Elecraft › [KX3]

KX3 vs FT817 (comparing apples+oranges)

Classic

List

Threaded

15 messages Options

DOUGLAS ZWIEBEL

KX3 vs FT817 (comparing apples+oranges)

Let me start off by stating that I own a K2, a pair of K3's and a P3.

I also own an FT817.

1. Yes, the KX3 is "way better" in terms of rx specs and some options

2. The FT817 ain't bad either, especially factoring in price (well, my
price)

These are really two very different radios.

Personally, I like the form factor on the FT817. It is easy to pack (very
"flat") and I don't worry about hurting it when "in the field." I am happy
to "throw it around." I would not feel that way about the KX3: kid gloves
for sure.

Back in 2003, the price was $569 for FT817, which included a microphone
with up/down buttons, internal (removable), chargeable battery pack, a
battery "tray" for AA cells, a rubber duck for 2 meters, a rubber duck for
6 meters, a hard bound manual, and carrying strap (over your shoulder,
hooks onto the radio), a DC power cable (with snap-on ferrite choke), and
probably some other stuff I have forgotten about...oh yeah.. a big world
map (LOL). At the time, Yaesu offered a $100 factory rebate (it was a Xmas
special), so I got the radio and all that other stuff, with free shipping,
for $469. Not too shabby...it was an easy decision. As I see it, the KX3
(built) with those options is well over 1k. So, surprise-surprise, you pay
more, you get more.

Also back in 2003, I had the well-respected (at the time) contest quality
radio, the Kenwood TS940. The 940, purchased new, was quite old at that
date. The FT817, maybe 5% the size of the 940, blew the doors off the big
radio in terms of RX dynamics, esp on 40. It was shocking. But that was 8
years ago now.

For me, I rather have to laugh a bit at the OUTSTANDING specs (in earlier
private emails) for the KX3 RX. Why laugh? Because if you are using this
radio "in the field," you probably will never have to use most of what is
available to you...and this was primarily designed as a Trail Radio,
right? You are just not going to get "that much signal" coming into your
front end using a simple (low) wire or buddipole, etc. unless you mean once
per year on Field Day where there are multiple radios set up right on top
of each other. But hey...if it can be built so well, why not! But
comparing it to the 817, for me, doesn't make a lot of sense, other than to
indicate that the 817 set some sort of standard for "super tiny radios."
See mine at https://picasaweb.google.com/dougzzz/FT8172003Dec

Also, I have won my fair share of contest certificates, using the FT817,
including on 160 (a very tough band on RX front ends). For what it is, it
works real well. It's no K3, but it ain't bad...and it sure is FUN.

I have not ordered a KX3 yet. This time around, I plan to wait a year or
so to let things "shake out." But if I do order one, it probably won't be
to replace the 817, which is a totally different radio. And yes, my FT817
does copy the WX station...and a whole lot more.

OK, before you blast away, please go back to the top and reread the first
sentence.

HNY and GL to all those happy KX3 purchasers. I know you'll be thrilled.

de Doug KR2Q
______________________________________________________________
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

wayne burdick

Re: KX3 vs FT817 (comparing apples+oranges)

Administrator

Nice analysis, Doug, but just for completeness' sake: we designed the
KX3 as both a field and compact home station (with optional 100 W) --
hence the performance goals.

73,
Wayne
N6KR

On Dec 30, 2011, at 9:16 PM, DOUGLAS ZWIEBEL wrote:

> Let me start off by stating that I own a K2, a pair of K3's and a P3.
>
> I also own an FT817.
>
> 1. Yes, the KX3 is "way better" in terms of rx specs and some options
>
> 2. The FT817 ain't bad either, especially factoring in price (well,
> my
> price)
>
> These are really two very different radios.
>
> Personally, I like the form factor on the FT817. It is easy to pack
> (very
> "flat") and I don't worry about hurting it when "in the field." I
> am happy
> to "throw it around." I would not feel that way about the KX3: kid
> gloves
> for sure.
>
> Back in 2003, the price was $569 for FT817, which included a
> microphone
> with up/down buttons, internal (removable), chargeable battery pack, a
> battery "tray" for AA cells, a rubber duck for 2 meters, a rubber
> duck for
> 6 meters, a hard bound manual, and carrying strap (over your shoulder,
> hooks onto the radio), a DC power cable (with snap-on ferrite
> choke), and
> probably some other stuff I have forgotten about...oh yeah.. a big
> world
> map (LOL). At the time, Yaesu offered a $100 factory rebate (it was
> a Xmas
> special), so I got the radio and all that other stuff, with free
> shipping,
> for $469. Not too shabby...it was an easy decision. As I see it,
> the KX3
> (built) with those options is well over 1k. So, surprise-surprise,
> you pay
> more, you get more.
>
> Also back in 2003, I had the well-respected (at the time) contest
> quality
> radio, the Kenwood TS940. The 940, purchased new, was quite old at
> that
> date. The FT817, maybe 5% the size of the 940, blew the doors off
> the big
> radio in terms of RX dynamics, esp on 40. It was shocking. But
> that was 8
> years ago now.
>
> For me, I rather have to laugh a bit at the OUTSTANDING specs (in
> earlier
> private emails) for the KX3 RX. Why laugh? Because if you are
> using this
> radio "in the field," you probably will never have to use most of
> what is
> available to you...and this was primarily designed as a Trail Radio,
> right? You are just not going to get "that much signal" coming into
> your
> front end using a simple (low) wire or buddipole, etc. unless you
> mean once
> per year on Field Day where there are multiple radios set up right
> on top
> of each other. But hey...if it can be built so well, why not! But
> comparing it to the 817, for me, doesn't make a lot of sense, other
> than to
> indicate that the 817 set some sort of standard for "super tiny
> radios."
> See mine at https://picasaweb.google.com/dougzzz/FT8172003Dec
>
> Also, I have won my fair share of contest certificates, using the
> FT817,
> including on 160 (a very tough band on RX front ends). For what it
> is, it
> works real well. It's no K3, but it ain't bad...and it sure is FUN.
>
> I have not ordered a KX3 yet. This time around, I plan to wait a
> year or
> so to let things "shake out." But if I do order one, it probably
> won't be
> to replace the 817, which is a totally different radio. And yes, my
> FT817
> does copy the WX station...and a whole lot more.
>
> OK, before you blast away, please go back to the top and reread the
> first
> sentence.
>
> HNY and GL to all those happy KX3 purchasers. I know you'll be
> thrilled.
>
> de Doug KR2Q
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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

DAVID M. Elliott

Re: KX3 vs FT817 (comparing apples+oranges)

In reply to this post by DOUGLAS ZWIEBEL

Here is a really neat 100 watt amp that can be frequency controlled by the FT817. It can be ordered from Japan.

http://www.thp.co.jp/english/hl_100bdx_e.html

I look forward to my KX3 but don't plan to sell the FT817. As you say, they are different radios for different uses.

73 de W6BK

On Dec 30, 2011, at 9:16 PM, DOUGLAS ZWIEBEL wrote:

> Let me start off by stating that I own a K2, a pair of K3's and a P3.
>
> I also own an FT817.
>
> 1. Yes, the KX3 is "way better" in terms of rx specs and some options
>
> 2. The FT817 ain't bad either, especially factoring in price (well, my
> price)
>
> These are really two very different radios.
>
> Personally, I like the form factor on the FT817. It is easy to pack (very
> "flat") and I don't worry about hurting it when "in the field." I am happy
> to "throw it around." I would not feel that way about the KX3: kid gloves
> for sure.
>
> Back in 2003, the price was $569 for FT817, which included a microphone
> with up/down buttons, internal (removable), chargeable battery pack, a
> battery "tray" for AA cells, a rubber duck for 2 meters, a rubber duck for
> 6 meters, a hard bound manual, and carrying strap (over your shoulder,
> hooks onto the radio), a DC power cable (with snap-on ferrite choke), and
> probably some other stuff I have forgotten about...oh yeah.. a big world
> map (LOL). At the time, Yaesu offered a $100 factory rebate (it was a Xmas
> special), so I got the radio and all that other stuff, with free shipping,
> for $469. Not too shabby...it was an easy decision. As I see it, the KX3
> (built) with those options is well over 1k. So, surprise-surprise, you pay
> more, you get more.
>
> Also back in 2003, I had the well-respected (at the time) contest quality
> radio, the Kenwood TS940. The 940, purchased new, was quite old at that
> date. The FT817, maybe 5% the size of the 940, blew the doors off the big
> radio in terms of RX dynamics, esp on 40. It was shocking. But that was 8
> years ago now.
>
> For me, I rather have to laugh a bit at the OUTSTANDING specs (in earlier
> private emails) for the KX3 RX. Why laugh? Because if you are using this
> radio "in the field," you probably will never have to use most of what is
> available to you...and this was primarily designed as a Trail Radio,
> right? You are just not going to get "that much signal" coming into your
> front end using a simple (low) wire or buddipole, etc. unless you mean once
> per year on Field Day where there are multiple radios set up right on top
> of each other. But hey...if it can be built so well, why not! But
> comparing it to the 817, for me, doesn't make a lot of sense, other than to
> indicate that the 817 set some sort of standard for "super tiny radios."
> See mine at https://picasaweb.google.com/dougzzz/FT8172003Dec
>
> Also, I have won my fair share of contest certificates, using the FT817,
> including on 160 (a very tough band on RX front ends). For what it is, it
> works real well. It's no K3, but it ain't bad...and it sure is FUN.
>
> I have not ordered a KX3 yet. This time around, I plan to wait a year or
> so to let things "shake out." But if I do order one, it probably won't be
> to replace the 817, which is a totally different radio. And yes, my FT817
> does copy the WX station...and a whole lot more.
>
> OK, before you blast away, please go back to the top and reread the first
> sentence.
>
> HNY and GL to all those happy KX3 purchasers. I know you'll be thrilled.
>
> de Doug KR2Q
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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

