On 4/8/2011 06:51, Jim Brown wrote: > On 4/7/2011 6:18 PM, Johnny Siu wrote: >> IMHO, ATU is nearly a must. > > That depends a lot on your style of operating, your antennas, your > budget, and how much power you are willing to give away in the antenna > tuner. ARRL lab tests have shown that some antenna tuners are a lot more > efficient than others. > > > 73, Jim K9YC
Indeed. The biggest losses generally occur with attempts to match low impedance antennas. That usually means trying to match an electrically short antenna. I suspect that is pretty common application. Having the tuner remote eliminates most of the feedline loss but not this impedance matching loss. Personally I'm not interested in having 100 -150 watts (out of the KPA's 500) disappear as heat in the tuner. I'd wait and see how the KAT-3 stacks up loss wise for the type of antenna situation you have. 73 de Brian/K3KO ----- No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 10.0.1209 / Virus Database: 1500/3559 - Release Date: 04/08/11 ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[email protected] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
