7 out of 7 people found this review helpful.
All good except TV bands
Date of Review: Jul 22, 2005
The Bottom Line: Consider other Grundig models. Shortwave will be better in emergency than a poorly-performing TV band. The 300 may still be the better choice due to the NOAA coverage.
I've had the radio less than 24 hours, and I like all of the features I've tried and the reception, except for TV audio operation. As an east-coast FL resident, I researched & bought it for my hurricane emergency kit. I like it overall, but the design is inadequate for receiving TV audio in many situations. I'm a radio design engineer, so I was attentive to the radio performance. I called customer service & was almost speechless when I heard a human voice on 1st ring. After a conversation, she transferred me to the technician. It gets real technical, but FM is between the TV1 and TV2 frequencies. Bottom line is that you will hear "single conversion mixer images" of strong FM stations when tuned to TV1. If the TV stations are not close by (stronger than an image of a corresponding FM station), you will not receive the TV station. Also, the TV receiver sensitivity in either band is not adequate for my area. Google the quoted phrase above to get deeper into radio design.
The tech said that they may develop a better design later, and suggested that the FR250 is probably a better choice for me, since the shortwave radio design is much better. I plan to swap it out. I'll probably be satisfied with the 250.
Update after further research: Neither the FR200 nor the 250 feature NOAA weather band coverage (160.4 - 160.55 MHz). Not a good thing to give up on a radio destined for the hurricane emergency kit. It comes down to the FR300 with NOAA (with poor TV band reception), or the FR250 or the 200 with shortwave. Or finding an overall better alternative for the price, which I haven't (yet).
Sports Authority
