Receiver Ratings wanted

[sleepybear]

I have searched many threads looking but cannot find a FTA receiver review for actual receiving of signals. Example: Will a Dreambox or a pansat 2500 pull in a better signal than a Coolsat 5000 etc. I am speaking now about signals received with the same other equipment (Dishes and LNB's) . What receiver does a better job with picking up weak transponders with the same other equipment (if you were switching from box to box and leaving your dish as is.) Does anyone know of a link for ratings? Or personal experiences you had if you have done this?

Many Thanks

 

[Tron]

You can check out the product reviews section here, but basically the favorites right now are the Coolsat 5k, the Pansat 3500, and the Fortec Mercury II. If you are going to use a motor, stay away from Viewsats. For a beginner, a receiver with "Blind Scan" is very helpful. This will find all transponders on the satellite you're pointed at without having to enter them manually.

 

[SatinKzo]

I've used all 3 that Tron mentioned and currently use the Pansat 3500. I think the fortec had the best blind scan setup, but I also think the coolsat was easiest to use.

As for signal quality, lock etc. I can't comment on the difference in signal locking between all 3, but I would have to guess all 3 do a pretty good job. I know my current Pansat seems to have no problems with it.

 

[Anole]

The only thing I've seen posted lately is in a thread by Iceberg.
He was describing how some of his receivers picked up certain transponders, and other receivers didn't.
Not an all-inclusive list, but you might give it a read.

http://www.satelliteguys.us/showthread.php?t=92977

 

[jayelem]

I know my Coolsat 5000 has missed some channels when scanning in regular mode but I like the channel editing and easy setup , I have a Pansat - Fortec clone that picks up everything but I find it slower and I hate that it defaults to all channels and when I change sats I have to remember what I was on , been awhile since I've played with it.

I really like my Coolsat ......... no big complaints .... best all around receiver in my opinion.

I have not tried the Pansat 3500 or Fortec Mercury , but I'm sure they make the top 3 for best receivers.

 

[mastermesh]

Based on what I've read, numbers don't really mean didly squat when comparing different brands and stuff.... I have a pansat 3500 sd and if signal strength is over 30 most stuff comes in great. I've read in other threads that other boxes can do that with numbers that are higher or lower than 30 and that each box will have different stengths showing on each tp even if you use the same dish with the same lnb and don't move anything except swap the box...

 

[sleepybear]

I thank all of you for your input so far. No, I'm not a beginner(just a dummy ) I'm a HAM w/ alot of radio equip. And was surprised to see one FTA box not pick up what another would. I found Iceberg's thread there, (thanks) yes and that's what I'm going through right now. RAtings shown by manufacturers themselves will not really tell the truth just as in radio. We need a consumer reports type test here on Satellite Guys I guess. It's disappointing when you got a fairly nice dish set up (finally) and a box will let you down. Now with all the new ones out you'd think one would improve its reception.

 

[Anole]

Well, not that this really addresses your question, but . . .

Recently, Iceberg posted a list of his vast collection of receivers, along with what sort of meter-readings they gave on good signals, and on low signals down around threshold.
edit: here is the link to that info.

You're right that nobody tells the truth in their specs.
Many manufacturers hit the market with firmware that isn't even fully operational.

If you like, we'll deputize you to take 'em all into a lab and verify their operation.
I'd really enjoy some such tests.
We're lucky to have the reviews, which point out shortcomings as well as good features.
And we're lucky to have equipment-whores who try everything that comes along.
We need mo ho!

 

[mastermesh]

It'd be awesome if there were lab tests... PC world and those other type mags are always doing tests on various computers and tech junk so that people can compare what's really what and what you get for your money in comparative shopping.. It'd be really cool if someone could do tests like that with fta stuff.

 

[SatinKzo]

I would volunteer my time to test FTA boxes. I think the problem is obviously there is a lot of subjectivity to it as far as conditions and equipment etc outside of a test lab type environment

I have actually been wanting to play with a new receiver, but I am up in the air on what to buy. Anyone have suggestions on a receiver they have been interested in that is not already reviewed?

 

[Anole]

Can you imagine what would happen to FTA sales if some (current) national magazine started showcasing one a month with a Consumer's-like test and evaluation?

Can you imagine the FTA boxes showing up at Sears, Circuit City, maybe even Home Depot ?

Anyone have suggestions on a receiver they have been interested in that is not already reviewed?

Yes, any that have a hard drive, and preferably blind scan.
Conexant, SonicView, GeoSatPro, ... but as far as I know, none of these do the blind-scan-boogie.

 

[SatinKzo]

Well, suppossedly the new coolsat 7000 will have blindscan and pvr. I'll put that in my "to be considered list''

Or the Nfusion line of PVR's specs say they have a blind scan feature.