I don't mean to start a debate, but I suspect the definition of "RF performance" is important to your observation.
After a little less than a week of experience with the 396XT, I've noticed that a couple of frequencies that seemed prone to adjacent-channel interference from household sources on my old 396T are less impactful on the XT. That could be the result of narrower or better filtering, but only Paul Opitz can tell us whether or not the RF circuitry is any different on the XT.
Another improvement I've experienced is with better audio volume from an EDACS system I monitor that uses narrow-band transmission signals. The ability to program the "NFM" mode on the XT instead of the default "FM" for EDACS "wide" systems, seems to have made a real difference. Strictly speaking, this may be considered more of a programming "feature" rather than "RF performance."
--- In BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com, "just_a_radio_guy" <eika@...> wrote:
> > I've had my 396XT for nearly a week now, and I'm very impressed with
> > its overall RF performance compared to my early production model 396T.
> In my opinion no any changes in RF perfomance been made in 396XT in comparison to 396T.
> UPMan, please clear this situation!