K3 2nd RX Specification

[Phil G4UDU]

I have been reading all of the news since making my decision to purchase
a K3.

There have been several occasions I thought I should have made comment
about the delivery schedule but have decided enough was already being said.

But after the last posting about the delays on the second receiver, I
need to ask a question


Did you notice the following :-

This is the latest news release about the sub receiver:-

/"When we release a product, it has to meet a number of criteria. Raw
performance by traditional measures is just one of these. Fortunately
the subreceiver has met our expectations in this regard, with dynamic
range *virtually identical* to that of the main."/

And this is the product specification from the web site :-

"In a first for the industry, the K3’s *identical main receiver and
subreceiver* each feature a high-dynamic-range, down-conversion analog
architecture."

So have Elecraft now down graded the sub receiver ? Virtually identical
and identical are two different specifications.

I ordered (Dayton Hamvention ) a K3 to have two identical receivers -
not to have a sub receiver that was " less than, but not equal to " the
main receiver, if I wanted that I could have purchased one of the other
twin receive transceivers and not waited for the K3

I do not think I am alone in thinking that anyone who has ordered the K3
for DXpedition operating is going to want what was stated in the product
specification, and I as someone who is keen to work the most difficult
of DX certainly have been waiting for this feature to appear on a new
compact transceiver. I thought I had ordered that feature - but now I am
not so sure .............

It is bad enough having to endure the constant changing delivery
schedule - please don't tell me the specifications are going into
decline in the same way

Leaving the news release until 15 days before the scheduled delivery
date it totally unprofessional, the problems should have been noticed
weeks/months ago and a statement issued at the time.


Phil G4UDU




_______________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: [hidden email]
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
 http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft   

Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com

[dj7mgq]

> So have Elecraft now down graded the sub receiver ? Virtually identical
> and identical are two different specifications.

Yep. The second RX might even be better than the primary RX... ;-)

Seriously, identical in this case was always a relative term. You can
not seriously expect to receivers to have absolutely identical specs.
Parts have tolerances, and these alone will always mean there is some
variation from unit to unit, from board to board. I do not see this as
downgrading the specs.

Apart from this, it has always been obvious that, because parts of the
second RX are not used for TX (e.g. roofing filters), the receivers
could not have absolutely identical circuits.


The website still says:

 >> In a first for the industry, the K3’s identical main
 >> receiver and subreceiver ...


My read is: Elecraft has not downgraded the specs and are doing their
best to insure that both receivers will run at full specs when both are
in the same box.


vy 73 de toby
_______________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: [hidden email]
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
 http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft   

Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com