Elecraft

Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

Classic

List

Threaded

43 messages Options

123

Clay Autery

Re: Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

I know next to nothing about radios, but here's my $0.02 anyway...

1) My K3s/P3 combo is the first purchase in 20 years or more that I've
had absolutely NO buyer's remorse... not even a hint, nada, none...
2) My K3s makes me WANT to become the best operator I can... This arrow
is wayyy better than the Indian right now and for the forseeable future.
3) NO ONE has ever made a single comment to me negative about the K3s or
Elecraft...
4) I consistently get comments on my signal from my QSOs that it is
clean, super, fills the room, full, broadcast quality, etc, etc, et
al... and I'm only 100w on a loop.
5) NO ONE at Yaesu, Icomm, or Kenwood ever called me to help me figure
out what I needed when I was ready to order.
6) Elecraft is USA... <this is where I drop the mic and walk away> ;-)

______________________
Clay Autery, KG5LKV
MONTAC Enterprises
(318) 518-1389

On 4/25/2016 6:08 PM, Wayne Burdick wrote:

>> Jim Brown <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon,4/25/2016 1:34 PM, lstavenhagen wrote:
>>> Wow, looks like Icom finally made a radio with performance close to the
>>> humble K3S and K3 + new synth.... but also looks like you really got to pay
>>> 'em for finally doing it, at nearly 13 grand for the 7851!
>> Don't be so quick to declare either of these products winners -- Rob's RX measurements are only a small part of what defines the quality of a radio. ICOM (and Yaesu) have a long history of producing radios with rather wide CW signals, including all the current products that ARRL has measured.
> Hi Jim,
>
> Also, in the "you get what you pay for" category, here are the K3S features (some optional*) that differ significantly from, or are not available on, the IC-7300:
>
> Receive
>
> - *Sub receiver (identical in performance to main), diversity and independent-band operation
> - Dedicated AF and RF gain controls for both receivers
> - APF (CW audio peaking filter)
> - 8-band RX EQ
> - Full stereo audio with audio effects (AFX) and L/R balance control
> - User-settable AF limiter for use when AGC is off
> - 7 AGC customization controls
>
> Transmit
>
> - PIN-diode T/R switching (audible relay on '7300)
> - Extremely fast T/R turnaround (as low as 5 ms in QRQ mode; also applies to KPA500)
> - Dedicated controls for CW code speed/mic gain, compression/power level
> - 8-band TX EQ
>
> General
>
> - *Wide-range ATU (> 10:1 at 100 W; > 20:1 at low power) and two antenna jacks
> - *Internal all-mode 2-meter transverter option
> - Direct transverter band displays (9); integrated with Elecraft XV-series
> - Built-in PSK and RTTY decode (to display) and encode (via keyer paddle);
> 7300 has only RTTY, I believe
> - Dedicated VFO B and RIT/XIT offset controls (VFO B is 400-count optical encoder
> with weighted knob)
> - 100 regular memories, plus 4 quick memories per band
> - 10 user-programmable function switches (for menu hot-keys, macros, TX messages)
> - Direct rotary control functions: K3 11; 7300 6
> - Direct switch functions: K3, 74 (addional 22 on P3*); 7300, 27
> (IC-7300 also has est. 10 full-time touch controls in main display context)
> - Keypad for direct frequency entry
> - Transflective LCD, easily readable in bright sunlight
> - Low current drain for portable/DXpedition use (1 amp typical)
> - Works with supply voltage of as low as 10 V
> - Carrying handle included
> - *High-quality/versatile external control panel option (K-Pod)
>
> Connectivity
>
> - RX antenna in/out and transverter in/out jacks
> - Stereo speaker outputs, front and rear headphones, front and rear mics
> - Analog line in/out in addition to USB (digital + audio)
> - Buffered I.F. output
> - Accessory output for compatibility with existing station equipment,
> including band-data outputs and user-defined logic in/out
> - 12-volt switched output for powering accessories
>
> Spectrum Display*
>
> - dedicated panadapter screen (P3) with significantly larger area
> - flexible partitioning of spectrum vs waterfall
> - *optional high-resolution, external SVGA display
>
> Any corrections or things I've missed?
>
> 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
> Message delivered to [hidden email]

lstavenhagen

Re: Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

In reply to this post by Jim Brown-10

Yes, quite true. But it is a little hilarious that the only other Icom rig above its own 7300 in the Sherwood chart costs 13 grand.... At least in the fairly narrow comparison domain of RX dynamic range anyway; to me that's just kind of funny that their high end rigs are outperformed by their own entry/mid level rig.

But yes you make a good point in that it's the overall package that really counts and you always have your compromises that you need to make to hit a particular performance level or price point or both...

After looking at them all, though, my K3S still edges out everything else I've looked at in the bang/buck ratio department, so that's what I went with. But of course my needs are kind of specific - the hottest possible RX, brick wall filtering CW a first-class citizen among the supported modes and built for /p operation.

If I worked voice or digital modes in addition, or didn't have /p requirements, maybe the calculus would have had other players in it.

When I threw in kit building fun/learning, the K2 actually edged out all of them. That's why I built 2 of them lol.

73,
LS
W5QD

Jim Brown-10 wrote

Don't be so quick to declare either of these products winners -- Rob's
RX measurements are only a small part of what defines the quality of a
radio. ICOM (and Yaesu) have a long history of producing radios with
rather wide CW signals, including all the current products that ARRL has
measured.

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]

Elecraft mailing list

Re: Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

In reply to this post by Clay Autery

I agree that comparisons between an heterodyne radio and direct-sampling radio is not like comparing apples vs apples. Each of these philosophies/architectures has has advantages and disadvantages at this time, but I'm pretty sure that all future amateur radio transceivers (any radio for that matter) will eventually be direct-sampling SDRs....Similar arguments have been had in the past (some are still ongoing) about competing technologies such as tubes vs. transistor, quartz cristal vs. synthesizers, etc...The difference is that direct-sampling SDRs, though a much newer philosophy/architecture, only have a few wrinkles that should easily be ironed out as more capable and affordable chips (ADCs and DSP) become available.
Honestly, I don't understand these claims about a direct-sampling SDR overloading so easily. Is this based on personal experience or theory? Of course, I would totally expect this to happen with an SDR kit based upon an 8-bit ADC. However, I have an Anan SDR (16 bits) and I'm yet to experience these issues. Besides this, what percentage of the total amateur radio community live near high-power broadcast stations? Does it really make sense to engineer products based upon unlikely scenarios that will likely increase production costs while diminishing/limiting additional features? I love Elecraft products (have or have had all major ones; K3, KX3/PX3/KXPA100, KPA500), but have to admit that direct-sampling offers some features that Elecraft won't be able to offer with a heterodyne architecture. But, I would imagine that Elecraft already has a direct-sampling SDR on the drawing board and this is exciting because I know that it'll beat anything that is in the market right now.
73,Robert-KP4Y/W4

On Monday, April 25, 2016 9:40 PM, Clay Autery <[hidden email]> wrote:

I know next to nothing about radios, but here's my $0.02 anyway...

1) My K3s/P3 combo is the first purchase in 20 years or more that I've
had absolutely NO buyer's remorse... not even a hint, nada, none...
2) My K3s makes me WANT to become the best operator I can... This arrow
is wayyy better than the Indian right now and for the forseeable future.
3) NO ONE has ever made a single comment to me negative about the K3s or
Elecraft...
4) I consistently get comments on my signal from my QSOs that it is
clean, super, fills the room, full, broadcast quality, etc, etc, et
al... and I'm only 100w on a loop.
5) NO ONE at Yaesu, Icomm, or Kenwood ever called me to help me figure
out what I needed when I was ready to order.
6) Elecraft is USA... <this is where I drop the mic and walk away> ;-)

______________________
Clay Autery, KG5LKV
MONTAC Enterprises
(318) 518-1389

On 4/25/2016 6:08 PM, Wayne Burdick 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
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]

Gary Smith-2

Re: Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

In reply to this post by EricJ

Fellas,

There's so many directions to look at if you want to play Devil's
Advocate to sliced bread, but is it a good argument? In many ways
this Icom vs K3s discussion reminds me of someone putting up the
merits of their 69 VW Bug against a 69 Hemi Roadrunner: Both are
pretty cars in their own way. Both will likely get you where you're
going. Both can break the speed limit and both will attract a certain
crowd. The flower power crowd will probably take the VW Bug. Me, I'd
want the Roadrunner in my garage.

The analogy is of course, this thread relating to the IC-7300 vs the
K3s: Both the Icom and the K3s are Ham Radios. Each has many of the
same kinds of features and both cost more than an average 50" TV,
while neither costs as much as an 8 day vacation to Bhutan will cost
you. Both will make contacts to the remotest part of the earth from
you. Is this thread comparing Apples to Oranges or is it a fair
comparison of two equal quality Radios?

To me, the obvious answer is this $1,499.95 Icom radio is arguably
not in the same league as the K3s, and to try to compare them as
equals is blatantly ungenuine. A fully loaded K3s will cost more
than, and do more than the IC-7300. The IC-7300 is not a bad radio
but it's like a High School Basketball star VS Michael Jordan back in
1995.

The K3s is made in the USA and has a support staff that speaks
clearly and can answer about anything you throw at them quickly and
with respect. Unlike with Icom, you can actually talk with the
designers of the Radio and president of the company and when you buy
the radio, you have the privilege of being able to upgrade new
components, rather than having to sell your old non-upgradable Icom
and having to buy the next iteration they put out if you want to
upgrade. Put that in your Icom Pipe & smoke it.

If you want to make a genuine argument of Apples and Apples, then
compare the K3s fully loaded with P3, to the Icom 7851 which at
$12,989.95, is double the cost of the K3s with P3. That's a more
reasonable argument than comparing it to it's kid brother, playing
basketball in High School.

I'm going back to my rock to make a few Q's with my K3s...

73,

Gary
KA1J
______________________________________________________________
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]

Wes Stewart-2

Re: Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

In reply to this post by Elecraft mailing list

I'm not smackin' this tar baby except to note that a direct sampling radio*is* a
heterodyne radio.

On 4/25/2016 8:19 PM, Robert Vargas-KP4Y via Elecraft wrote:
> I agree that comparisons between an heterodyne radio and direct-sampling radio is not like comparing apples vs apples.

______________________________________________________________
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]

WB6DJI

Re: Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

In reply to this post by wayne burdick

Interesting Sherwood Receiver Ratings
http://www.sherweng.com/table.html

Used the following radios at our DX Club station
( 1st place is K3/P3 by our DX operators )
1st Place --> K3/P3 (upgraded synth) Best NB, Sensitivity and Filtering
2nd Place --> IC-7851
IC-7300
TS-990S ( Sold it - Terrible NB )
TS-590S ( Sold it as well )

Most preferred Radio for performance is the
K3/P3 (with upgraded Synth)

Eric/Wayne you got a great product !

73 Mike

______________________________________________________________
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

Re: Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

In reply to this post by Wes Stewart-2

Yep, I agree and I know you understand my point 😀

73,
Robert-KP4Y/W4

Sent from my iPhone

> On Apr 26, 2016, at 12:00 AM, Wes <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> I'm not smackin' this tar baby except to note that a direct sampling radio*is* a heterodyne radio.
>
>> On 4/25/2016 8:19 PM, Robert Vargas-KP4Y via Elecraft wrote:
>> I agree that comparisons between an heterodyne radio and direct-sampling radio is not like comparing apples vs apples.
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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]

Jim Brown-10

Re: Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

In reply to this post by EricJ

A big advantage of owning an Elecraft radio is that you CAN communicate
directly with the Owners and Chief Engineer, they will listen to what
you have to say, and often modify/upgrade their products based on what
they hear from US! Try that with ICOM. Or Yaesu. Or Kenwood.

73, Jim K9YC

On Mon,4/25/2016 6:19 PM, EricJ wrote:
> The fact that you are having this conversation directly with one of
> the owners/designers of Elecraft and not one of the owners of ICOM is
> always going to make comparisons inherently unfair.

