What held me back from completing my K3 order was the small
front panel. I played with one in Aptos and decided that while I'd much
prefer
a larger panel with more space between the knobs, the K3 would work.
I've most recently owned an Orion, an Omni VI+ and an Omni VII.
I tend to like big
Modern radios do malfunction in such a way that repair of them is likely beyond
the capability of most owners, unless the radio came from Elecraft.
Should such an event occur with your radio, would you rather pack and ship back
to the factory a brick (Icom, etc), or a feather (A K3 module). T
g - or not - on the air.
73 Art
Message: 51
Date: Fri, 16 May 2008 12:26:48 -0400
From: Bill Tippett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: [Elecraft] The K3 in comparison to the Big Guns
K6XT wrote:
>I note that the 7800 first appeared with something like a
6KHz first IF filter, got hammere
K6XT wrote:
>I note that the 7800 first appeared with something like a
6KHz first IF filter, got hammered in the press, eham etc. for lousy
close-in performance, and quickly added a 3KHz 1st IF filter option.
Bzzzt...you forgot Icom's advertising formula!
Their 6 kHz filter is actually 1
same here, I was going for the FT-2000 before the K3 announcement -
that changed a lot of things, including having the space to put it on
my desk
--
If you must play, decide on three things at the start: the rules of the
game, the stakes, and the quitting time. -Chinese Proverb
On 16 May 2008
I've been following the 'big gun' thread with interest. I'm astonished that
this group seems to imply that 'big gun' status depends upon the radio you
own, rather than the amplifiers and antennas you use. Most rigs today put
out between 100-200 watts, regardless of price. DX'ing and contesting
succ
I think that's an unreasonable statement Joe. Please have another read of my
initial post. I didn't make any such assumption, I merely questioned the
relative cost and performance of some radios.
No 73's for you.
Shane.
Joe Stofko-2 wrote:
>
> Hi Dave,
>
> Right you are! Actually, Sh
Hi Dave,
Right you are! Actually, Shane's thinking
is a bit flawed. He equates performance with product
price and weight. And, neither should be part
of the criteria. We have, sadly, become the victims
of marketing. We are slammed with it every day.
The product that costs more, MUST (so
Simon Brown (HB9DRV) wrote:
>
> IC-7800 height or even a tad more. I'm not a fan of making radios as small
> as possible.
Perhaps not, but a lot of people don't have the luxury of large rooms to
operate in. With the box room I have to use, I wouldn't have the space for
an IC-7400 even if I coul
IC-7800 height or even a tad more. I'm not a fan of making radios as small
as possible.
Simon Brown, HB9DRV
--
From: "David Ferrington, M0XDF" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
How many units high?
On 16 May 2008, at 09:43, Simon Brown (HB9DRV) wrote:
I
Simon, they might have been even more delighted with a K3! (We shall never
know.)
If being sold out is a measure of satisfaction, I shouldn think the K3's
order backlog would put it at the top of the list :-)
73 to all
Geoff
G3UCK
- Original Message -
From: "Simon Brown (HB9DRV)
IMO one area where the IC-7700 and co. win out is in ergonomics, especially
for those of us who are members of the Terminally Bewildered club (tired
eyes, colour blindness). Given the extra real estate this may seem like a
daft comparison, but the FTDX-9000's tuning knob(s) and the IC-7700 /
IC
12 matches
Mail list logo
