Unfair Comparison?

[vk4tux]

Please have a look at;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DI8T-K64LAY

It seems an unfair test with the K3 filter settings much narrower than
the 590. The 590 sounds noisier despite the extra S level.

These guys seem to think its proof the 590 outperforms the K3,
but I don't think it's a fair test. Comments?

Adrian ... vk4tux

______________________________________________________________
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

[Pierfrancesco Caci]

>>>>> "Adrian" == Adrian  <[hidden email]> writes:


    Adrian> Please have a look at;
    Adrian> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DI8T-K64LAY

    Adrian> It seems an unfair test with the K3 filter settings much
    Adrian> narrower than
    Adrian> the 590. The 590 sounds noisier despite the extra S level.

    Adrian> These guys seem to think its proof the 590 outperforms the K3,
    Adrian> but I don't think it's a fair test. Comments?

The preamplifier on 40 m?


--
Pierfrancesco Caci, ik5pvx
______________________________________________________________
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]

I can't speak for the test conditions used here, but for an  
independent comparison of most ham transceivers, see:

    http://www.sherweng.com/table.html

Sherwood sorts his table by 2-kHz (close-spaced) dynamic range. The K3  
and FT5000 have the top spots. I'm still not entirely sure why Rob put  
the FT-5000 above the K3, given that they tied on narrow-banded IMDDR3  
and the K3 had the better numbers in nearly all other categories.

But then, as anyone on the list will tell you, I'm hopelessly biased.

73,
Wayne
N6KR


On Mar 24, 2012, at 5:25 PM, Adrian wrote:

> Please have a look at;
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DI8T-K64LAY
>
> It seems an unfair test with the K3 filter settings much narrower than
> the 590. The 590 sounds noisier despite the extra S level.
>
> These guys seem to think its proof the 590 outperforms the K3,
> but I don't think it's a fair test. Comments?
>
> Adrian ... vk4tux
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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

[Tony Estep]

On Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 7:47 PM, Wayne Burdick <[hidden email]> wrote:
>....not entirely sure why Rob put
> the FT-5000 above the K3, given that they tied on narrow-banded IMDDR3
> and the K3 had the better numbers in nearly all other categories....
----------------
I always wondered that too. But hey, the K3 is by far the dominant
choice among those who read Sherwood's page, viz. DXers and
contesters. I doubt that Elecraft has lost any sales based on choices
made by referring to Sherwood's rankings. Even if you accept his
placement, it doesn't seem that you get much for the incremental $3000
and 36 pounds.

Tony KT0NY


--
http://www.isb.edu/faculty/facultydir.aspx?ddlFaculty=352
______________________________________________________________
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

[VE3GNO Daniel]

No Wayne,
 
You are not biased at all. Numbers are numbers above a certain trashold is hard to feel the difference in real traffic, you won't feel 1 or 2 dB difference in DR but you'll feel a lot in AGC response...a looooot. The strenght of K3 is the huge flexibility in AGC settings plus the unique static noise tolerance in AGC loop feature. Regardless the 2KHz DR the contest conditions are far more complex than two carriers testing and is very hard to draw a conclusion after one day or one month of  operating. So far today I use my K3 90% of time in CW and 40-50% in SSB/digital and just maybe less than 10% in CW with FT5K and little bit over 50% in SSB/Digital. I am trying to monitor my operating "behaviour" in time and to draw a kind of dynamic graph of usage. Is interesting first few weeks the proportion was oposite. K3 maybe less than 10%...why? due lack of knowledge. This is why I said is hard to love the K3 in the first day of use, learning curve is waaay
 longer, requires extensive reading. ON4UN low band DX and KE7X  are my bibles.....and still discover thing. Is fascinating. I would recomand everyone to read this books before order K3, you'll save some time.

VE3GNO/YO3GJC Daniel
 

________________________________
 From: Wayne Burdick <[hidden email]>
To: Adrian <[hidden email]>
Cc: [hidden email]; [hidden email]
Sent: Saturday, March 24, 2012 8:47:54 PM
Subject: [Elecraft_K3] Re: [Elecraft] Unfair Comparison?
 

 
   
 
I can't speak for the test conditions used here, but for an
independent comparison of most ham transceivers, see:

http://www.sherweng.com/table.html

Sherwood sorts his table by 2-kHz (close-spaced) dynamic range. The K3
and FT5000 have the top spots. I'm still not entirely sure why Rob put
the FT-5000 above the K3, given that they tied on narrow-banded IMDDR3
and the K3 had the better numbers in nearly all other categories.

But then, as anyone on the list will tell you, I'm hopelessly biased.

73,
Wayne
N6KR

On Mar 24, 2012, at 5:25 PM, Adrian wrote:

> Please have a look at;
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DI8T-K64LAY
>
> It seems an unfair test with the K3 filter settings much narrower than
> the 590. The 590 sounds noisier despite the extra S level.
>
> These guys seem to think its proof the 590 outperforms the K3,
> but I don't think it's a fair test. Comments?
>
> Adrian ... vk4tux
>
> __________________________________________________________
> 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

   
__._,_.___
Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post | Start a New Topic  Messages in this topic (4)  
Recent Activity: * New Members 6  
Visit Your Group  
 
Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use    
.  

__,_._,___      
______________________________________________________________
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

[george fritkin]

I think if compare the 5000 price to an equal equipped K3 you will find the difference a lot less. Plus you get 3db.

George, W6GF

Love my two K3s and waiting for my KX3....... Is there a UPS truck comming around the corner
______________________________________________________________
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

[Nate Bargmann]

* On 2012 24 Mar 19:48 -0500, Wayne Burdick wrote:
> I'm still not entirely sure why Rob put  the FT-5000 above the K3,
> given that they tied on narrow-banded IMDDR3  and the K3 had the
> better numbers in nearly all other categories.

IIRC, I read somewhere that the FT5K garnered the top spot due to its
filters being stock items and optional on the K3.  What is more
troubling are some of the other numbers in the table where the FT5k
seems quite inferior such as ultimate filter rejection.

> But then, as anyone on the list will tell you, I'm hopelessly biased.

I am too, but rather than focus on one category (of course, it's Mr.
Sherwood's chart so he can do with it as it suits him), I prefer to
judge the numbers as a whole.  I also like that the K3 is offered with
various options to make it the rig I want it to be.

73, de Nate, N0NB >>

--

"The optimist proclaims that we live in the best of all
possible worlds.  The pessimist fears this is true."

Ham radio, Linux, bikes, and more: http://www.n0nb.us
______________________________________________________________
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

[Robert Vargas (KP4Y)]

I agree with a previous post that the price difference between an equally equiped K3 and a FT-5K is very close if none. I did the price comparison before buying the K3 and what really made decide for the K3 instead of the FT-5K was Elecraft's great customer service and the fact that I didn't have an immediate need for features like the second receiver and the 200 watts, thus saving some money. I also do believe that the K3 receiver is out of this world specially on the implementation of the digital NR.

My SO2R second radio is a TS-590 and which I believe is the best bang for the buck for a DX'er/contester who doesn't want to spend more than $2K on a radio. In my opinion,it's unfair to compare a K3 with a TS-590 simply because they are in different price class. I paid near $1,700 for my TS-590 wheras my almost plain K3 costed me near $2,600 last December and it doesn't include some options the TS-590 includes like ATU, FM, AM and general coverage receiver. Does the K3 have a better receiver than the TS-590?, darn yeah!...much superior I would say and that's what I expected. Otherwise I would have two TS-590 sitting on my desk today with $1K+ (I intend to get the ATU option soon) to spare in my pocket. Therefore, the K3 is in my opinion in the same class as the FT-5K.

Robert - KP4Y

Sent from my HTC on the Now Network from Sprint!







______________________________________________________________
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 K9YEQ]

As you should be :-)

73,
Bill
K9YEQ

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email]
[mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Wayne Burdick
Sent: Saturday, March 24, 2012 7:48 PM
To: Adrian
Cc: [hidden email]; [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Unfair Comparison?

I can't speak for the test conditions used here, but for an independent
comparison of most ham transceivers, see:

    http://www.sherweng.com/table.html

Sherwood sorts his table by 2-kHz (close-spaced) dynamic range. The K3 and
FT5000 have the top spots. I'm still not entirely sure why Rob put the
FT-5000 above the K3, given that they tied on narrow-banded IMDDR3 and the
K3 had the better numbers in nearly all other categories.

But then, as anyone on the list will tell you, I'm hopelessly biased.

73,
Wayne
N6KR


On Mar 24, 2012, at 5:25 PM, Adrian wrote:

> Please have a look at;
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DI8T-K64LAY
>
> It seems an unfair test with the K3 filter settings much narrower than
> the 590. The 590 sounds noisier despite the extra S level.
>
> These guys seem to think its proof the 590 outperforms the K3, but I
> don't think it's a fair test. Comments?
>
> Adrian ... vk4tux
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> 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

______________________________________________________________
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