K3 review for RadCom

[g3ymc]

On 2 Oct 2007 at 4:00, [hidden email] wrote:

> I think the only reviews of Elecraft products that have appeared to
> date have been written by people known to the RSGB committee who
> bought them for their own use. (I wrote and submitted a review of the
> T1 ATU a few years ago but despite a favourable initial reaction from
> the then editor it was never published.)
>
> If Elecraft wants a RadCom review of a K3 someone needs to arrange for
> Peter Hart to receive the loan of one.

(I have changed the original title, apologies to those who use
threaded emailers...)

As the co-author of the K2 review which appeared in March 2003 RadCom
maybe I can comment.

That article arose from a discussion with Steve G4JVG (now 9M6DXX),
at that time the editor, over lunch at the preceding HF Convention. I
commented that there was very little about Elecraft products in the
magazine and he suggested I should write one. At the time Peter Hart
G3SJX was taking a break from writing reviews and had no objection to
me doing it. But it was always from a user's perspective and was
never intended to be any sort of lab test.

After submitting my first draft Steve got back to me and said that
Bob G3PJT had added a section to the article, would that be OK? Since
Bob at that time was President of RSGB I could hardly say no.... so
it appeared as a joint effort between us. I must say that Bob's
section added quite a lot to it and overall it was well received. You
may also be interested that the photo of the K2 on the front cover is
of my own K2 (they seem to have done some interesting editing of it,
the bail for instance has mysteriously disappeared...).

I would imagine there is scope for a similar review for the K3. Peter
concerns himself with laboratory testing reviews, and as such
probably does stay to kit donated for testing from the big UK
dealers. But I am sure the editor is open to articles from elsewhere,
and it would be great if an actual user produced such an article
rather than them being written by RSGB editorial staff (many consider
the article they did themselves on the FT2000 lacked a lot of
substance).

(by the way, I nearly unsubscribed from this reflector the other day.
The quantity of posting these days really is too high, daily digest
is the only sensible way of getting it, and when you get 2 or 3
digests a day it is a sure sign that it is time to split it up into
seperate lists for different rigs. Moan over...).

73 Dave G3YMC

http://www.davesergeant.com

_______________________________________________
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

[Julian, G4ILO]

Given the specification and market position the K3 is aimed at, I
would have thought a Peter Hart review, putting a fully fitted out K3
through the same lab tests as the other top rigs, would be essential,
as well as a great marketing opportunity for Elecraft. A user review
is not going to be able to corroborate those performance figures with
the same degree of authority.
--
Julian, G4ILO K2 s/n: 392  K3 s/n: ???
G4ILO's Shack: www.g4ilo.com
Ham-Directory: www.ham-directory.com


On 10/2/07, Dave Sergeant <[hidden email]> wrote:

[snip]

> But it was always from a user's perspective and was
> never intended to be any sort of lab test.

[snip]

> I would imagine there is scope for a similar review for the K3. Peter
> concerns himself with laboratory testing reviews, and as such
_______________________________________________
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