While the RadCom reports are trustworthy, I have not seen the complete test results nor the procedures documented in a manner similar to the ARRL test reports and procedures. I do see and hear Peter Hart's ranking (the K3 is 3rd for 2 kHz IMD at 500 Hz BW), but how does it rank for the other parameters - there is more to receiver performance than just 2 kHz IMD. What is most important to Peter Hart may not be most important to me - there are trade-offs with any piece of equipment, and any chosen parameter may be improved at the expense of other parameters.
73, Don W3FPR Bill W4ZV wrote: > Radcom's tests, under Peter Hart G3SJX, are just as trustworthy as ARRL and > Sherwood, and in fact have more continuity (in longevity of personnel, > equipment and procedure) than ARRL and maybe a bit more integrity than > Sherwood. I say the latter because Rob has had the K3 listed #1 even though > both the Flex 5000 and Perseus exceed it at 500 Hz BW. The only reason the > K3 is ranked #1 is that it uses a narrower bandwidth (200 Hz) than the other > two rigs to achieve the #1 position. Rob has this clearly footnoted but it > still doesn't seem right to me to list the K3 at the top based on footnotes. > > With equal 500 Hz BWs, the 2 kHz IMD results are: > > Perseus - 99 dB > Flex 5k - 96 dB > K3 - 95 dB > > http://www.sherweng.com/table.html > > Someone may forward this to Rob which will be no surprise to him since I've > told him this directly. Frankly I doubt many would notice the difference > between 95, 96, 99 or even 101 (with 200 Hz) so I don't understand why not > rank rigs at identical bandwidths (500 Hz). > > 73, Bill > > > ______________________________________________________________ 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
