am sorry you have had a bad experience, but that is not Icom's fault.
 

Fast1eddie

Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2004
Messages
652
Location
Crafton Pennsylvania
I am sorry to hear of your experience. I prefer Icom HF receivers, but for VHF/UHF it's AOR. I'm sure there are other fine attributes the 9500 has though....

Ed
 

DaveIN

Founders Curmudgen
Database Admin
Joined
Jan 5, 2003
Messages
6,515
Location
West Michigan
This is not unusual for icom radios. If it's a USA version it will have frequency coverage beyond just the cell band blocked as a guard band to keep you from hearing cell images.

I agree that this is false advertising, and buyer beware!

If i were you I'd keep after icom to take the radio back. Maybe check with your lawyer as well.
 

Viper43

Member
Joined
Jul 23, 2005
Messages
3,272
Last night after reading this I looked at an ad for the 9500 and it says "cellular blocked" and then in very small rype elsewhere it says something about ICOM reserving the right block additional frequencies at their discretion but nothing about what additional frequencies.
It sure looks nice though.

V
 

Turbo68

Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2005
Messages
879
Location
East Devonport,Tasmania,Australia
I got the R-9500 Aussie version with no gaps and it is an excellent radio and paid 18 Grand for it but they also gave me the UT-106DSP/UT-122 APCO 25 DIGITAL BOARD and at the moment i am compering it to the R-9000.

Regards Lino (Melbourne Australia)
 

Rick911

Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2007
Messages
1
Mine is dead on as advertised:
Frequency Range (U.S.A. consumer version):
0.005-821.9999 MHz
851.0-866.9999 MHz
896.0-3335.000 MHz
 

N9JIG

Sheriff
Moderator
Joined
Dec 14, 2001
Messages
6,006
Location
Far NW Valley
Rick911 said:
Mine is dead on as advertised:
Frequency Range (U.S.A. consumer version):
0.005-821.9999 MHz
851.0-866.9999 MHz
896.0-3335.000 MHz

So it appears that the US version is missing 867-869 MHz., which is currently used as part of the Public Safety band, mostly trunking but some conventional use.

While eventually this will be rebanded in the USA to Nextel use, it could be a couple years until they are done.
 

KC1UA

Scan New England Janitor/Maintenance
Database Admin
Joined
Oct 27, 2002
Messages
2,145
Location
Marstons Mills, Cape Cod, Massachusetts
That coverage is the same as the Icom IC-R2500 receiver. Unfortunate, but as Rich says, rebanding (whenever it actually happens) will cure the problem. Typical Icom nonsense though, an ongoing problem since the R7100 receiver when 800-900 MHz was eliminated in US versions.

I'm amazed that AES would not take it back. I bought an AOR SDU-5600 which I was unhappy with despite doing research prior to buying. It was horrible with weak signals, and who would know until one got it in one's hands. AES took it back without a problem. They felt bad that they had to charge me a restocking fee, but I ate it as I knew I had an expensive paperweight on my hands otherwise. Your paperweight is subject to a lot more of a restocking fee than mine was, but I would think they would take a return unless it was specifically outlined as otherwise prior to the purchase. AES are good folks and very reliable.
 

iMONITOR

Silent Key
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Sep 20, 2006
Messages
11,156
Location
S.E. Michigan
This is typical of most all ICOM receivers. Yet another reason to do away with the now obsolete reasoning to block cellular bands.
 

N9JIG

Sheriff
Moderator
Joined
Dec 14, 2001
Messages
6,006
Location
Far NW Valley
scancapecod said:
I'm amazed that AES would not take it back. I bought an AOR SDU-5600 which I was unhappy with despite doing research prior to buying. It was horrible with weak signals, and who would know until one got it in one's hands. AES took it back without a problem. They felt bad that they had to charge me a restocking fee, but I ate it as I knew I had an expensive paperweight on my hands otherwise. Your paperweight is subject to a lot more of a restocking fee than mine was, but I would think they would take a return unless it was specifically outlined as otherwise prior to the purchase. AES are good folks and very reliable.

I think the R9500 is not kept in stock at AES, they are a special order, and as such would not be taken back. While I understand the OP's quandary, the radio's specs are available from multiple sources online and otherwise. Before spending that kind of money I would have probably dug a whole lot deeper, especially when it comes to frequency coverage.
 

gariac

Member
Joined
Feb 1, 2004
Messages
252
Regarding ICOM and AOR, I prefer AOR on HF and Icom on VHF/UHF. The AR7030+NB is really a great radio.

I wasn't aware they made blocked R7100s. Even the R8500 can be unblocked.
 

Turbo68

Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2005
Messages
879
Location
East Devonport,Tasmania,Australia
Gday i guess we are lucky when it comes to Radios in Austrlia because they are all unblocked unless you get them from a dealer that try to sell you a blocked radio for the same price as the unblocked version.

Regards Lino.
 
Last edited:

gariac

Member
Joined
Feb 1, 2004
Messages
252
The Icom manuals list the holes per country. For instance, on the R7100:
USA/Europe/Australia: 25.0 to 1999.9999MHz

R8500:
USA: 0.1 to 823.9999MHz;849.00001 to 868.99999Mhz; 894.00001 to 1999.99999Mhz
Europe&Australia: 0.1 to 1999.99999 Mhz


Now the R9000 and R9000L manuals seem strange. They list the USA/Europe/Australia versions to be unblocked. I don't recall if the R9000 was strictly sold to government organizations.
0.1 to 1999.8MHz

R9500:
USA 0.005 to 821.999999Mhz;851.0 to 868.999999Mhz;896.0 to 3335.0MHz
EU/USA-01(probably government)/EXP/Australia 0.005 to 3335.0MHz
 

EricCottrell

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Nov 8, 2002
Messages
2,414
Location
Boston, Ma
Hello,

I was able to use the demo unit up at HRO in Salem, NH.

The dial feel, display, and spectrum scope are very nice. It has little touches like changing the center frequency display to a FSK tuning display when in FSK mode.

The frequency gaps are nasty. I read the manual today and notice some of the Icom IC-7000 limitations are also present like no TV reception and limited decoding of Baudot FSK (No 850 shift, No 75 baud).

One question I have is will it receive P25 above 700 MHz unlike the R2500. The Demo unit did not have a P25 decoder installed.

73 Eric
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top