______________________________________________________________
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]

Alan Bloom

Re: Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

In reply to this post by Wes Stewart-2

On 04/25/2016 10:26 PM, Walter Underwood wrote:
> Are you confusing a direct conversion receiver with a direct sampling
> receiver? A super-het (K3) or direct conversion (KX3) receiver is a
> heterodyne system. A direct sampling receiver is not.

It kind-of is. There has to be some kind of digital local oscillator in
the electronics following the ADC which is used to heterodyne the signal
down to baseband or a lower-frequency "IF". True, it's all done with
ones and zeros but it performs the same function as an analog local
oscillator and mixer.

Alan N1AL

______________________________________________________________
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]

EricJ

Re: Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

In reply to this post by Jim Brown-10

Of course it is a big advantage. It's one of the reasons I've owned
Elecraft rigs since I first became aware of them and currently have two
K2s and a K1-4. I'd own a K3 if I didn't find the K2 perfectly
satisfactory for my casual operating interests.

I stand by what I said. Comparisons between Elecraft and other amateur
manufacturers are unfair, apples to oranges, in large part because of
the personal interaction of Eric and Wayne with those of us who enjoy
their products. In 60 years on the air I've had the chance to own or
operate most of what has been offered. Except for my Drake 2B, my K1 is
still my personal favorite, and the K2 close behind.

Eric

KE6US

On 4/25/2016 10:00 PM, Jim Brown wrote:

> A big advantage of owning an Elecraft radio is that you CAN
> communicate directly with the Owners and Chief Engineer, they will
> listen to what you have to say, and often modify/upgrade their
> products based on what they hear from US! Try that with ICOM. Or
> Yaesu. Or Kenwood.
>
> 73, Jim K9YC
>
> On Mon,4/25/2016 6:19 PM, EricJ wrote:
>> The fact that you are having this conversation directly with one of
>> the owners/designers of Elecraft and not one of the owners of ICOM is
>> always going to make comparisons inherently unfair.
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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]
>
>

Jim Brown-10

Re: Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

On Tue,4/26/2016 9:31 AM, EricJ wrote:
> I stand by what I said. Comparisons between Elecraft and other amateur
> manufacturers are unfair, apples to oranges, in large part because of
> the personal interaction of Eric and Wayne with those of us who enjoy
> their products.

I don't think the comparison is at all unfair -- the owners of ICOM,
Yaesu, and Kenwood can just as easily have the same level of
communication with their customers IF THEY WANT TO.

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]

Chris Tate - N6WM

Re: Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

Interesting conversation. There are 2 800 lb gorillas at the top of the list one of them is Elecraft and many Elecraft peripherals such as the KPA500 and KAT500, W2 etc work great with the other. I own several radios from both companies. they are both awesome. They both have similar management and engineer interaction and support. Neither of them are Yaesu, Kenwood or Icom.

They are both great in their own right but they are definitely different animals (or fruits.. as in apples and oranges) and have different advantages and disadvantages.

IC 7300 is in a completely different class.

I am fortunate to have both top platforms to play with.

I am looking forward to playing with a Kpod soon!

Chris
N6WM

________________________________________
From: Elecraft [[hidden email]] on behalf of Jim Brown [[hidden email]]
Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2016 10:02 AM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

On Tue,4/26/2016 9:31 AM, EricJ wrote:
> I stand by what I said. Comparisons between Elecraft and other amateur
> manufacturers are unfair, apples to oranges, in large part because of
> the personal interaction of Eric and Wayne with those of us who enjoy
> their products.

I don't think the comparison is at all unfair -- the owners of ICOM,
Yaesu, and Kenwood can just as easily have the same level of
communication with their customers IF THEY WANT TO.

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]
______________________________________________________________
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]

WB4SON

Re: Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

I think Chris has hit it on the head. Looking at a high-performance direct
sampling rig vs. a high-performance superhet with digital features is
looking at "definitely different animals". Exactly the same sort of
problem that comes from a question that begins "if you could have only
one...".

I love my K3, but own a Flex 1500 as well (dipped my toe in to test the
water). I could happily live with only the K3. However, I haven't jumped
into the different world of the Flex 6700. I suspect if I did, I wouldn't
want to part with either of them. They are different tools -- each excels
in certain situations.

