> > Main fun of the K1 and KX1 is building them :-) > Well, that is fun. But it is also fun to "do much with little".
Work VK with a K3S - nice. Work VK with a KX1 - thats gives a kind of "Wow!" feeling. I'm just saying there is a lot of gratification working with limited gear. Chip AE5KA On Thu, Jul 7, 2016 at 2:22 PM, Phil Wheeler <[email protected]> wrote: > Main fun of the K1 and KX1 is building them :-) > > Phil W7OX > > On 7/7/16 11:07 AM, Mike Morrow [email protected] [KX3] wrote: > >> >> Barry wrote: >> >> > ...I would have preferred the K1, but I don't believe Elecraft is >> > selling that anymore. >> >> The K1 is still sold...see http://www.elecraft.com/k1_page.htm . The K1 >> remains an excellent small CW-only transceiver. However, the four-band >> KFL1-4 filter board has been unavailable for a couple of years. >> >> The original posting in this thread contrasted the KX1 vs. KX2 or KX3. If >> RF performance mattered, where the K1 is clearly superior to the KX1, the >> 16-year-old K1 deserves honorable mention among small QRP transceivers: >> (1) The K1 uses an LC VFO that is cleaner than the DDS frequency >> generation scheme of the KX1. This reduces transmitter spurious output, and >> improves receiver performance because fewer spur frequencies are part of >> the local oscillator signal fed to the front-end mixer. >> (2) The K1 can be placed on any of the HF bands, although Elecraft sells >> parts for 80m through 15m only. The KX1 DDS chip is clocked at its maximum >> rate of 50 MHz, which limits KX1 highest frequency coverage to around those >> of 20m band. >> (3) The K1 IF uses a four-pole crystal filter...the KX1 IF uses >> three-pole. This makes a very noticeable difference in selectivity. >> (4) The KAT1 produces a larger number of configurations (1020) of >> impedance than the KXAT1 (124). (It's of note that the KXAT2 produces 32764 >> different network configurations, 264 *times* the number of the KXAT1. The >> KXAT3 produces 131068 configurations, 1057 times the KXAT1.) >> (5) Many find continuous K1 LC VFO tuning more natural than step-wise KX1 >> DDS tuning. >> (6) The K1 has a noise blanker option...the KX1 does not. >> (7) The K1 transmitter can produce up to seven watts of output power. The >> KX1 is about half that...at best. >> (8) The K1 case has a speaker...the KX1 does not. >> >> OTOH, the KX1 is clearly superior in terms of VFO stability. It is >> superior in its span of frequency coverage within the limits of the DDS. It >> can switch between USB and LSB receive mode due to the frequency agility of >> the DDS as local oscillator. It has neat features like audio feedback to >> controls. It is smaller and lighter. >> >> With respect to the KX1 vs. KX2 or KX3, the gulf in capability and >> performance is so great as to render the question absurd. The only >> advantage to the KX1 over the KX2 is that Elecraft provides a schematic for >> the KX1...something that very noticeably withheld for the KX2 and its >> accessories. That implies the customer is an "appliance operator". >> >> Mike / KK5F >> >> __._,_.___ >> >> > ______________________________________________________________ > 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 > Message delivered to [email protected] > ______________________________________________________________ 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 Message delivered to [email protected]
