Icom 7300 is available
Locked
12
12
Re: Icom 7300 is available
 
|
On 3/2/2016 11:49 AM, lstavenhagen wrote: > I don't doubt at all that Icom's high end rigs are good rigs with > good performance, but the K3 and K3S at the core of the Elecraft > investment still far outperform them for less money. For me anyway, > Icoms offer nothing comparable to the K line at the upper end of the > $ range, not even close. If you look at test data from both Sherwood and ARRL, I don't believe you can consider any of the Icom rigs (ProIII, 7600, 7700, 7800) to be "high performance" (I'm holding judgement until I see test data on the 7851). In all cases, phase noise and 2 KHz IMDDR3 are barely adequate with 2 KHz IMDDR3 between 70 and 80 dB and phase noise in the 125 - 130 dBc/Hz range 10 KHz from carrier. Those numbers put Icom's top of the line rigs behind well known "High performance" rigs like the Flex-1500 and Yaesu FTdx3000! 73, ... Joe, W4TV ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [hidden email] |
|
|
In reply to this post by Elecraft mailing list
On Wed,3/2/2016 8:24 AM, Doug Person via Elecraft wrote:
> If you have spent serious time with an IC-7600, IC-7700, or IC-7800, > you would absolutely NOT say their performance is mediocre. They are worse than mediocre with respect to cleanliness of transmitted CW. See k9yc.com/TXNoise.pdf 73, Jim K9YC ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [hidden email] |
|
|
In reply to this post by Joe Subich, W4TV-4
oh, I totally agree - even my K2 nips at the heels of a 7700 and probably even a 7800, especially in a pileup. I just didn't want to bury Doug's point, which I think is a good one. A rig purchase is often a compromise, where it's often ok to sacrifice one feature set for another to suit one's budget or intended use of the rig. Something like the 7300 can fill a niche, as Doug describes so I think he's totally right on that point.
OTOH, it's hard not to be biased once you get your first Elecraft rig, or two... your opinions very quickly converge away from El's competitors once you start putting them on the air, etc. and those rigs become three... and then 4..... :). 73, LS W5QD |
|
|
In reply to this post by Joe Subich, W4TV-4
The observation I would make on this is that the poor performing Icoms were good enough to capture all 3 of the top positions in the recent WRTC. IIRC there was one Elecraft and 5 Icoms used by the top 3 teams. I don't want to read too much into that, op skills play heavily in the results. And luck plays a role as well. But nonetheless, even though the 'numbers' of the Icoms are not all that good, they appear to be 'good enough'. They do have too much TX noise. But then nearly all rigs have too much TX noise. My view is that the top-of-the-line rigs are serious overkill for nearly all hams. Even the lowly FT-857, which is no ones idea of a 'contest rig', did surprisingly well in the hands of two very good ops. This was back in the WRTC in 2010. Their pair of K3's were wiped out by lightning. They lost an hour of op time while swapping rigs but still finished about 35th out of 50. At the end of that lost hour they were dead last, but then climbed back up the list. So I think the evidence indicates that even under the demanding condx of a contest a lot of rigs are good enough to be competitive. Guys should spend less on rigs and more on antennas. Or maybe spend that extra $$$ on beer and women . . . 73 de dave On 3/2/16 11:09 AM, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote: > > On 3/2/2016 11:49 AM, lstavenhagen wrote: >> I don't doubt at all that Icom's high end rigs are good rigs with >> good performance, but the K3 and K3S at the core of the Elecraft >> investment still far outperform them for less money. For me anyway, >> Icoms offer nothing comparable to the K line at the upper end of the >> $ range, not even close. > > If you look at test data from both Sherwood and ARRL, I don't believe > you can consider any of the Icom rigs (ProIII, 7600, 7700, 7800) to > be "high performance" (I'm holding judgement until I see test data > on the 7851). In all cases, phase noise and 2 KHz IMDDR3 are barely > adequate with 2 KHz IMDDR3 between 70 and 80 dB and phase noise in > the 125 - 130 dBc/Hz range 10 KHz from carrier. > > Those numbers put Icom's top of the line rigs behind well known "High > performance" rigs like the Flex-1500 and Yaesu FTdx3000! > > 73, > > ... Joe, W4TV > > ______________________________________________________________ > Elecraft mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > Post: mailto:[hidden email] > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html > Message delivered to [hidden email] > Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [hidden email] |
Re: Icom 7300 is available
|
Administrator
|
In reply to this post by lstavenhagen
Folks - Let's end this topic now to relieve others from email overload.
73, Eric Moodulator /elecraft.com/ On 3/2/2016 9:34 AM, lstavenhagen wrote: > oh, I totally agree - even my K2 nips at the heels of a 7700 and probably > even a 7800, especially in a pileup. I just didn't want to bury Doug's > point, which I think is a good one. A rig purchase is often a compromise, > where it's often ok to sacrifice one feature set for another to suit one's > budget or intended use of the rig. Something like the 7300 can fill a niche, > as Doug describes so I think he's totally right on that point. > > OTOH, it's hard not to be biased once you get your first Elecraft rig, or > two... your opinions very quickly converge away from El's competitors once > you start putting them on the air, etc. and those rigs become three... and > then 4..... :). > > 73, > LS > W5QD > > > > -- > View this message in context: http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/Icom-7300-is-available-tp7614790p7614834.html > Sent from the Elecraft mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > ______________________________________________________________ > Elecraft mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > Post: mailto:[hidden email] > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html > Message delivered to [hidden email] > ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [hidden email] |
|
|
In reply to this post by Dave-7
On Wed,3/2/2016 9:56 AM, dave wrote:
> The observation I would make on this is that the poor performing Icoms > were good enough to capture all 3 of the top positions in the recent > WRTC. IIRC there was one Elecraft and 5 Icoms used by the top 3 teams. ICOM provided rigs at no cost to those who couldn't or didn't want to bring their own rig to WRTC. Elecraft rigs were owned by the participants, and were about 2/3 of the rigs in use. Also, many participants don't care (or don't know) if their rig is dirty on CW, and those ICOM rigs are (although not as nasty as the Yaesu rigs). 73, Jim K9YC ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [hidden email] |
|
|
In reply to this post by Dave-7
Yes, and a Flex 6700's ADC evidently didn't crumble in the big signal
jungle on topband and garnered #1 USA (assisted/unlimited) in the recent CQ WW 160M CW contest. 73, Barry N1EU On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 5:56 PM, dave <[hidden email]> wrote: > > The observation I would make on this is that the poor performing Icoms > were good enough to capture all 3 of the top positions in the recent WRTC. > IIRC there was one Elecraft and 5 Icoms used by the top 3 teams. > > I don't want to read too much into that, op skills play heavily in the > results. And luck plays a role as well. But nonetheless, even though the > 'numbers' of the Icoms are not all that good, they appear to be 'good > enough'. > > They do have too much TX noise. But then nearly all rigs have too much TX > noise. > > My view is that the top-of-the-line rigs are serious overkill for nearly > all hams. > > Even the lowly FT-857, which is no ones idea of a 'contest rig', did > surprisingly well in the hands of two very good ops. This was back in the > WRTC in 2010. Their pair of K3's were wiped out by lightning. They lost an > hour of op time while swapping rigs but still finished about 35th out of > 50. At the end of that lost hour they were dead last, but then climbed back > up the list. So I think the evidence indicates that even under the > demanding condx of a contest a lot of rigs are good enough to be > competitive. Guys should spend less on rigs and more on antennas. Or maybe > spend that extra $$$ on beer and women . . . > > 73 de dave > > > > On 3/2/16 11:09 AM, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote: > >> >> On 3/2/2016 11:49 AM, lstavenhagen wrote: >> >>> I don't doubt at all that Icom's high end rigs are good rigs with >>> good performance, but the K3 and K3S at the core of the Elecraft >>> investment still far outperform them for less money. For me anyway, >>> Icoms offer nothing comparable to the K line at the upper end of the >>> $ range, not even close. >>> >> >> If you look at test data from both Sherwood and ARRL, I don't believe >> you can consider any of the Icom rigs (ProIII, 7600, 7700, 7800) to >> be "high performance" (I'm holding judgement until I see test data >> on the 7851). In all cases, phase noise and 2 KHz IMDDR3 are barely >> adequate with 2 KHz IMDDR3 between 70 and 80 dB and phase noise in >> the 125 - 130 dBc/Hz range 10 KHz from carrier. >> >> Those numbers put Icom's top of the line rigs behind well known "High >> performance" rigs like the Flex-1500 and Yaesu FTdx3000! >> >> 73, >> >> ... Joe, W4TV >> >> ______________________________________________________________ >> Elecraft mailing list >> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft >> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm >> Post: mailto:[hidden email] >> >> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net >> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html >> Message delivered to [hidden email] >> >> ______________________________________________________________ > Elecraft mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > Post: mailto:[hidden email] > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html > Message delivered to [hidden email] > Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [hidden email] |
|
|
In reply to this post by Bill-3
I'm trying to "get my arms around" the following statement by Joe, W4TV:
"The observation I would make on this is that the poor performing Icoms were good enough to capture all 3 of the top positions in the recent WRTC. IIRC there was one Elecraft and 5 Icoms used by the top 3 teams." Joe seems to concede that the Icoms are "poor performing", but that somehow they took the top 3 positions in the WRTC. So what does that mean? It seems to suggest that the dirtier your signal is the better you will do!!! I would agree that a dirty signal does tend to get your attention!!! At the same time, the fact that there was only one Elecraft radio in use certainly assured the fact that Icoms would finish high. I can also see why the Elecraft may not have finished in the top 3, since it really is not designed, with all the glitz and 500 knobs, to be a contest radio. Rather, it is designed to be a modest sized, but highly competent radio! That may not dovetail with what contesters are looking for. However, when it comes to "nailing down" a difficult contact, one at a time, I'll put the K3 up against just about any radio. The obsession with contests is a concern to me. During those events I constantly hear signals that are obviously the result of over driving, etc. Some folks seem to be willing to sacrifice anything in order to just be "heard" better than the next guy. They will absolutely squeeze the very last watt possible out of their equipment even though they know (and have been warned) that running equipment that close to maximum increases the probability that signal quality will deteriorate, and very probably outside required specifications. It just seems to me that this is a subversive way of cheating! Admittedly, not all of this is the fault of the operator. Equipment manufacturers have increasingly ignored the importance of signal purity. Still, if you take a piece of equipment that is known to be deficient, and then run it at levels that accentuate the problem, I think you lose your innocence. Even the K3 had a potential problem. At one time you could run a stock K3 at more than 100 watts, thus increasing significantly the odds of transmitting a dirty signal. Elecraft dialed that capability back through firmware. I may be kidding myself, but my rule of thumb is to never run anything at more than 90% of it's rated capability. Maybe that's not dialing back enough, but it is bound to be better than what I could be doing. Dave W7AQK ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [hidden email] |
|
|
Wow. Elecraft seems to be fooling a lot of contesters into using their
modest, yet competent radios! :) 73, Josh W6XU On 3/2/2016 8:43 PM, w7aqk wrote: > since it really is not designed, with all the glitz and 500 knobs, to > be a contest radio. Rather, it is designed to be a modest sized, but > highly competent radio! ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [hidden email] |
|
|
In reply to this post by w7aqk
Eric has closed this thread but I think this needs to be responded to:
> So what does that > mean? It seems to suggest that the dirtier your signal is the better you will do!!! I don't think you understand what the WRTC is. Do some research and you will find that the kind of dirty TX you are talking about would not be tolerated in this event. In a general contest this may be a valid point. Yaesu was known for years for having loud key clicks on the FT-1000. And they did win a lot of contests. But that is not applicable to the WRTC, which is a tightly regulated and monitored event. 73 de dave ab9ca/4 On 3/2/16 10:43 PM, w7aqk wrote: > I'm trying to "get my arms around" the following statement by Joe, W4TV: > > "The observation I would make on this is that the poor performing Icoms > were good enough to capture all 3 of the top positions in the recent > WRTC. IIRC there was one Elecraft and 5 Icoms used by the top 3 teams." > > Joe seems to concede that the Icoms are "poor performing", but that > somehow they took the top 3 positions in the WRTC. So what does that > mean? It seems to suggest that the dirtier your signal is the better > you will do!!! I would agree that a dirty signal does tend to get your > attention!!! At the same time, the fact that there was only one > Elecraft radio in use certainly assured the fact that Icoms would > finish high. I can also see why the Elecraft may not have finished > in the top 3, since it really is not designed, with all the glitz and > 500 knobs, to be a contest radio. Rather, it is designed to be a > modest sized, but highly competent radio! That may not dovetail with > what contesters are looking for. However, when it comes to "nailing > down" a difficult contact, one at a time, I'll put the K3 up against > just about any radio. > > The obsession with contests is a concern to me. During those events I > constantly hear signals that are obviously the result of over driving, > etc. Some folks seem to be willing to sacrifice anything in order to > just be "heard" better than the next guy. They will absolutely > squeeze the very last watt possible out of their equipment even though > they know (and have been warned) that running equipment that close to > maximum increases the probability that signal quality will > deteriorate, and very probably outside required specifications. It > just seems to me that this is a subversive way of cheating! > > Admittedly, not all of this is the fault of the operator. Equipment > manufacturers have increasingly ignored the importance of signal > purity. Still, if you take a piece of equipment that is known to be > deficient, and then run it at levels that accentuate the problem, I > think you lose your innocence. > > Even the K3 had a potential problem. At one time you could run a > stock K3 at more than 100 watts, thus increasing significantly the > odds of transmitting a dirty signal. Elecraft dialed that capability > back through firmware. I may be kidding myself, but my rule of thumb > is to never run anything at more than 90% of it's rated capability. > Maybe that's not dialing back enough, but it is bound to be better > than what I could be doing. > > Dave W7AQK > > > ______________________________________________________________ > Elecraft mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > Post: mailto:[hidden email] > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html > Message delivered to [hidden email] > Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [hidden email] |
Re: Icom 7300 is available
|
Administrator
|
Folks - yes, this thread was closed earlier today. Please take this to private email. We are way past the OT POSTING LIMIT.
73, Eric Moderator - Really! elecraft.com --- Sent from my iPhone 6S > On Mar 2, 2016, at 9:38 PM, dave <[hidden email]> wrote: > > Eric has closed this thread but I think this needs to be responded to: > <snip!> ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [hidden email] |
«
Return to Elecraft
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |