I'm this close!!!

[GaryPen]

I'm trying to decide between 3 receivers. Perhaps people here can offer their opinions on which would be the best choice.
Fortec Mercury II
Pansat 3500SD
CoolSat 5000

All 3 seem to have the basic features I'm looking for:
Component Output, AC-3, USALS, and true Blind Scan.

But, I am also interested in
-ease of initial setup (with motorized system)
-scan speed
-channel change speed
-video and audio quality
-channel list customization
-video in guide
-everyday ease-of-use (for the wife)
-any add'l features you may feel I need that I don't know about being a newbie

Thanks in advance. I will try not to be too big of a pain in the ass anymore, with all these newbie questions. (And, yes, I have read the reviews.)

 

[W_Tracy_Parnell]

Coolsat is the fastest both in scanning time and channel change. I heard the Mercury had scanning issues-don't know if that has been addressed. Heard good things about it otherwise.

 

[PSB]

I have installed them all and the Fortec wins hands down every time!

I do not have a Mercury II but do have the Classic NA and the Ultra, plus they are GOLD sponsors here!

Great quality and simple to use, and above all the flexible scanning with the Fortec's

 

[Mr Tony]

I like the Fortec Classic and the Coolsat. Use both on a regualr basis

 

[iafirebuff]

I love my Fortec Classic

 

[updatelee]

Ive owned the coolsat 5000 and now have a fortec mercury II.

the coolsat is nice because its supported by 'channel master' an awesome channel editor by sharpc, makes editing your channel lists a breeze, you can even convert other formats into coolsat or convert your coolsat to other formats. mercury II isnt supported by chanel master yet.

the mercury II has the best usals tracking Ive ever seen on an ird, many irds the usals is usefull for getting close to a sat, then using v1.2 to tweak the signal. some ird's the usals isnt even good enough for that. the coolsat was good, the fortec is amazing, I cant even tweak the dish using v1.2, usals is so right on that moving the dish left or right allways decreases the signal. im very happy with the fortec for usals.

I havent had it long enough to rate the blind scan against the coolsat, so I wont.

 

[Das Hammer]

3500SD scan is slow compared to the Coolsat's; however, it seems to find more.

On the plus side, you can save the channel list to the SD card, do what you want to it on the PC, then upload the list from the card. You don't have to physically connect with a serial cable. Also, it is very good with a motor.

 

[SatinKzo]

I am brand spanking new to FTA, but I have a Coolsat 5000 and as far as ease of setup, it was pretty much just like my dish system (easier IMO except the plethora of sats that are close together made my pointing experience uh, fun).

Anyways, my wife liked it, said fairly easy to use, so thats one for the plus side.

I have to get a channel editor still, cause the deleting of $ channels is cumbersome IMO on the interface if you get alot of stuff during scans.

 

[Mr Tony]

I have to get a channel editor still, cause the deleting of $ channels is cumbersome IMO on the interface if you get alot of stuff during scans.

you can scan just FTA stuff

but if you have a ton of $ stuff, go into the security settings and there is an option for "delete scrambled channels" and **poof** scrambled channels gone

 

[SatinKzo]

OH I didn't see that option, thx iceberg, I'll try that. Gotta bear with me, I am still learning all the navigation options and scan features.

 

[Mr Tony]

OH I didn't see that option, thx iceberg, I'll try that. Gotta bear with me, I am still learning all the navigation options and scan features.

no problem. Thats what we're here for

Its system settigns--database reset--(password) then option (see below pictures)

 

[drhydro]

I have both pansat 2700a and fortec mercury II recievers. Both of them are very good, but I have to say that for ease of use and features the Mercury II is the winner hands down.

 

[GaryPen]

I think I've now narrowed it down to either the Fortec Mercury II and the Coolsat 5000.

Any further comments and comparisons bewteen the two would be appreciated. Thanks!

 

[Optical Serenity]

I also have a Mercury II. I've had several receivers and one thing I don't like about FTA receivers is the bad (read: unprofessional looking) software they are loaded with. Most menus look cheesy at best. For example, the Traxis DBS-4550 I had spelled "Succeed" as "Succed." Yes, minor complaints, but I had to find something better.

I went to the Mercury II, and along with component cables comes slick menus, and a quick OS. The menus are quick, and so far I have found very minor items which I thought were off or wrong. I'm very happy with my Mercury II.

 

[digiblur]

I remember seeing a receiver show something like "15 Transponders Founded"

 

[drhydro]

I remember seeing a receiver show something like "15 Transponders Founded"

That would be a satworks 3618, or at least that what my say

 

[PSB]

That would be a satworks 3618, or at least that what my say

The Satworks ST 3618, what a wonderful receiver, still have mine here

 

[drhydro]

The Satworks ST 3618, what a wonderful receiver, still have mine here

My first DVB reciever, it has the most accurate blind scan of all. Plus it has the most stable signal meter I have seen in a FTA reciever. It is lacking in some major features tho, most notably motor control and AC-3

 

[PSB]

My first DVB reciever, it has the most accurate blind scan of all. Plus it has the most stable signal meter I have seen in a FTA reciever. It is lacking in some major features tho, most notably motor control and AC-3

True but a software update and change of remote was all that was needed to upgrade the above to the 3688 (Can be motorized)
AC3 would have been nice!

I think when the 3618 came on the market it was aimed at hobbyists that had motorized analog and wanted to get DVB signal with BLIND SCAN, that was the real selling point!

 

[Mr Tony]

The issue with the 3688 was that it logged all frequencies on a blind scan. So if you had a frequency already in the unit, it made a duplicate.

When I use to scan SBS6, I'd end up with 10 TP's of ONN (but only one channel)