Becker vs XCOM Radios

[Clyde Barker]

My Becker AR 4201 transceiver has worked great for almost 5 years, but today started displaying an "E2" error message, which means it needs a new synthesizer board. Becker won't quote me a price for repair until I send it in, but I suspect it will be $500 or more. I've been real happy with the performance of the Becker up to now but am reluctant to spend that much money on a 5 year old radio.

Anyway, the XCOM 760 radio is now made in the USA by Narco. I am interested in this radio because they also make a remote controller head. I normally fly my cub from the back seat, but it would be nice to be able to change frequency from either seat. I can buy an XCOM radio together with the remote head for less than a new AR4201 would cost. The only down side is I would have to re-wire my harness for the XCOM.

Anyone have any experience with the quality of XCOM since Narco took over the production? I know that they had problems when they were made in Australia. Or maybe know of a place to get the Becker repaired for cheap?

Thanks
Clyde

 

[sjohnson]

I've moderately pleased with the XCOM after 100 hours, but it was built in Australia, not by Narco. The built-in intercom is great. It is a full VOX unit, while the Becker has a hot mike. This is a key reason I went with XCOM. I paid a lot of attention to proper shielding and grounding. Unlike the Becker, the XCOM backlight is dimmable. I have no problem with knobs and buttons using my left hand (I'm right handed). Much better than Micro-aire.

Receiver audio quality is good, although some transmissions come through pretty muddy. The unit sometimes loses its mind upon power up. I've been told by XCOM that the problem was fixed in a firmware upgrade, which costs $200 and requires the unit to be sent to Narco. The problem is usually avoided by turning the unit off with the button on the unit, rather than the radio master. Presumably this is fixed in new units.

From an installation point of view, the connector (DB15) is way too small with too few ground pins. There really is no way to get all the wiring in the D shell without lots of external jumpering, which sort of defeats the purpose. A DB25 like Becker uses would work much better.

Note that the XCOM is in no way FAA approved - there merely is a letter to the effect that there is no objection to approval. The XCOM website and emails are very misleading on this point. I managed to get an XCOM 760 transceiver field approved, along with a new panel, antennae, and moving the electrical stuff out of the wing root, but it took 18 months. Much of the time was spent being bounced between inspectors who didn't want to deal with it. The documentation provided by XCOM (downloadable from the website) seemed to satisfy the inspector as to the radio's suitability. YMMV. Check with your local FSDO about prospects for approval before buying this radio.

 

[Clyde Barker]

Thanks. That's the kind of info I'm looking for.

My Cub is experimental, so no problems with the FSDO.

My wiring harness already goes through a PM501 intercom, so I would probably not use the on board VOX. Also that would use fewer connections through the DB15. I agree they should use a DB25.

My primary interest in the XCOM is the remote head, but only if the quality is good.

Thanks for the report.

Clyde

 

[sjohnson]

I should mention that I've talked to RCOs over 80 miles away. Transmit power and audio clarity do not seem to be a problem. I measured the output power with my antenna when I first installed the radio. I don't have the data in front of me, but IIRC was 4-5 watts across the spectrum, which is pretty good for an actual installation.

Can't report on the remote head.