James Puah

Re: KX3 vs FT817 (comparing apples+oranges)

Me either, Ordered a fully loaded KX3 minus the paddle, keeping my 817ND and
703, perhaps selling just one of the two 703s I own to make space :-)

James Puah 9V1JP

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email].
net] On Behalf Of David Elliott
Sent: 2011年12月31日 PM 1:49
To: DOUGLAS ZWIEBEL
Cc: Elecraft Reflector
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] KX3 vs FT817 (comparing apples+oranges)

Here is a really neat 100 watt amp that can be frequency controlled by the
FT817. It can be ordered from Japan.

http://www.thp.co.jp/english/hl_100bdx_e.html

I look forward to my KX3 but don't plan to sell the FT817. As you say, they
are different radios for different uses.

73 de W6BK

.......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

Eric Swartz - WA6HHQ

Re: KX3 vs FT817 (comparing apples+oranges)

Administrator

In reply to this post by wayne burdick

And as a great mobile rig - especially when paired with the KXPA100 amp. :-)

73,
Eric

www.elecraft.com
_..._

On Dec 30, 2011, at 9:22 PM, Wayne Burdick <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Nice analysis, Doug, but just for completeness' sake: we designed the
> KX3 as both a field and compact home station (with optional 100 W) --
> hence the performance goals.
>
> 73,
> Wayne
> N6KR
______________________________________________________________
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

wayne burdick

Re: KX3 vs FT817 (comparing apples+oranges)

Administrator

In reply to this post by DAVID M. Elliott

Hi David,

We're familiar with this amp. The KXPA100 will have several additional
features by comparison: 160-meter coverage; better transmit 3rd-order
IMD (optimized low-pass filters for each band); optional built-in 100-
W ATU (KXPA100) with two antenna jacks; instant auto-bandswitching
with any rig via RF sensing; and full integration with the KX3.

73,
Wayne,
N6KR

On Dec 30, 2011, at 9:49 PM, David Elliott wrote:

> Here is a really neat 100 watt amp that can be frequency controlled
> by the FT817. It can be ordered from Japan.
>
> http://www.thp.co.jp/english/hl_100bdx_e.html
>
> I look forward to my KX3 but don't plan to sell the FT817. As you
> say, they are different radios for different uses.
>
> 73 de W6BK
>
>
>
>
> On Dec 30, 2011, at 9:16 PM, DOUGLAS ZWIEBEL wrote:
>
>> Let me start off by stating that I own a K2, a pair of K3's and a P3.
>>
>> I also own an FT817.
>>
>> 1. Yes, the KX3 is "way better" in terms of rx specs and some
>> options
>>
>> 2. The FT817 ain't bad either, especially factoring in price
>> (well, my
>> price)
>>
>> These are really two very different radios.
>>
>> Personally, I like the form factor on the FT817. It is easy to
>> pack (very
>> "flat") and I don't worry about hurting it when "in the field." I
>> am happy
>> to "throw it around." I would not feel that way about the KX3: kid
>> gloves
>> for sure.
>>
>> Back in 2003, the price was $569 for FT817, which included a
>> microphone
>> with up/down buttons, internal (removable), chargeable battery
>> pack, a
>> battery "tray" for AA cells, a rubber duck for 2 meters, a rubber
>> duck for
>> 6 meters, a hard bound manual, and carrying strap (over your
>> shoulder,
>> hooks onto the radio), a DC power cable (with snap-on ferrite
>> choke), and
>> probably some other stuff I have forgotten about...oh yeah.. a big
>> world
>> map (LOL). At the time, Yaesu offered a $100 factory rebate (it
>> was a Xmas
>> special), so I got the radio and all that other stuff, with free
>> shipping,
>> for $469. Not too shabby...it was an easy decision. As I see it,
>> the KX3
>> (built) with those options is well over 1k. So, surprise-surprise,
>> you pay
>> more, you get more.
>>
>> Also back in 2003, I had the well-respected (at the time) contest
>> quality
>> radio, the Kenwood TS940. The 940, purchased new, was quite old at
>> that
>> date. The FT817, maybe 5% the size of the 940, blew the doors off
>> the big
>> radio in terms of RX dynamics, esp on 40. It was shocking. But
>> that was 8
>> years ago now.
>>
>> For me, I rather have to laugh a bit at the OUTSTANDING specs (in
>> earlier
>> private emails) for the KX3 RX. Why laugh? Because if you are
>> using this
>> radio "in the field," you probably will never have to use most of
>> what is
>> available to you...and this was primarily designed as a Trail Radio,
>> right? You are just not going to get "that much signal" coming
>> into your
>> front end using a simple (low) wire or buddipole, etc. unless you
>> mean once
>> per year on Field Day where there are multiple radios set up right
>> on top
>> of each other. But hey...if it can be built so well, why not! But
>> comparing it to the 817, for me, doesn't make a lot of sense, other
>> than to
>> indicate that the 817 set some sort of standard for "super tiny
>> radios."
>> See mine at https://picasaweb.google.com/dougzzz/FT8172003Dec
>>
>> Also, I have won my fair share of contest certificates, using the
>> FT817,
>> including on 160 (a very tough band on RX front ends). For what it
>> is, it
>> works real well. It's no K3, but it ain't bad...and it sure is FUN.
>>
>> I have not ordered a KX3 yet. This time around, I plan to wait a
>> year or
>> so to let things "shake out." But if I do order one, it probably
>> won't be
>> to replace the 817, which is a totally different radio. And yes,
>> my FT817
>> does copy the WX station...and a whole lot more.
>>
>> OK, before you blast away, please go back to the top and reread the
>> first
>> sentence.
>>
>> HNY and GL to all those happy KX3 purchasers. I know you'll be
>> thrilled.
>>
>> de Doug KR2Q
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> 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
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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

wayne burdick

Re: KX3 vs FT817 (comparing apples+oranges)

Administrator

On Dec 30, 2011, at 10:02 PM, Wayne Burdick wrote:

> ....optional built-in 100-W ATU (KXPA100)...

Make that "KXAT100".

Wayne

______________________________________________________________
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

James Puah

Re: KX3 vs FT817 (comparing apples+oranges)

In reply to this post by wayne burdick

I want the amp Wayne. I promise I will reserve a special place in my study
room for the KX3/KXPA100 Combo, I promise :-)

James Puah 9V1JP

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email].
net] On Behalf Of Wayne Burdick
Sent: 2011年12月31日 PM 2:03
To: David Elliott
Cc: Elecraft Reflector; DOUGLAS ZWIEBEL
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] KX3 vs FT817 (comparing apples+oranges)

Hi David,

We're familiar with this amp. The KXPA100 will have several additional
features by comparison: 160-meter coverage; better transmit 3rd-order
IMD (optimized low-pass filters for each band); optional built-in 100-
W ATU (KXPA100) with two antenna jacks; instant auto-bandswitching
with any rig via RF sensing; and full integration with the KX3.

73,
Wayne,
N6KR

On Dec 30, 2011, at 9:49 PM, David Elliott wrote:

______________________________________________________________
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

______________________________________________________________
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

James Puah

Re: KX3 vs FT817 (comparing apples+oranges)

Includes the KXAT100 :-()

James Puah 9V1JP

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email].
net] On Behalf Of James Puah
Sent: 2011年12月31日 PM 2:09
To: 'Elecraft Reflector'
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] KX3 vs FT817 (comparing apples+oranges)

I want the amp Wayne. I promise I will reserve a special place in my study
room for the KX3/KXPA100 Combo, I promise :-)

James Puah 9V1JP

....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

DAVID M. Elliott

Re: KX3 vs FT817 (comparing apples+oranges)

In reply to this post by wayne burdick

Hi Wayne,

The KXPA100 was not available when I got the HL 100 and perhaps not even a gleam in your eye yet. I am sure it will be up to your usual standards with many unique design features. When do you think it will b available?

73 de W6BK

On Dec 30, 2011, at 10:02 PM, Wayne Burdick wrote:

> Hi David,
>
> We're familiar with this amp. The KXPA100 will have several additional features by comparison: 160-meter coverage; better transmit 3rd-order IMD (optimized low-pass filters for each band); optional built-in 100-W ATU (KXPA100) with two antenna jacks; instant auto-bandswitching with any rig via RF sensing; and full integration with the KX3.
>
> 73,
> Wayne,
> N6KR
>
> On Dec 30, 2011, at 9:49 PM, David Elliott wrote:
>
>> Here is a really neat 100 watt amp that can be frequency controlled by the FT817. It can be ordered from Japan.
>>
>> http://www.thp.co.jp/english/hl_100bdx_e.html
>>
>> I look forward to my KX3 but don't plan to sell the FT817. As you say, they are different radios for different uses.
>>
>> 73 de W6BK
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Dec 30, 2011, at 9:16 PM, DOUGLAS ZWIEBEL wrote:
>>
>>> Let me start off by stating that I own a K2, a pair of K3's and a P3.
>>>
>>> I also own an FT817.
>>>
>>> 1. Yes, the KX3 is "way better" in terms of rx specs and some options
>>>
>>> 2. The FT817 ain't bad either, especially factoring in price (well, my
>>> price)
>>>
>>> These are really two very different radios.
>>>
>>> Personally, I like the form factor on the FT817. It is easy to pack (very
>>> "flat") and I don't worry about hurting it when "in the field." I am happy
>>> to "throw it around." I would not feel that way about the KX3: kid gloves
>>> for sure.
>>>
>>> Back in 2003, the price was $569 for FT817, which included a microphone
>>> with up/down buttons, internal (removable), chargeable battery pack, a
>>> battery "tray" for AA cells, a rubber duck for 2 meters, a rubber duck for
>>> 6 meters, a hard bound manual, and carrying strap (over your shoulder,
>>> hooks onto the radio), a DC power cable (with snap-on ferrite choke), and
>>> probably some other stuff I have forgotten about...oh yeah.. a big world
>>> map (LOL). At the time, Yaesu offered a $100 factory rebate (it was a Xmas
>>> special), so I got the radio and all that other stuff, with free shipping,
>>> for $469. Not too shabby...it was an easy decision. As I see it, the KX3
>>> (built) with those options is well over 1k. So, surprise-surprise, you pay
>>> more, you get more.
>>>
>>> Also back in 2003, I had the well-respected (at the time) contest quality
>>> radio, the Kenwood TS940. The 940, purchased new, was quite old at that
>>> date. The FT817, maybe 5% the size of the 940, blew the doors off the big
>>> radio in terms of RX dynamics, esp on 40. It was shocking. But that was 8
>>> years ago now.
>>>
>>> For me, I rather have to laugh a bit at the OUTSTANDING specs (in earlier
>>> private emails) for the KX3 RX. Why laugh? Because if you are using this
>>> radio "in the field," you probably will never have to use most of what is
>>> available to you...and this was primarily designed as a Trail Radio,
>>> right? You are just not going to get "that much signal" coming into your
>>> front end using a simple (low) wire or buddipole, etc. unless you mean once
>>> per year on Field Day where there are multiple radios set up right on top
>>> of each other. But hey...if it can be built so well, why not! But
>>> comparing it to the 817, for me, doesn't make a lot of sense, other than to
>>> indicate that the 817 set some sort of standard for "super tiny radios."
>>> See mine at https://picasaweb.google.com/dougzzz/FT8172003Dec
>>>
>>> Also, I have won my fair share of contest certificates, using the FT817,
>>> including on 160 (a very tough band on RX front ends). For what it is, it
>>> works real well. It's no K3, but it ain't bad...and it sure is FUN.
>>>
>>> I have not ordered a KX3 yet. This time around, I plan to wait a year or
>>> so to let things "shake out." But if I do order one, it probably won't be
>>> to replace the 817, which is a totally different radio. And yes, my FT817
>>> does copy the WX station...and a whole lot more.
>>>
>>> OK, before you blast away, please go back to the top and reread the first
>>> sentence.
>>>
>>> HNY and GL to all those happy KX3 purchasers. I know you'll be thrilled.
>>>
>>> de Doug KR2Q
>>> ______________________________________________________________
>>> 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
>>
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> 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
>

