Yaesu FT-7900 or FT-8800

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.

OB

OB

10 Year 15 Year 20 Year
Joined
Sep 4, 2003
Threads
24
Messages
169
I just passed the technician test on Friday and I'm trying to figure out which radio I want to get.
Right now I'm torn between the Yaesu FT-7900 & the FT-8800.
My plans for use are club runs here on the east coast and for CM 2012.
Unfortunately the Yaesu site does not offer side by side comparison of their units and almost every site I find them on has Yaesu's description.

Can anyone tell me what one radio has the advantage over the other?

They say they are both "dual band" but it looks as if the 7900 can only hear either one band or the other at a time while the 8800 can hear both at the same time.

Why would I need the more expensive 8800?

I'm new to this ham thing so I don't know what I need.
 
Last edited:
I've been in the same dilemma...from what I've read, 95+% of what you need in a radio is contained in the much less expensive 2m only FT-2900R...perfect unless you NEED dual-band

now, we'll see who talks us into one of your choices :)
 
First of all, congratulations on your ticket!

OB said:
They say they are both "dual band" but it looks as if the 7900 can only hear either one band our the other at a time while the 8800 can heat both at the same time.
Click to expand...

Bingo.


OB said:
Why would I need the more expensive 8800?
Click to expand...

You don't need any more than a basic 2M mobile (like the Yaesu 2900 for example) for a good trail radio. If there are plenty of 70cm repeaters where you live or like to wheel, then the 7900 would let you use those too.

But as to why you might want a 8800 or other similar radio - the 8800 is really two radios in one unit. At Cruise Moab, you could listen and talk to your trail group on one side, and listen and talk to base camp/CM headquarters on the other side. You could rig it as a cross-band local repeater when camping or wheeling with family or friends outside the range of a regular repeater. If you were willing to spend a little more, you could get a Yaesu 350 or a Kenwood 710 and then you could use one side of the radio to beacon and receive APRS, then anyone at home could see where you were, on the internet in real time. And you could see the location of other APRS rigs and repeaters and etc. right on your GPS screen.

Amateur radio is a multi-faceted hobby, there is a ton of stuff you can do with it. Don't be surprised if end up with several radios and doing a lot more than trail commo. Good luck with your purchase decision.
 
I went with the 7900 because a) I wanted to at least have dual band, and b) was withing my price range. ;). I would love to have a higher end one, but the reality of my uses can't really justify. We have a good amount of 70cm around here.... So at least having the dual band is justified for me.
 
Sure 1911, go throw some other radio in the mix and really screw me up!
If I lived out in the Moab area I think I would seriously consider one of those other radios and believe me it is tempting but I need to be realistic.

95% of my wheeling is done on the East Coast where satellite signals are easy to come by. As far as being able to track myself or have someone else track me, I can use apps on my android phone for that.
Here on the east coast your lucky if your trail leader and tail gunner are more than 500 yards away from each other. This is why we (in our club) primarily rely on CB's. More and more of us are transitioning to the HAM but really only because we are going to CM 2012.

I personally can't think of a reason that I would need to hear two channels at one time. I like the thought of being able to monitor two channels at one time like the 7900 but I would gather this could also be accomplished by "scanning" two channels-correct?

Woody-I'm thinking a little more than the 2900 only because of the road time we see. With a little more storage capacity for repeaters you could virtually program every repeater in the radio along the route before you leave (if that's how it works).
The 7900 has the removable face, this will give me better mounting options. I'll prewire both the tow rig and the trail rig making the unit usable in both, just unplug, move to the other rig and plug it back in.
 
OB said:
I like the thought of being able to monitor two channels at one time like the 7900 but I would gather this could also be accomplished by "scanning" two channels-correct?
Click to expand...

Sure, you can just set the frequency range of the scan to just barely include both of the frequencies you want to monitor. You would miss whatever was happening on one while you were listening/talking on the other, but if it works for you then that is a cheap way to monitor two (or more) frequencies.
 
Well, for my first radio I think I'm going with the Yaesu FT-7900R. It may be more than I need at this point but I'd rather go bigger than wish I had in the end. The biggest selling point for me is the remote face, I just don't have anymore room in the dash area of my 4Runner for another radio and trying to fit one in the Tundra without hacking things up isn't an option.
Now, do we know any vendors that sell HAM equipment that give a Mud discount?
 
I'm new to ham as well and I have the Yaseu FT-2900R in my 60. I think its a good solution for "first radio" as it seems to have a number of good features and is built very well. I was only looking to do 2m simplex and duplex and just understand the radio and be comfortable with just that before I jumped off on to something more expensive and complicated.

check out eham.net for reviews of ham gear.
 
I own a FT 2900 Ft 7800 and FT 8900.

My suggestion for a first radio would be the Ft-2900. It is butt easy to learn and operate. This allows you to concentrate on learning radio use and protocol rather than learning to use radio. The buttons are few, large and easy to use. I have this radio in my FJ40 it is very easy to use even on technical trails. If you decide you need more radio later you can always sell it or move it to another rig.

