• You can now help support WorldwideDX when you shop on Amazon at no additional cost to you! Simply follow this Shop on Amazon link first and a portion of any purchase is sent to WorldwideDX to help with site costs.

Another new(?) Ranger


View attachment 66697
From Ranger today.
Think they are trying to compete with the Aries Radios but AM only is not going to get them there.
73
Jeff
I've got one of those, it isn't a new offering. Matter of fact a few years back I posted about it and the comparison to the Mirage mx-36hp3 which is identical aside from the final transistors. One has 520's and the other has rt1 but both are dual final. They're a hot talking AM only radio with the same innards as the galaxy 66v2 and 86v. Not a bad little radio.

 
Not to change the subject jeff those new murals and the repainting of the old one looks nice in town, the one by the post office is great
 
  • Like
Reactions: AudioShockwav
Not to change the subject jeff those new murals and the repainting of the old one looks nice in town, the one by the post office is great
They really did some nice work!
That same group of painters is over in Monterey this week working on another set of murals.
I have a few pics here I will dig them up.

73
Jeff
 
  • Like
Reactions: dave457
Is there really a market for an AM only, 10 meter radio?
It's not really a 10 meter radio, it is built full well knowing they will be converted to freeband/CB use.
(On edit)
Back when the FCC took Jim Peng aka Ranger Taiwan and A-1 Telecom to court for selling export radios in the US, they admitted , under oath, that as long as the Radio did not work on CB frequency's out of the box it was legal to sell.
This case allowed exports to be openly sold.

The manufacturers now sell them as Ten Meter radios full well knowing they will be expanded.

This page I link to below shows the conclusion of the case and where Ranger petitioned the court to make the FCC pay Rangers Court costs because they withheld vital information from Ranger during the case.






73
Jeff
 
Last edited:
In case this info disappear's from the web....
The basis of the decision hinged on these points, these were internal e mails written by FCC field agents.
Quote:

Two of these documents are especially telling. In Defendant's Exhibit I, there is an e-mail from Lawrence Brock (an FCC employee stationed in Dallas, Texas) to another FCC employee dated June 7, 1996. The document says in pertinent part:


As you know, the PUBLIC NOTICE went out on "Export" transceivers on May 13 many thanks to Gary.

I think now is the time to publicize it and issue warning letters to known or suspected violators. Gary has already disseminated copies of the notice at a ham convention. In the future, if we can convince AUSAs that there is no doubt that the importers/marketers knew the "export" transceivers were illegal, they may be willing *672 to take on these cases knowing that they may have to argue this point to a jury.

I've prepared a sample warning letter that we may want to send importers and wholesalers. ...

Before we mail any warnings, I'll provide * * * * * (the AUSA handing the A-1 case and its offshoots) with the proposed list and final draft, and determine if he has any objections or concerns relating to what he's doing. The last paragraph to the sample warning letter was added as a "just-in-case" to avoid any future conflict with anything which may be in the works.

I am also appending a sample CITATION, but I'm not recommending it. I believe the referenced sections in a formal citation indicates that it is being issued because it is required (under our Rules) prior to us issuing any administrative forfeitures, ... which may be argued, implies that they may be ignorant of the violations and should have been informed of the illegalities prior to any criminal charges. I don't believe a citation is required under our Rules for violations relating to activities for which an FCC authorization (including an equipment authorization) is required.

When the warning letters are issued, I hope Gary will be able to address questions concerning the Public Notice (especially as it relates to the Ranger and RCI models).
(Def.'s Ex. I.) This document is susceptible to the interpretation that FCC engineers at the time of the message believed that it was arguable whether regulatory violators who had imported open radios had knowingly violated the law.

Another telling document is Defendant's Exhibit L an e-mail written from FCC employee Gary Hendrickson to Julius Knapp (another FCC employee) and apparently referencing the "Motion to Dismiss" filed by Defendants in this case. The e-mail reads in part as follows:


In your note on the transmittal slip, you made the comment that to your knowledge "none of the major brands can be modified to operate outside amateur bands certainly not with the ease provided on the Ranger units."

Unfortunately, this isn't quite the case. Virtually all models of the major brands of "real" amateur equipment CAN be modified for out-of-band operation. This applies both to MF/HF and to VHF/UHF amateur equipment from Icom, Kenwood, Yaesu, etc. Usually, the mods require opening up the unit and removing a resistor or diode-on some, a switch which is hidden on an obscure P.C. board has to be flipped. The mods may not be quite as easy to accomplish as on the Ranger units, but we're just talking about a matter of difficulty.

The mod information is readily available in the amateur versions of the "radio mod" books. The manufacturers will tell an amateur how to do it if he provides them with a copy of his license. Many of the ham radio store's service departments will do the mods (usually upon showing of a license).

There is an exemption in the Rules which permits the use of non-type accepted equipment in the Amateur Radio Service, and for MARS and CAP use. For some strange reason, this exemption is found within the CB Rules (See 95.655(a)), rather than in Part 2! (If we're going to provide a "loophole" for manufacturers, let's be sure to place it right where they can easily find it!)....
(Def.'s Ex. L.) This document is susceptible to the interpretation that FCC engineers believed at the time of this message that the radios imported by Ranger were not legally distinguishable from modifiable radios, which radios, arguably, were not prohibited by law at the time of the criminal conduct at issue. It would have, thus, provided the Defendant an argument both that the radios imported were not "prohibited by law" and that the regulations in place did not provide adequate notice to importers that the radios were so prohibited.

End Quote.

The FCC screwed the pooch on this case and walked away with there tail between there legs allowing the radios from them to openly being sold.

73
Jeff
 
Last edited:
Great post on the details of that RCI case! I remember when that was a big topic of phone conversations with Galaxy and a few distributors at the time.

RCI IS repacking some of the old tech while introducing new models. The problem with RCI is still build quality. I continue to see new Ranger built products (Galaxy, Connex, etc, plus the RCI models themselves) coming in with what I call dumb things wrong right out of the box. For example, in pretty much every new Connex or General (now out of business) I've had on the bench over the past few years has had PC-mounted POT's that had to be cleaned before they could be set. Most seem to come out of the box with loose nuts on mic jacks and SO239 connectors (this issue could be a result of shipping bumps and jostles). I've also seen a fair percentage of RCI-built radios come through with loose plug-in connectors (again could be results of shipping jolts). The problems were apparently bad enough that two of the outfits that were handling warranty support for RCI dropped them, namely CB Shop Supply and RF Limited (the Magnum outfit). I've been in contact with one of RCI's Asia reps this week about the build quality issues and they do say they're working on the problems. Hopefully they will sort it out soon.
 
We were saying that about them 25 or more years ago, finding loose antenna and mike sockets.

Some things just never change.

73
My brother bought a new 2950cf not long ago, so 239 was finger tight out of the box.....
Requires you to do your own QC before you install them.
My biggest gripe is they keep rehashing the same old with a different pa section.
They could do better.

73
Jeff
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pez
Is there really a market for an AM only, 10 meter radio?
90% of the radios we sell across from the truck stop on I40. It is hard to get my boss to order the ssb models because they set longer. Hopefully this one will be a little cheaper than the 39vhp plus.
 

dxChat
Help Users
  • No one is chatting at the moment.