Which HT Receiver would you buy?

If this setup is for HT only, I'd buy the Outlaw receiver and the separate 5 channel amp. My brother's friend has this setup. He liked the external amp because it is very muscular. It reminds me of the Hafler or Ati 5 channel amps. You could probably get both items on the used market very reasonably priced. That's what I would buy, for inexpensive, powerful. (I don't think SQ matters as much in HT as it does for music, YMMV)

power, SQ, inexpensive... pick any two.

I have to agree with others who recommend going with seperates. Receivers are throwing money away - if you want to be savvy pick up good deals on seperates - you can upgrade when and if you want to. I had a Yamaha DSP 3090 that couldn't be sold for virtually any price on Audiogon - even at the final $425 price I had, and this was a highly recommended unit with a list of $3k, and I bought (new) for $1.5k. Also none of the receivers can touch the seperates in sound quality. With the rest of the systm you have, you'll immediately hear the difference.
Going to an Acurus Act3 with an Anthem MCA-5, I immediately heard things the Yamaha could even concieve of resolving. Good recommendations above about the used Rotel pieces for under $1k (amp+power amp), and I saw an Act3 without bass management go for under $600 last week on an auction.
If you insist on a receiver buy a used one on this site and make someone else take the $ dump - Good Luck!

I disagree with several of the above posts. I currently use an integrated Marantz SR-18EX A/V receiver as the heart of my home theater set-up. While this is out of the $1000 price range, I found it to exceed many of the A/V seperates in the same range. It is important to realize that many of the people that the companies are targeting with these A/V products are not audiophiles, but high-income individuals who want a good, but simple setup, thus no seperates. As the companies have focused their efforts this way, vast improvements have been made. I initially was going to go with the seperates, but for the money and performance, the Marantz came out on top. The older seperate systems that people are advising simply cannot hold a candle to a newer A/V receiver. Let me see, no THX ultra, DTS, no 6.1, etc. Not really my idea of a bargain. If you need to stay within a budget, you can easily find a one boxer that has everything you need. Also, the Marantz, and I am sure, others as well, can easily handle 2 channel stereo when needed in a pinch. It still sounds great. My point is not to make you buy the Marantz, but to not be too quick to discount the A/V Receivers.

Ryan

not quantity but quality-this is what is important.having said that it is true that seperates are usually better value.basically research the brand and product.for cheap thrills the new yamaha models-520 and 620 i beleive have gotten rave reviews-you might be able to get one of these new online for only $200-$250(check the merchant at audiosurvey.com etc).the outlaw is probably a very good choice too.i beleive yamaha has also just released model 1200 i beleive which is probably better than 800 model and i beleive is just as cheap.nad may be the best of all soundwise but there is a question of the build quality esp. compared to the outlaw.the outlaw therfore may be the best buy because you can add their current or upcoming power amp in the future-or you can wait for outlaws upcoming home theater pre amp.

Go with the Yamaha!