wayne burdick

Re: KX3 vs FT817 (comparing apples+oranges)

Administrator

2012.

Wayne

On Dec 30, 2011, at 11:01 PM, David Elliott wrote:

> Hi Wayne,
>
> The KXPA100 was not available when I got the HL 100 and perhaps not
> even a gleam in your eye yet. I am sure it will be up to your usual
> standards with many unique design features. When do you think it
> will b available?
>
> 73 de W6BK
>
>
>
> On Dec 30, 2011, at 10:02 PM, Wayne Burdick wrote:
>
>> Hi David,
>>
>> We're familiar with this amp. The KXPA100 will have several
>> additional features by comparison: 160-meter coverage; better
>> transmit 3rd-order IMD (optimized low-pass filters for each band);
>> optional built-in 100-W ATU (KXPA100) with two antenna jacks;
>> instant auto-bandswitching with any rig via RF sensing; and full
>> integration with the KX3.
>>
>> 73,
>> Wayne,
>> N6KR
>>
>> On Dec 30, 2011, at 9:49 PM, David Elliott wrote:
>>
>>> Here is a really neat 100 watt amp that can be frequency
>>> controlled by the FT817. It can be ordered from Japan.
>>>
>>> http://www.thp.co.jp/english/hl_100bdx_e.html
>>>
>>> I look forward to my KX3 but don't plan to sell the FT817. As you
>>> say, they are different radios for different uses.
>>>
>>> 73 de W6BK
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Dec 30, 2011, at 9:16 PM, DOUGLAS ZWIEBEL wrote:
>>>
>>>> Let me start off by stating that I own a K2, a pair of K3's and a
>>>> P3.
>>>>
>>>> I also own an FT817.
>>>>
>>>> 1. Yes, the KX3 is "way better" in terms of rx specs and some
>>>> options
>>>>
>>>> 2. The FT817 ain't bad either, especially factoring in price
>>>> (well, my
>>>> price)
>>>>
>>>> These are really two very different radios.
>>>>
>>>> Personally, I like the form factor on the FT817. It is easy to
>>>> pack (very
>>>> "flat") and I don't worry about hurting it when "in the field."
>>>> I am happy
>>>> to "throw it around." I would not feel that way about the KX3:
>>>> kid gloves
>>>> for sure.
>>>>
>>>> Back in 2003, the price was $569 for FT817, which included a
>>>> microphone
>>>> with up/down buttons, internal (removable), chargeable battery
>>>> pack, a
>>>> battery "tray" for AA cells, a rubber duck for 2 meters, a rubber
>>>> duck for
>>>> 6 meters, a hard bound manual, and carrying strap (over your
>>>> shoulder,
>>>> hooks onto the radio), a DC power cable (with snap-on ferrite
>>>> choke), and
>>>> probably some other stuff I have forgotten about...oh yeah.. a
>>>> big world
>>>> map (LOL). At the time, Yaesu offered a $100 factory rebate (it
>>>> was a Xmas
>>>> special), so I got the radio and all that other stuff, with free
>>>> shipping,
>>>> for $469. Not too shabby...it was an easy decision. As I see
>>>> it, the KX3
>>>> (built) with those options is well over 1k. So, surprise-
>>>> surprise, you pay
>>>> more, you get more.
>>>>
>>>> Also back in 2003, I had the well-respected (at the time) contest
>>>> quality
>>>> radio, the Kenwood TS940. The 940, purchased new, was quite old
>>>> at that
>>>> date. The FT817, maybe 5% the size of the 940, blew the doors
>>>> off the big
>>>> radio in terms of RX dynamics, esp on 40. It was shocking. But
>>>> that was 8
>>>> years ago now.
>>>>
>>>> For me, I rather have to laugh a bit at the OUTSTANDING specs (in
>>>> earlier
>>>> private emails) for the KX3 RX. Why laugh? Because if you are
>>>> using this
>>>> radio "in the field," you probably will never have to use most of
>>>> what is
>>>> available to you...and this was primarily designed as a Trail
>>>> Radio,
>>>> right? You are just not going to get "that much signal" coming
>>>> into your
>>>> front end using a simple (low) wire or buddipole, etc. unless you
>>>> mean once
>>>> per year on Field Day where there are multiple radios set up
>>>> right on top
>>>> of each other. But hey...if it can be built so well, why not! But
>>>> comparing it to the 817, for me, doesn't make a lot of sense,
>>>> other than to
>>>> indicate that the 817 set some sort of standard for "super tiny
>>>> radios."
>>>> See mine at https://picasaweb.google.com/dougzzz/FT8172003Dec
>>>>
>>>> Also, I have won my fair share of contest certificates, using the
>>>> FT817,
>>>> including on 160 (a very tough band on RX front ends). For what
>>>> it is, it
>>>> works real well. It's no K3, but it ain't bad...and it sure is
>>>> FUN.
>>>>
>>>> I have not ordered a KX3 yet. This time around, I plan to wait a
>>>> year or
>>>> so to let things "shake out." But if I do order one, it probably
>>>> won't be
>>>> to replace the 817, which is a totally different radio. And yes,
>>>> my FT817
>>>> does copy the WX station...and a whole lot more.
>>>>
>>>> OK, before you blast away, please go back to the top and reread
>>>> the first
>>>> sentence.
>>>>
>>>> HNY and GL to all those happy KX3 purchasers. I know you'll be
>>>> thrilled.
>>>>
>>>> de Doug KR2Q
>>>> ______________________________________________________________
>>>> 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
>>>
>>> ______________________________________________________________
>>> 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
>>