The FT-7900 is a nice radio, perfect for more advanced users. The dual frequency allows use with many repeaters. I have this radio in my FJ60 the buttons are smaller and a bit fussier to use, there are also a ton more features to learn with the associated menus and sub menus. I'd recommend this radio as a great second purchase.

The FT-8900 (same as the ft-8800 with extra bands) his a true dual radio. You can listen to your convoy on simplex and monitor a repeater that others may be using to contact the group for a hook up, or monitor the Weather radio channel. It also allows you to cross band repeat. I use the cross band repeat to monitor the club simplex frequency when I'm waiting for people to show up at camp, I X-band to my HT and can carry it around camp or go for a hike. In retrospect I wouldn't buy this radio again. There are just so many features it is very cumbersome to learn and many of the features have limited use for me.

One feature I use on all my radios is the Weather channels, very handy here in the mountains.

Any way that's my .02
 
Last edited:
Congrats !

I'm a fan of the true dual bands. After having that ability in my hand held (portables, HT's) I really looked for the ability to work both bands. Advanced Specialties in Lodi might have those in stock and has everything else you need for the install. Not sure about the MUDscount, but its worth a try.
 
RobRed said:
If I only had one radio it would be a handheld..
Click to expand...

I don't agree. For a first radio, the last thing you want is a low power radio with fiddly buttons, a tiny difficult to hear speaker, a terrible antenna and difficult programming. You rarely use it outside of the truck anyway, so why not take advantage of your ham radio's main advantages, and get range, clarity, and power? A truck mounted unit with a good antenna will give you a great experience, and blow you away vs CB.

Regarding your first radio--I agree that the 2900 is nearly ideal. I have 2 2800s which was the predecessor to the 2900 and they are durable, excellent radios with lots of power, a decent speaker, and no noisy cooling fan due to the finned aluminum chassis. The 2900 is basically the same radio. $$ for performance, this will be an excellent investment. It will also be easy to sell when you want to move up.

Put some thought into your antenna. It makes a lot more difference than your radio. A single band radio like the 2900 can use a simple and inexpensive antenna. I recommend the Larsen 150 series all the time because it works so well, is inexpensive and can take more of a beating than virtually any other antenna. They are excellent. Other antennas have to be folded down going under trees or get broken off on rocks, but the Larsens can just take it.

For a second radio, the 8800 is nice. The dual band dual receive is occasionally extremely useful. If you think that long term you will use APRS, then the 350 or similar Kenwood would be a good purchase. I want a 350 for the large letters on the faceplate! I can't see a strong argument for the 7900. It isn't dual band/dual receive, and how often are you really going to use 70cm alone? The great part about say the 8800 or 350 is you can set each side of the radio to a different "2M" frequency. Monitor truck to truck on one side and a repeater system or other frequency on the other side of the radio.

Handhelds have their place, but get your feet wet in the radio world first and see how much radio you really need. It's very easy to get caught up in the more is better thing, when in fact, less is often more as you will see.
 
Cruiserdrew said:
I don't agree. For a first radio, the last thing you want is a low power radio with fiddly buttons, a tiny difficult to hear speaker, a terrible antenna and difficult programming. You rarely use it outside of the truck anyway, so why not take advantage of your ham radio's main advantages, and get range, clarity, and power? A truck mounted unit with a good antenna will give you a great experience, and blow you away vs CB.

Regarding your first radio--I agree that the 2900 is nearly ideal. I have 2 2800s which was the predecessor to the 2900 and they are durable, excellent radios with lots of power, a decent speaker, and no noisy cooling fan due to the finned aluminum chassis. The 2900 is basically the same radio. $$ for performance, this will be an excellent investment. It will also be easy to sell when you want to move up.

Put some thought into your antenna. It makes a lot more difference than your radio. A single band radio like the 2900 can use a simple and inexpensive antenna. I recommend the Larsen 150 series all the time because it works so well, is inexpensive and can take more of a beating than virtually any other antenna. They are excellent. Other antennas have to be folded down going under trees or get broken off on rocks, but the Larsens can just take it.

For a second radio, the 8800 is nice. The dual band dual receive is occasionally extremely useful. If you think that long term you will use APRS, then the 350 or similar Kenwood would be a good purchase. I want a 350 for the large letters on the faceplate! I can't see a strong argument for the 7900. It isn't dual band/dual receive, and how often are you really going to use 70cm alone? The great part about say the 8800 or 350 is you can set each side of the radio to a different "2M" frequency. Monitor truck to truck on one side and a repeater system or other frequency on the other side of the radio.

Handhelds have their place, but get your feet wet in the radio world first and see how much radio you really need. It's very easy to get caught up in the more is better thing, when in fact, less is often more as you will see.
Click to expand...

Apparently you have never used an FT60 - LOUD, Easy to program and 5 Watts. Loooong battery life and super durable. Super good handheld - actually super good radio in general. Couple this will a nice truck mounted antenna an it's formidable. Using the rubberduck is perfect for vehicle to vehicle and outside. I use this as well as my trail partners out of the rig every trip.

I can recommend a 350 as I have a fully decked out 350 installed in my cruiser but I also carry the FT 60 for out side use, spotting and foot recon.
 
Congratulations on earning your license.
. I’ve own several Icom dual band radios (2720) and one - 2 meter VHF IC-V8000. I also have several older Yaesu FT-2400 2 meter radios that I’ve used in a Jeep, full size and classic Broncos, and a couple of “Go Boxes”. I like dual band radios that allow running 2 meter frequencies on “both sides” of the radio simultaneously. You can have a simplex freq on one side and the local repeater on the other. I also like the option of a removable face plate that allows mounting the body of the radio separately from the face plate. This is very beneficial if space is an issue. However, for an off road vehicle I wanted a radio that was very rugged and if possible transmit more than 50 watts. I ended up mounting a FT-2900M in the stock radio location with an external speaker located in the stock speaker location. (I'm not sure about cross posting info on two different sites. So if this isn't "politically correct" let me know. With that said, I have a write up on 4x4 Ham - 4x4 Ham Radio Operators.)
 
1911 said:
But as to why you might want a 8800 or other similar radio - the 8800 is really two radios in one unit. At Cruise Moab, you could listen and talk to your trail group on one side, and listen and talk to base camp/CM headquarters on the other side. You could rig it as a cross-band local repeater when camping or wheeling with family or friends outside the range of a regular repeater. If you were willing to spend a little more, you could get a Yaesu 350 or a Kenwood 710 and then you could use one side of the radio to beacon and receive APRS, then anyone at home could see where you were, on the internet in real time. And you could see the location of other APRS rigs and repeaters and etc. right on your GPS screen.

Amateur radio is a multi-faceted hobby, there is a ton of stuff you can do with it. Don't be surprised if end up with several radios and doing a lot more than trail commo. Good luck with your purchase decision.
Click to expand...

Great info! I would love to see a discussion of the uses of ham in addition to basic trail communications

Sent from my iPhone using IH8MUD
 
I'd echo Cruiserdrew's statement on HT's as a first radio. I made that mistake.

However I disagree with him about 70cm. We have a pretty extensive repeater network on 70cm around here, so the utility of that band may vary with local.
 
rusty_tlc said:
I'd echo Cruiserdrew's statement on HT's as a first radio. I made that mistake.
Click to expand...

Seems a bit narrow minded... since Drews statement was so general. My first HAM was a mobile and I made that mistake.

I do agree having 70cm is a big benefit. Of course APRS is a big benefit. Well Having a big readout is a big benefit. Having a 1000 memories not so much.
 
RobRed said:
Seems a bit narrow minded... since Drews statement was so general. My first HAM was a mobile and I made that mistake.

I do agree having 70cm is a big benefit. Of course APRS is a big benefit. Well Having a big readout is a big benefit. Having a 1000 memories not so much.
Click to expand...
Just saying that in my opinion an HT is a poor choice for a first radio for off road use. I think Drew was pretty specific about why.

The facts are the buttons are fiddely, the menus are hard to navigate, and HT's are low power compared to a mobile unit.

I have used an FT-60. I also own an VX-7R which is an awesome radio, I use it fairly often when hiking or if I ride along with a Non-ham on the trail. Still not the best choice for a first radio IMHO.
 
rusty_tlc said:
Just saying that in my opinion an HT is a poor choice for a first radio for off road use.
...
HT's are low power compared to a mobile unit.

I have used an FT-60. I also own an VX-7R which is an awesome radio, I use it fairly often when hiking or if I ride along with a Non-ham on the trail. Still not the best choice for a first radio IMHO.
Click to expand...

I agree in most instances. Why give up one of the major benefits of ham (10-20X the power) over other services? If all you're ever going to do is ride right behind someone else on the trail, and you live/drive near some repeaters that are way up high, then a 5-Watt HT may do you just fine - but the first time you are separated from your trail group, or have more than one trail group, or find yourself out-of-range of a repeater, you'll wish you had a mobile instead. If you don't want to drill holes for a permanent antenna, then use a mag mount.
 
If you're going to buy an HT for your first radio and use it in your vehicle, I suggest an HT with a BNC antenna mount. It's easier to attach an external (mag or permanent mount) antenna to the radio. At least I found it to be easier. An external speaker and hand mic/headset are also good additions. I bought a dual band HT as my first radio and used it mobile for about a year. I bought an amplifier (5 watts in around 45 out) at a ham fest, external speaker, trunk mount antenna, and hand mic. It was a small hassle to hook up the coax, amp, speaker jack, each time I entered and exited the vehicle but I didn't want to buy a mobile until I knew what I wanted.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Back
Top Bottom