No Wayne, You are not biased at all. Numbers are numbers above a certain trashold is hard to feel the difference in real traffic, you won't feel 1 or 2 dB difference in DR but you'll feel a lot in AGC response...a looooot. The strenght of K3 is the huge flexibility in AGC settings plus the unique static noise tolerance in AGC loop feature. Regardless the 2KHz DR the contest conditions are far more complex than two carriers testing and is very hard to draw a conclusion after one day or one month of operating. So far today I use my K3 90% of time in CW and 40-50% in SSB/digital and just maybe less than 10% in CW with FT5K and little bit over 50% in SSB/Digital. I am trying to monitor my operating "behaviour" in time and to draw a kind of dynamic graph of usage. Is interesting first few weeks the proportion was oposite. K3 maybe less than 10%...why? due lack of knowledge. This is why I said is hard to love the K3 in the first day of use, learning curve is waaay longer, requires extensive reading. ON4UN low band DX and KE7X are my bibles.....and still discover thing. Is fascinating. I would recomand everyone to read this books before order K3, you'll save some time.
VE3GNO/YO3GJC Daniel ________________________________ From: Wayne Burdick <[email protected]> To: Adrian <[email protected]> Cc: [email protected]; [email protected] Sent: Saturday, March 24, 2012 8:47:54 PM Subject: [Elecraft_K3] Re: [Elecraft] Unfair Comparison? I can't speak for the test conditions used here, but for an independent comparison of most ham transceivers, see: http://www.sherweng.com/table.html Sherwood sorts his table by 2-kHz (close-spaced) dynamic range. The K3 and FT5000 have the top spots. I'm still not entirely sure why Rob put the FT-5000 above the K3, given that they tied on narrow-banded IMDDR3 and the K3 had the better numbers in nearly all other categories. But then, as anyone on the list will tell you, I'm hopelessly biased. 73, Wayne N6KR On Mar 24, 2012, at 5:25 PM, Adrian wrote: > Please have a look at; > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DI8T-K64LAY > > It seems an unfair test with the K3 filter settings much narrower than > the 590. The 590 sounds noisier despite the extra S level. > > These guys seem to think its proof the 590 outperforms the K3, > but I don't think it's a fair test. Comments? > > Adrian ... vk4tux > > __________________________________________________________ > 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 __._,_.___ Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post | Start a New Topic Messages in this topic (4) Recent Activity: * New Members 6 Visit Your Group Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use . __,_._,___ ______________________________________________________________ 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
