Kenwood: New Kenwood dual-band mobile radio
- Thread starter mmckenna
- Start date
Sweet
The control head was not connected to the RF deck. The display was static. And, the RF deck had no RF connector. I think Kenwood showed a mock-up and we are months from seeing a working prototype. Still, it looks promising.
I’d speculate it’s a year away from production. It doesn’t even have a model number yet. What they show at Hamvention will tell the tale. I’d guess early fall…2025.
KD7RJC
Member
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2023
- Messages
- 103
Comparing it visually to my FTM-500, it looks like the buttons' labels are on-screen, rather than on-button like on the Yaesu. This could mean that depending on the screen one's in, the buttons could change function, like how the buttons around the gas pump screen or ATM screen might change functions as one navigates the menu system. That part could potentially be good, but it also means that these buttons wouldn't have absolute-functions regardless of what screen one's on, which could be annoying.
If the buttons change functions depending on the screen, does that mean that it is or is not a touchscreen?
There's an awful lot of space between the edge of the digital display and those buttons, which would make the faceplate larger than it would be if the buttons were closer to the screen. The whole faceplate looks like it's even bigger than the FTM-400, so it might be a bit on the challenging side to find a place for it in many modern vehicles' dashboards.
If they're going to make it handle a wide variety of USB peripherals (think honest to goodness keyboards for example) then it could be useful for APRS or DSTAR's text capabilities. Or even more ideally, over bluetooth.
If the buttons change functions depending on the screen, does that mean that it is or is not a touchscreen?
There's an awful lot of space between the edge of the digital display and those buttons, which would make the faceplate larger than it would be if the buttons were closer to the screen. The whole faceplate looks like it's even bigger than the FTM-400, so it might be a bit on the challenging side to find a place for it in many modern vehicles' dashboards.
If they're going to make it handle a wide variety of USB peripherals (think honest to goodness keyboards for example) then it could be useful for APRS or DSTAR's text capabilities. Or even more ideally, over bluetooth.
I think old man Kenwood heard my prayers and whipped up a mobile version of the D75. Also, I can live without a touchscreen. Time to sell off two Yaesu FTM-400’s and an FTM-300. I have a Kenwood D710 I’ll use in between.
Anyways, we’ll see if this Kenwood is like the D75, just with more juice.
Anyways, we’ll see if this Kenwood is like the D75, just with more juice.
MTS2000des
5B2_BEE00 Czar
My guess is a $700-800 price will keep most crybaby Bowelturd clutching hams far far away and they won't sell too many, but then JVCKW doesn't really care. The price of one VP8000 makes up for the sale of a half a dozen hamster toys and they don't have to deal with the crying and whining of cheap hams. That being said, I'm game, I like it!
The TM-D710 worked that way. On the original TM-D710, the KEY button changed the bottom row of buttons from KEY, F, TONE, REV, LOW, PF1, PF2 to KEY, F, MSG, LIST, BCON, POS, P.MON. When the F key was tapped, the bottom row changed to F OFF, T.SEL, SHIFT, MUTE, blank, VISUAL. The TM-D710G added a additional row of functions to work in conjunction with the internal GPS receiver: KEY, F, MARK, GPS, LOG, POS, TARGET. Also, depending on what APRS information was displayed, the bottom row could be functions related to sorting of the APRS received beacon list, displaying additional information about a received APRS beacon, or functions related to APRS messaging. It's a very functional user interface that assigns context-sensitive functions to buttons. I can only hope that Kenwood follows suit with the new radio.
Given that Kenwood has eschewed touch screens on their HF, mobile, and handheld radios to-date, I hope that they continue with using real buttons and context-sensitive functions. I do not care for touch screens on radios.
And, yes, it won't be cheap.
I doubt it will have a touchscreen. The two card slots are interesting. I guess to update the rf module and control panel software firmware.
I hope they update the Bluetooth to accommodate BLE Apple devices.
Just shy of $1K would be my guess, I’ll be in…
Me too. Kenwood, take my money!!
kayn1n32008
ØÆSØ Say it, say 'ENCRYPTION'
Honestly, I'd rather see the buttons freely assignable in software, similar to how their LMR radios function. The only buttons I really used on my V71a were the 2 assignable buttons.
My other wish is that they have a **** ton of channels, and proper banks/zones. It was the ONE think about the V71a I didn't like were the static 100ch groups, you HAD to cycle through.
Hopefully there is a mic port on the control head, and built in GNSS receiver, preferably in the control head, that way you won't need an external GNSS receiver.
I also hope, if it has a GNSS receiver built in,, it is capable of at least GPS and GLONASS. additional constellations would be nice, but with those 2, it will get fast, accurate fixes.
could be a winner, bit only time will tell.
It looks like a decent radio
Kenwood definitely has the edge on APRS functionality. Others are clunky at best.
@kayn1n32008 there is not a mic connector on the control head shown on the mock up. The menu system will likely be similar to the TH-D75A.
@kayn1n32008 there is not a mic connector on the control head shown on the mock up. The menu system will likely be similar to the TH-D75A.
kayn1n32008
ØÆSØ Say it, say 'ENCRYPTION'
It would be nice to see it have decent filtering, and not a DC->Daylight receiver.
108-174MHz and 400-520MHz considering band above 520 are almost exclusively digital and trunking
108-174MHz and 400-520MHz considering band above 520 are almost exclusively digital and trunking
I've been told that the mic connector is in the RF deck, not the control head. But, since what was shown at Ham Fair was just a mock-up, anything's possible.
kayn1n32008
ØÆSØ Say it, say 'ENCRYPTION'
They have ALWAYS had the edge. Yaesu implementation of APRS was half assed at best.
It's like they half assed it, and just expected their customers to accept it because people are buying their gear for the brand rather than the actual functionality.
KD7RJC
Member
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2023
- Messages
- 103
Or perhaps individual customers are buying a given brand for the features/functions that they value?
Before I sold my soul to Yaesu, buying used FT2DR and FT5DR, and two new FTM-500DRs for the two vehicles, I looked at the digital capabilities of DMR and of DSTAR, along with the popularity of repeaters in my city and region.
DSTAR looked better for digital mode location beaconing since it looks like on at least the ICOM radios it was possible to get the data off of the radio and onto a tablet or PC for mapping purposes during a live digital voice transmission, while I couldn't find information for doing such for Yaesu System Fusion, but it is still possible to display the GPS raw location on Yaesu radios instead of just bearing and distance. And there are 10x as many YSF repeaters here as there are DSTAR repeaters.
If there had been a higher percentage of DSTAR repeaters than ICOM or Kenwood might have been the order of the day, but in this particular case I'm more likely to want digital for better weak-signal communications than I am for life-safety or S&R. For me the Yaesu offering was good enough for the latter, and due to the wider base of repeaters much better for the former compared to the DSTAR offerings. And YSF also doesn't require registering with third-parties just to use the digital mode on a repeater, which was a deal breaker for DMR before I even got to looking at things like GPS beaconing.
Admittedly despite the 20+ year old callsign I'm inexperienced (new old stock operator!), so I'm not going to claim that my opinions or conclusions have particular merit, but for what I was looking to do the Yaesu offerings were the best fit for me at the time I made the choice. If I ever upgrade my license and I start looking for HF radios I'd have a choice to make, an HF that doesn't go past 6m and thus there's no concern for YSF compatibility, or an HF that can do VHF and UHF and thus an interest in maintaing YSF interoperability and thus Yaesu almost by default.
Even as a Yaesu owner I have no problem with Kenwood, and if anything strong competition means companies have to improve their products to stay competitive.