The key thing that strikes me as a real advantage of Elecraft is how well
an old K3 performs when upgraded. You can't do that to a Flex
1500/3000/5000. Elecraft is the only company that consistently looks after
their customer base by providing continuous improvements.

73, Bob, WB4SON
______________________________________________________________
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]

73, Bob, WB4SON

Doug Turnbull

Re: Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

Dear OMs and YLs,
I think Bob says it well. How can you compare a fine radio like the
7300 with a loaded K3. They are not the same yet the 7300 will probably
work most of the DX that the K3 will for less money. A Cadillac is no
more functional than a Chevy. They both go from A to B. Okay, I would
prefer a Porsche but it does the same thing but in a more stylish and
exciting manner. Your pocketbook decides.

A good few hams have both Flex and Elecraft radios - we are fortunate
to see these newer USA companies providing such good products. For now I
am an Elecraft man and suspect this will be the case till the pine box but
different strokes for different folks. A TS930 will still do a good job
on HF CW. Let us not seriously compare an entry level radio with the K3
and at the same time do not let the previous KX3 and K3 Sherwood ratings
lead one to believe that the KX3 is a better radio than the K3. One needs
to consider the whole package and yes Elecraft provides the magic of
allowing access to the principle design engineers. I sure do like this
company.

73 Doug EI2CN

-----Original Message-----
From: Elecraft [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Bob
Sent: 26 April 2016 18:34
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

I think Chris has hit it on the head. Looking at a high-performance direct
sampling rig vs. a high-performance superhet with digital features is
looking at "definitely different animals". Exactly the same sort of
problem that comes from a question that begins "if you could have only
one...".

I love my K3, but own a Flex 1500 as well (dipped my toe in to test the
water). I could happily live with only the K3. However, I haven't jumped
into the different world of the Flex 6700. I suspect if I did, I wouldn't
want to part with either of them. They are different tools -- each excels
in certain situations.

The key thing that strikes me as a real advantage of Elecraft is how well
an old K3 performs when upgraded. You can't do that to a Flex
1500/3000/5000. Elecraft is the only company that consistently looks after
their customer base by providing continuous improvements.

73, Bob, WB4SON
______________________________________________________________
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]

Jim Rodenkirch

Re: Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

In reply to this post by Don Wilhelm

CONTENTS DELETED

The author has deleted this message.

Jim Brown-10

Re: Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

In reply to this post by Doug Turnbull

On Tue,4/26/2016 12:53 PM, Doug Turnbull wrote:
> Dear OMs and YLs,
> I think Bob says it well. How can you compare a fine radio like the
> 7300 with a loaded K3.

How do we KNOW that it's a "fine radio?" I haven't seen a review by ARRL
or RSGB. We have only Rob's measurements of the RECEIVER.

> They are not the same yet the 7300 will probably
> work most of the DX that the K3 will for less money. A Cadillac is no
> more functional than a Chevy. They both go from A to B. Okay, I would
> prefer a Porsche but it does the same thing but in a more stylish and
> exciting manner. Your pocketbook decides.

Yep.

> A good few hams have both Flex and Elecraft radios - we are fortunate
> to see these newer USA companies providing such good products. For now I
> am an Elecraft man and suspect this will be the case till the pine box but
> different strokes for different folks. A TS930 will still do a good job
> on HF CW. Let us not seriously compare an entry level radio with the K3
> and at the same time do not let the previous KX3 and K3 Sherwood ratings
> lead one to believe that the KX3 is a better radio than the K3. One needs
> to consider the whole package and yes Elecraft provides the magic of
> allowing access to the principle design engineers.

Well said, Doug.

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]

John Kramer

Re: Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

I own Elecraft, Flex and for the past few weeks an IC-7300. Yes, Jim, it is a fine radio,
I have personally experienced this and own a KX3 and 3 Flex rigs to compare it with.
And, for what it costs, it is a damn fine rig. I don’t know of any other rig currently available
that is such good value for money.
Perhaps the K3S would be better in terms of performance…but for the money, the
IC-7300 is very capable, and has a brilliant UI.

73
John

How do we KNOW that it's a "fine radio?" I haven't seen a review by ARRL or RSGB. We have only Rob's measurements of the RECEIVER.

