K2 vs K3 ?
Locked
 
|
The difference in price between a fully equipped K2 at $1230 and a
bare bones K3 at $1400 is $170, or slightly more than 10%. For that extra $170 you get a better integrated rig, six meters, FM, 20 dB better dynamic range, and a host of other features typical of top of the line rigs. If you add the 6M transverter to the K2 to bring 6M capability to the K2, the price of the K2/XV50 combination is actually higher. The base K-2 is a very nice reasonably priced CW only rig for either base or portable operation. When you add in SSB, computer I/o interface, 160M, 60M/transverter interface, noise blanker, and the DSP filter, it seems like less of a good deal, especially when compared to the K3. So if you want a barebones K2, that is a good deal. If you want a full featured rig, you are better off with the K3. The K2 is better than the K3 in two respects, it is smaller and it draws less current. For most people, the K3 is a much better deal than the K2. - Duffey -- KK6MC James Duffey Cedar Crest NM ______________________________________________________________ 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 |
|
|
I must agree with Jim Duffey's assessment.
The K2 is a great transceiver, but when all the options are added to make it an all band 160m through 10 meter transceiver with SSB and noise blanker and audio DSP, the K3 with its built-in 160 meter through 6 meter coverage, built-in IF DSP which allows not only SSB but FM and AM modes too, the small price differential makes the K3 a bargain priced transceiver. A basic K3/10 will do all that a K2/10 will do and more. One does not need to fill all the filter slots, nor add all the options to have a great performing transceiver, so the price comparison should be between a basic K3 and a K2 with the K160RX, KNB2, KSB2 and KDSP2 options - there is not much of a difference. Of course, the K2 is built from parts soldered in by the builder while the K3 is a plug-together kit. Some may define a hand-built K2 as being more personal and therefore having more value than a plug-together K3 kit, and who am I to argue with that perspective, it is a thrill to see something you assembled from small bits and pieces come to life. Both the K2 and the K3 have their great points, but if you are after the best performance for the dollar, the basic K3 is IMHO the best deal on the ham market today. The K2 is also a bargain if one is willing to give up some of the bands and features that come 'stock' with the basic K3, and for portable QRP operation, the K2 has less current draw which leads to more operating time on a battery. 73, Don W3FPR James Duffey wrote: > The difference in price between a fully equipped K2 at $1230 and a > bare bones K3 at $1400 is $170, or slightly more than 10%. For that > extra $170 you get a better integrated rig, six meters, FM, 20 dB > better dynamic range, and a host of other features typical of top of > the line rigs. If you add the 6M transverter to the K2 to bring 6M > capability to the K2, the price of the K2/XV50 combination is actually > higher. > > The base K-2 is a very nice reasonably priced CW only rig for either > base or portable operation. When you add in SSB, computer I/o > interface, 160M, 60M/transverter interface, noise blanker, and the DSP > filter, it seems like less of a good deal, especially when compared to > the K3. So if you want a barebones K2, that is a good deal. If you > want a full featured rig, you are better off with the K3. > > The K2 is better than the K3 in two respects, it is smaller and it > draws less current. > > For most people, the K3 is a much better deal than the K2. - Duffey > -- > KK6MC > James Duffey > Cedar Crest NM > > 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 |
|
|
Don Wilhelm wrote:
> I must agree with Jim Duffey's assessment. > The K2 is a great transceiver, but when all the options are added to > make it an all band 160m through 10 meter transceiver with SSB and noise > blanker and audio DSP, the K3 with its built-in 160 meter through 6 > meter coverage, built-in IF DSP which allows not only SSB but FM and AM > modes too, the small price differential makes the K3 a bargain priced > transceiver. > While I have NO argument with this reasoning, I chose to build the K2 because I could afford it as a basic kit. And I have every reason to think that I'll be able to afford to add about one of the listed options a month. This I will be able to do without putting anything on my already overstressed credit cards. Were I to try to buy a K3 it would be many months before the cash would be in hand. [ The budget committee, KB4WYR, is fully behind this project as well. And would lament having to wait for a K3.] The K2 is expected to be one of the building blocks for our VHF/UHF station, with a K3 coming along as it can. I'm thinking that this combination will give us a good high end weak signal station for 50 mhz and up. 73 de KD0R #6708 in build ______________________________________________________________ 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 |
«
Return to Elecraft
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |