Bert The specs say it all. The K2 is no slouch compared to the K3 in terms of MDS (Minimum discernable signal), BDR (Blocking Dynamic Range) and such. The K3 begins to have an edge in terms of IMD (intermodulation distortion) and phase noise. In that sense I believe the K3 is a better contesting rig specially when you add the bells and whistles. There are other advantages to a K2 - such as current draw - as low as 200mA versus the K3's 800mA which makes it better for portable ops using batteries - better at conserving energy and it is much smaller - even as a K2/100. Plus you have the bragging right of having almost as good a receiver as a K3 which you soldered together. See the ARRL and Sherwood specs on the Elecraft page. Ariel NY4G
> Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2012 05:11:52 -0500 > From: wa...@arrl.net > To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net > Subject: [Elecraft] K2 vs. K3 Rcvr > > I'm contemplating replacing my K2/100's desktop companion, a Ten-Rec Jupiter, > with a K3/100. I operate 100% casual CW. > > Does anybody feel that the K2's rcvr is equal to or better than that of the > K3, additional bells and whistles notwithstanding? > > Vy 73 de Bert > WA2SI > > "...and all the pieces matter." > -- Det. Lester Freamon, BPD > > Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4GLTE smartphone > > ______________________________________________________________ > Elecraft mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net > > 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:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