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]

______________________________________________________________
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]

Don Wilhelm

Re: Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

In reply to this post by Jim Rodenkirch

Jim,

The problem with your question is that the answer really is "it all
depends".
If the feedline from the antenna is short and relatively low loss, then
the ATU in the shack is fine.
Or if the feedline is very low loss (say open wire line, well supported
and away from conductors), then the length of the feedline does not
matter much at all, and again the ATU in the shack is the more
convenient answer.

OTOH, if the feedline is coax, and the length is for instance 150 feet,
then you would want to consider something at the antenna. Whether that
is a remote ATU, or some type of fixed matching section to bring the
antenna feedpoint impedance down to a range of 30 to 150 ohms would be
in order. With the fixed matching section (antenna loading), you would
also want to have an ATU in the shack.

I have generalized on the antenna type - but the answer remains the same
no matter what the antenna type. Look at a beam with a matching section
at the driven element - that is one example of a fixed matching section,
it will not likely be flat SWR over the entire band and an ATU in the
shack can keep the PA transistors working into a 50 ohm load as you QSY.

Another example of a fixed matching section is a matching inductor (and
possibly capacitor) that is used on many of the popular 43 foot
verticals - but you still need an ATU in the shack.

One solution for a vertical antenna is to feed it with low loss parallel
feedline. Before you scream 'heresy' because the vertical is
unbalanced, there is nothing wrong with using a parallel feedline for a
vertical, the RF will figure it out - the radials are merely the "other
half" of the monopole. If your feedline run is long, consider using
open wire line if you can, or ladderline as a close second. Yes, you
need a current choke at the vertical antenna, and that takes care of the
'balance' situation - use a 1:1 choke, you are simply choking common
mode current and not trying to match the impedance of the feedline.

73,
Don W3FPR

73,
Don W3FPR

On 4/26/2016 4:09 PM, Jim Rodenkirch wrote:

> Don: requiring a wide ranging ATU is half of the question, Don!! What is
> truly "significant" is this - many hams, new or otherwise, fail to
> understand whether they really need an ATU in the shack or do they really,
> REALLY need an ATU out at the antenna. For me, THAT's the mystifying piece
> of the "ATU question" that always shows up.....
>
> 71.5/72 de Jim Rodenkirch K9JWV
>
>
> Don Wilhelm wrote
>> Wunder,
>>
>> The only reason I can understand is that they can get away by stating
>> that they have an internal ATU. Sadly many hams (particularly newer
>> hams) gloss over the significance of the need for a wide range ATU.
>> They don't discover that they need an external tuner for their
>> "multiband" antenna until after they buy the transceiver and discover
>> that it is inadequate.
>>
>> 73,
>> Don W3FPR
>>
>> On 4/25/2016 7:25 PM, Walter Underwood wrote:
>>>> On Apr 25, 2016, at 4:08 PM, Wayne Burdick <
>> n6kr@
>> > wrote:
>>>> - *Wide-range ATU (> 10:1 at 100 W; > 20:1 at low power) and two
>>>> antenna jacks
>>> I am really mystified about why transceivers include a 3:1 range ATU. It
>>> adds $150-200 to the end cost to get an external ATU. It might add $50-75
>>> to make the internal ATU wide-range. It is especially odd for an
>>> entry-level rig, where people are likely to be using a low-slung dipole.
>>> OK, it is very strange for the IC-7851, too.
>>>
>>>
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> Elecraft mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post: mailto:
>> Elecraft@.qth
>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>> Message delivered to
>> lists+1215531472858-365791@.nabble
>
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/Sherwood-s-receiver-performance-table-updated-tp7616652p7616743.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]
>

Jim Rodenkirch

Re: Sherwood's receiver performance table updated

CONTENTS DELETED

The author has deleted this message.

Andrzej Worosz

K3 vs K3S

In reply to this post by HarryW

Has anyone compare rx K3 vs K3 with a new synth ( K3S) by the A / B
switch metode ?
As heard issued abt 250 usd ( KSYN3A) , what is the difference?
Where can I find a movie with such comparisons, cant find on youtube.

73 Andy sp8brq

______________________________________________________________
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]

123