I made some A/B testing in CQ160 last weekend, between K2 and TS-850S. They hear pretty good the same but it's much easier to copy week signals with K2 if you have S9+ signal close to you.
I suppose that K3 is even better... Samir, 7S7V Message: 29 Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2009 11:55:52 -0500 From: Randy Downs <randyddo...@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] New Eham.net K3 review by QRPNEW To: "Kenneth E. Harker" <kenhar...@kenharker.com>, Elecraft@mailman.qth.net Message-ID: <97f678d20901260855x6760c92cle536d9ef305e9...@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Actually when 10 meters opened up last Saturday I fired up my 850 for a while on SSB. I went back to the K3. I could get much closer to signals with the K3 without desense. I have been very happy with the K3 using the N8LP Panadaptor. I've been able to get very close to 40 over signals with no problems. My other rigs won't. I use the K3 rx not PwrSdr. I drive the K3 from the PC though. I do wish the K3 was like my Ft2000 was as far as size, etc. BUT I would not go back. On 160 phone I see 40 over signals all of the time with no problems at all. I run phone most of the time. I'm very happy with the K3. Randy K8RDD On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 11:40 AM, Kenneth E. Harker <kenhar...@kenharker.com > wrote: > On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 08:00:41AM -0700, Jim Garland wrote: > > > > > > > > > > I see that a new review of the K3 has appeared on Eham.net which will > no > > > doubt raise the hackles of the paid-up members of the Elecraft fan > club, > > > and > > > cause nods of agreement from many others. > > > > > > http://www.eham.net/reviews/detail/6673 > > > > > > ----- > > > Julian, G4ILO. K2 #392 K3 #222. > > > > I read the review, and while "QRPNEW" took a few unwarranted pot shots at > > the K3, I also thought he made some interesting and valid points. The > gist > > of his comments is that the K3 can't quite decide whether it wants to be > a > > small portable transceiver, or a full-sized full-featured base station > > transceiver, and in trying to be both it falls short in several respects. > > Well said. > > Another thing to consider is that a lot of the review is related to the > use of the radio on SSB rather than CW. Elecraft has never had the same > overall high-end achievement for phone operation as it has had for CW > operation. A $700 used Kenwood TS-850 stands up pretty well against an > Elecraft K3 in a phone contest. > > -- > Kenneth E. Harker WM5R > kenhar...@kenharker.com > http://www.kenharker.com/
_______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
