NC0B of Sherwood Engineering gave a great presentation on contest receivers
during the Dayton 2004 Contest Forum. The data from the presentation is
here.
http://www.sherweng.com/presentation.html
He shows the 20 KHz and 2 KHz Dynamic Range Numbers for a variety of
receivers. He said the IC-7800
Of N2TK
Sent: Sunday, June 27, 2004 2:45 PM
To: 'Elecraft Reflector'
Subject: RE: [Elecraft] Re: IC-7800
One of the local hams who is a heavy contester now has a K2, 7800, Orion and
756Pro II. Of those the only one he hasn't put through the paces yet is the
7800. So far, the Orion
I keep asking myself if I really want to plunk down the
bucks for one of those monsters, and the answer I give
myself is "the Orion you have isn't 4 times better than
the K2 (more like 1.01X), so what makes you think the
IC-7800 will be 10 times better?" In my case, I'd be
far better off spending
Hi All,
The IC-7800 is a beautiful radio--no question. I saw one at Dayton this
year, and it will charm your socks off! I saw the new Yaesu there also, but
no
touchee--they had it in a glass case! It's beautiful too, but costs even
more.
To me, there are (at least) two words that appl
Hmmm ... $10,000 would buy a lot of fully loaded K2s ;-)
Michael VE3WMB
___
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
Julian wrote:
I don't need to own one to know that I get far more pleasure using a radio
I built myself than operating some ready-made box of tricks packed with
unnecessary bells and whistles. That, for me, is the only comparison that
really matters.
Jim responds:
AMEN, AMEN! Ham radio lives.
I don't need to own one to know that I get far more pleasure using a radio
I built myself than operating some ready-made box of tricks packed with
unnecessary bells and whistles. That, for me, is the only comparison that
really matters.
73,
--
Julian, G4ILO. (RSGB, ARRL, G-QRP, K2 #392)
G4ILO's
PROTECTED]>
Cc:
Sent: Monday, June 28, 2004 5:12 AM
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Re: IC-7800
> Well, to compare them more directly, I think you have to add a bit more
> "extras" and the price and is about 3dB higher since most people aren't
> looking for a QRP CW rig.
>
&
On Jun 27, 2004, at 12:51 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Wayne, please take note. The KX1 pretty much defines the "little"
end. Now
how about a K3 with which to define the "big" end? I suggest a more
ergonomic transceiver than the K2, covering contesters and DXers
specific needs
rather th
Let's not loose sight of the fact of the number of failed companies that
tried to
be everything to everyone. Elecraft has a nice nitch that they have
deservedly
carved out for themselves. Straying from that nitch by trying to compete
with the
rest of the crowd may not be in their best interests or
Well, to compare them more directly, I think you have to add a bit more
"extras" and the price and is about 3dB higher since most people aren't
looking for a QRP CW rig.
I know I'll sound like a heretic here, but I'm planning on running 100W
almost exclusively.
On Sun, 27 Jun 2004, Jeff Davis wr
Any comparison has to consider what the rig is used for too.
Most comparisons are made by contesters. Assuming a rig that is best for
contesting is best for other operating is like saying that a championship
Formula 1 racing car is best vehicle for taking a drive to the grocery
store.
Frankly, I
I love my K2, but the 11x price comparison number vs the 7800 offered up in
a previous post is as unfair a comparison as I have seen in a long while.
If the only operating you ever do is QRP CW to a resonant antenna, then the
price comparison to a base K2 might be fair - for your operating tastes.
looks
different but there is definitely quality there.
Stan Rife
WD5EWA
Houston, TX
K2 S/N 4216
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of WQ8Q
Sent: Sunday, June 27, 2004 2:22 PM
To: Jeff Davis; elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Re
Wayne, please take note. The KX1 pretty much defines the "little" end. Now
how about a K3 with which to define the "big" end? I suggest a more
ergonomic transceiver than the K2, covering contesters and DXers specific
needs
rather than backpacker's. Why not put to the list the question "
ing radio - but for those of us who don't care
about low current drain/portability it's small size and mini-ergonomics
leave a bit to be desired.
Rick WQ8Q
- Original Message -
From: "Jeff Davis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Sunday, June 27, 2004 11:10 AM
S
, June 27, 2004 10:10 AM
To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Re: IC-7800
On Sun, 27 Jun 2004 21:45:21 +0800, js wrote:
> First of all, I am both an ICOM and K2(s) user. Before we make any
> comparison between IC7800 and K2, I am looking forward to learning
> from a ham w
On Sun, 27 Jun 2004 21:45:21 +0800, js wrote:
> First of all, I am both an ICOM and K2(s) user. Before we make any
> comparison between IC7800 and K2, I am looking forward to learning
> from a ham who really operates these two rigs. As we are all
> aware, sometimes number itself is not necessari
valier.
#3481
N2TK, Tony
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Kenneth E. Harker
Sent: Sunday, June 27, 2004 10:02 AM
To: Elecraft Reflector
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Re: IC-7800
On Sun, Jun 27, 2004 at 09:45:21PM +0800, js wrote:
> Hi Group,
&g
Dowell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To:
> Sent: Sunday, June 27, 2004 8:43 PM
> Subject: [Elecraft] Re: IC-7800
>
> > Looking at the QST review of the IC-7800, a couple of things leap out. The
> > first is the keying waveform. It looks to me like this rig will have key
On Sun, Jun 27, 2004 at 09:45:21PM +0800, js wrote:
> Hi Group,
>
> First of all, I am both an ICOM and K2(s) user. Before we make any
> comparison between IC7800 and K2, I am looking forward to learning from a
> ham who really operates these two rigs. As we are all aware, sometimes
> number its
we keep our finger crossed and wait for some one who really operates
these two rigs.
73
Johnny Siu VR2XMC
s/n 1146, 3837, 4165, 4225, 4255
- Original Message -
From: "Jerry T Dowell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Sunday, June 27, 2004 8:43 PM
Subject: [Elecraft] Re: IC-780
Looking at the QST review of the IC-7800, a couple of things leap out. The
first is the keying waveform. It looks to me like this rig will have key
clicks. ICOM will probably have the same attitude as Yaesu in cleaning up
their act. Secondly, the transmit IMD is nothing to write home about. Third
o
I haven't heard one, but looking at the report, it appears they need to do
some work on the CW keying shape. Looks rather clicky to me!
It's on the web. http://www.arrl.org/members-only/prodrev/pdf/pr0408.pdf
___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraf
It's on the web. http://www.arrl.org/members-only/prodrev/pdf/pr0408.pdf
Dan / WG4S / K2 #2456
I haven't seen my QST yet. But I'll be looking for it
___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the li
Gene A. Williamson wrote:
Looking at what I consider the three most important measurements of a
receiver's contest performance -- BDR, Ip3, and IMD at 5khz spacing
-- in the new ARRL review of the IC-7800, I read the K2 as superior
in ALL THREE areas.
Thank you, thank you, thank you, N6KR and W
26 matches
Mail list logo
