I said the K3's transmitter was superior to the FT-5000, not perfect. The ARRL review lists the 3rd order TX IMD numbers at -30db for the 5000 and -29 dB for the K3, but those numbers alone don't tell the whole story. Take at look at the ARRL's phase noise numbers and spectral display characteristics for the FT-5000's transmitted signal and compare them to the K3 and then get back to us. To be fair, the K3 tested does seem to have an issue with inferior 9th order IMD numbers, though.
These figures were without the FT-5000's processor turned on, which of course, dirties up the 5000's signal quite a bit, unless that "feature" has been fixed. If it has, many contesters will be tearing up, because that and the key clicks help FT5000 ops get higher scores. Re: your other post, my K3 is rated at 100 watts output, so I'm sure someone running one at 120 watts will notice that the performance does degrade. I find the slightly higher PS voltage an intriguing idea. The FT-5000 is a fine rig, and is fairly clean in class A mode, with the processor turned off, but most people don't run them that way. 73, Scott, N9AA On 6/22/12 5:48 PM, Adrian wrote: > K3 a superior transmitter in imd product results? Your kidding right? > Out in the real world the K3 has a bad rep for splatter and imd3 product. > See; > > http://www.eham.net/ehamforum/smf/index.php/topic,75182.0.html > > Those of us with K3's running 15v PS with heavy cable inputs, driving clean > amps escape the wrath of the imd police. > The 5000 is way better esp in class A operation. > ______________________________________________________________ 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
