No, and it's also from 2009, but that's not the point. The point is that
there isn't going to be much difference between the 250hz 8 pole filter
and the 200hz 5 pole filter. But think about your comment for a moment.
A stock K3 with no additional filters is that good enough to rank that
high. It might actually rank higher, because the ARRL and Sherwood
methodologies differ.
In any case, far too many people are far too concerned about the
Sherwood rankings. Most people don't understand what the data mean and
only worry about where a radio ranks on the list. The few dB between
radios at the top of the Sherwood rankings means the list could probably
be reordered based on component differences in production runs.
Certainly a radio near the top ten is good enough.
73,
Scott N9AA
On 7/25/15 3:29 PM, XE3/K5ENS via Elecraft wrote:
That is not the Sherwood "receiver list" that everyone covets.
Taking this data the K3 would be about 11th or 12th on the list
with the stock 2.7hz filter.
--
View this message in context:
http://elecraft.365791.n2.nabble.com/200-Hz-5-pole-filter-tp7605299p7605328.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:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to scott.man...@gmail.com
.
______________________________________________________________
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
Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