w7aqk

Re: KX3 vs FT817 (comparing apples+oranges)

In reply to this post by DOUGLAS ZWIEBEL

Hi All,

I read the comments by Doug, KR2Q, (and Wayne's response as well), and while
I tend to agree with much of Doug's analysis, I have a serious question.
Doug infers that the "outstanding" specs for the KX3 are superfluous when
operating in the field. I honestly don't understand his point. I suspect
I'm missing something or not connecting the dots right.

For one thing, when I go to the field, which tends to be fairly often, I
usually have better antennas there than at home. That doesn't say anything
very good about my home setup, but I have antenna restrictions and I live in
the desert. Setting up a decent antenna in the field isn't necessarily that
difficult, unless you are in a big hurry. Trees or not, I can have a fairly
decent dipole at 40 feet in about 5 minutes. Alternatively, I can use
something like an end fed half wave, or a vertical arrangement of some sort.
If I have trees, so much the better. I also have a Buddipole system, but I
tend to use it as a Buddistick, which works very well. In any event,
whether I'm at home or out camping, I find plenty of reason to appreciate a
better radio.

The late, but welcome, arrival of our current sunspot cycle has certainly
enhanced activity on the bands. Signals are often very LOUD, and not that
far apart. I agree that contests and pile-ups exacerbate things, but it
seems to me that there isn't that much difference in conditions regardless
of where I operate.

It is certainly understandable that folks would immediately ponder the
"trail friendly" qualities of the KX3. Anything small and light leads you
to that as an option. However, I don't think Elecraft approached this
design with that as their main objective. Rather I think they were trying
to enhance versatility. In other words, trying to make a small version of
the K3, and as close to a K3 as they could get. I'm remembering something
from a number of years back, when the KX1 was fairly new. I commented that
I had even operated my KX1 while sitting in bed. Wayne responded that he
had done that too! So, maybe what Wayne really was trying to do was come up
with a way to take his K3 to the bedroom! Hi.

Anyway, I don't think the challenge was just to make a smaller radio. I
think it was making a really good radio smaller. To do the former only
trumps a few alternative radios. To do the latter trumps a bunch of other
radios--at least in versatility. That was, in my view, the real
objective--versatility. Maybe that's not exactly the word they had on the
flip chart during the brain storming sessions about designing the KX3, but I
tend to think it at least partially describes their objective. For a long
time I've wished I could be a "fly on the wall" when they discuss this
stuff!

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

Bill W4ZV

Re: KX3 vs FT817 (comparing apples+oranges)

David Yarnes wrote

For a long
time I've wished I could be a "fly on the wall" when they discuss this
stuff!

http://www.mail-archive.com/elecraft@mailman.qth.net/msg99836.html

73, Bill

Steve KC8QVO

Re: KX3 vs FT817 (comparing apples+oranges)

In reply to this post by DOUGLAS ZWIEBEL

I do agree with some of what Doug says. I see the numbers side with the pricing - you are more than double the original price Doug outlined with a KX3. The FT-817ND now is in the $700+ range. Going off that number a base KX3 is $300 more - not a double in price.

Regarding the "apples to oranges" comment - I entirely agree. In fact, I find it hard to compare the KX3 to a lot of radios because there is so much under the cover (and on the cover). My potable radio for years has been the FT-857D. That is my every day rig in the mobile (160-6m, 2m, 70cm) and is my "grab'n'go" rig. I have a K2 also and that is nice when car-camping, but at that point the FT-857D is along too - it has VHF/UHF capabilities the K2 does not. Adding in the 2m module to the KX3 will let me grab that instead of un-installing the FT-857D. I am anxious to throw it in the backpack and head out to the Appalachians for a few days. My pack weight will drop substantially and my back will thank me!

For what the FT-817 is - it is a neat little rig. That satisfied a niche for years in the HFPack community. It is really hard to knock the useability of the rig. For those that currently have them maybe, as Doug alludes to, it will remain a staple in their portable arsenals. My FT-857D will be a staple in my arsenal in some instances I would assume, but there is some versatility in that rig that the KX3 will replace, no doubt. At the time I got the FT-857D I considered other rigs - and the FT-817 was one of them. Where I use my FT-857D most of the time is as my every-day mobile rig, and to that point there still is no radio on the market that satisfies that niche to the same capacity - the FT-857D, as heavy as it is, still has made its way in to my backpack for trips around southern Ohio and the Appalachian mountains. It is compact and the receive current is low (500-550mA = low enough to run on batteries). Try that with an IC-7000 (one of the better mobile rigs on the market). That rig's current consumption is at least 2 amps (2000mA) and it is also heavier. Or, conversely, try putting an FT-817 in the mobile... Doesn't work too well - the faceplate doesn't remote and the power output is low.

Who knows - maybe the KX3 will make it in to my mobile station with the KXPA100... Then the FT-857D for VHF/UHF and the KX3 for HF? HI. The possibilities are endless.

We are all entitled to our own opinions. What the base of those opinions is can vary, but we're the ones that choose our "tools". What we want our tools to do or have change, but guess what? They all do the same job. All radios let you communicate. Do you want CW only? SSB only? Both? HF only? A few bands or all bands? Is VHF important to you? Do you travel? Do you operate from home?

Shel Radin KF0UR

Re: KX3 vs FT817 (comparing apples+oranges)

Greetings,

As others have stated well, there are as many objectives for the KX3 and FT-817 as there are users.

For me, the KX3 fills the bill that multiple rigs have filled in the past. I use a KX1 on the trails here in the Rockies. It's a fantastic radio and I love using it. I picked up an FT-817 two years ago to round out the bands and modes I didn't have with the KX1. It was nice having SSB and 6M, for example. The SSB was particularly nice when I had non-ham friends with me. Their CW was poor :-). With SSB, they could participate (and maybe get interested in the hobby?). But I always used the KX1 when I could because of its vastly superior currently draw.

Enter the KX3. For me, it was better in a number of ways for my situation.
- small and easier than taking two radios
- lighter than the FT-817 alone
- built in antenna tuner. I carried a T-1 for use with the FT-817
- PSK31 and RTTY without taking another device like a netbook. A great, great plus.

So I will use the KX3 as my one and only in the field from now on (well, after it's delivered). I already sold my FT-817. And who knows, maybe I'll get the 100W amp/tuner thingy as a backup for or second station to my K3 /P3.

72, 73 & happy trails,

Shel KF0UR