Jeremy wrote: >I know the KX1 is more portable but I am wondering specifically >about the receiver performance between the two.
If properly built, the K1 has a somewhat better receiver than the KX1 in most areas. The advantages of the K1 receiver over that of the KX1 are: (1) Bands of operation. The K1 offers 15m in addition to the bands on the KX1. This is important, even in waning solar cycles, because when it's open 15m is one of the finest of QRP bands. An additional two-band board will let you add 80m and 17m. The clocking limitations of the direct digital synthesis (DDS) chip in the KX1 prevent operation on bands much above 20m. (2) Receiver I.F. filtering. The K1 has a four-pole crystal filter. The KX1 has a three-pole filter. (3) More natural tuning. The K1 has an LC VFO which tunes as fast or as slow as you turn the dial. The KX1 has step-wise DDS tuning, with manually selectable tuning steps. Not as natural, IMHO. (4) Cleaner RF response since the K1 has an LC VFO for its local oscillator (LO). The KX1 uses a DDS (without PLL) for the LO. All DDS generation schemes (except DDS-locked PLL systems) have spurious outputs which adversely affect recever performance. (5) Good internal speaker on the K1. No speaker on the KX1. I don't like to be tied to the radio with a headset if I'm just casually listening to a QSO. (6) Front mounted controls. I hate top mounted controls, except as a concession to simplifying the design and reducing the cost of a rig. I do not consider them "trail friendly." In the transmitter arena, the K1 offers higher power output if needed, lower spurious output (that DDS thing again), and most importantly the K1 ATU (KAT1) is a considerably wider range tuner compared to that of the KX1. However, in real life, whether you will notice some of these K1 advantages is open to question. The KX1 is indeed a fine little rig. Some of the KX1 advantges over the K1 are: (1) DDS gives crystal-like temperature stability, far better than the K1 (though the K1 is much better in this area than I would have expected for its LC VFO). (2) The KX1 can tune a wide segment of the HF spectrum and can thus serve as a small shortwave receiver for other things besides ham radio (SW broadcast stations and utility stations, etc.). The K1 covers only only the CW segments of its ham bands. (3) The KX1 receiver can function in either LSB or USB mode. You can tune the phone portion of 40m and 20m with it. The K1 receiver can only function in LSB mode. (4) A host of nice bells and whistles, like lighted frequency display, and audio annunciation (can be operated blind). The K1 has neither. (5) Very small bulk and light weight, even compared to the K1 (unless you start making extras like an external speaker for your KX1). I chose the K1 five years ago, three years before the KX1 became available. I would still chose it today, but I can understand the popularity of the KX1 especially if 15m isn't required. You can hardly go wrong either way. 73, Mike / KK5F _______________________________________________ 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
