I think it is correct to say the basic k4 does not exceed the K3 raw performance (based on the Sherwood engineering standard) but I think the results are pretty close for practical purposes. I would not say the K4 is materially worse. I think it would be up to individual K3 owners to decide whether to sell and pay the difference for an upgrade.
I looked at pricing for the Yaesu stuff and the comparable dual receiver model comes out at $4700. Their 200 watt version is advertised at $5200. We don't really know how much the superhet option will cost but what if it was a grand more, that would put the top of the line K4HD at $5000. At that level I would look more at a full feature comparison before I reached a conclusion about which is a better deal. I don't have full information on pricing and options so I don't know if my numbers are off. We are dealing with a US company versus foreign made and that may also be a factor. I also suspect Elecraft could in the future come out with a scaled down model that has only one receiver and that could become a lower cost option. -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of David Gilbert Sent: Tuesday, June 8, 2021 12:08 PM To: Elecraft <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Giving Up Except that the K4 (not K4HD) does not equal the K3 for raw performance. The K4HD with equivalent performance and accessories is going to cost a fortune, with the extra cost going mostly into creature features. And you're forgetting comparison to rigs from other manufacturers. If you create a sliding scale of cost versus performance for various rigs, Elecraft doesn't come out on top on any rig anymore. Dave AB7E On 6/8/2021 10:25 AM, KENT TRIMBLE wrote: > Not so, Doug. > > My K3, including accessories and filters, was $4,500 in 2007. That's > $5,722 in today's dollars. > > A K4 with all its advanced technology at $4,600 (your quote) is a > steal compared to a K3. > > The word "expensive" can be applied to the K4 (or any product) only > when answering the question, "compared to what?" Otherwise it has no > meaning. Nothing is expensive or inexpensive on its own. The word > has relevance only when comparing the price of two or more products. > > 73, > > Kent K9ZTV > > > On 6/7/2021 9:33 PM, Doug Person, KØDXV, wrote: >> ... With a tuner the [K4] price is $4600 making it one of the most >> expensive transceivers on the market ... When the K3 came out it was >> very competitively priced. I'm not sure I would describe the K4 with >> the same words. It is unquestionably an expensive radio. > . > > ______________________________________________________________ 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]
