RE: [Elecraft] Re: IC-7800
NC0B of Sherwood Engineering gave a great presentation on contest receivers during the Dayton 2004 Contest Forum. The data from the presentation is here. http://www.sherweng.com/presentation.html He shows the 20 KHz and 2 KHz Dynamic Range Numbers for a variety of receivers. He said the IC-7800 data was taken from ARRL measurements, not his measurements. All of the other data were his measurements. ___ 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/elecraftHelp: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
RE: [Elecraft] Re: IC-7800
Write to your division director and DEMAND that the ARRL reinstate the extended lab reports. They are discontinued in yet another misunderstanding of the demographics of WHO it is they are alienating. Bob N4HY -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of N2TK Sent: Sunday, June 27, 2004 2:45 PM To: 'Elecraft Reflector' Subject: RE: [Elecraft] Re: IC-7800 One of the local hams who is a heavy contester now has a K2, 7800, Orion and 756Pro II. Of those the only one he hasn't put through the paces yet is the 7800. So far, the Orion seems to be on top. Wonder when the in-depth ARRL report on the 7800 will be available? Would like to see what the 2KHZ spacing Dynamic Range numbers look like. ___ 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/elecraftHelp: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
Re: [Elecraft] RE: IC-7800
I keep asking myself if I really want to plunk down the bucks for one of those monsters, and the answer I give myself is "the Orion you have isn't 4 times better than the K2 (more like 1.01X), so what makes you think the IC-7800 will be 10 times better?" In my case, I'd be far better off spending half the cost of an IC-7800 on antennas; I'd definitely get the most bang for the buck that way. All I can say is if you really, really want one of those behemoths and can afford it, more power to you. Life's too short to not get what you want. Just my $0.02. 73, Bob WA4FOM ___ 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/elecraftHelp: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
[Elecraft] RE: IC-7800
Hi All, The IC-7800 is a beautiful radio--no question. I saw one at Dayton this year, and it will charm your socks off! I saw the new Yaesu there also, but no touchee--they had it in a glass case! It's beautiful too, but costs even more. To me, there are (at least) two words that apply here--"afford" and "justify". In other words, can you "afford" an IC-7800, and if you can, can you "justify" it? Some of us can do one or the other, a few can do both, but many of us can do neither. So we just marvel at it I guess. Personally, I really am at a loss to see how this radio can be 10 or 11 thousand dollars better than what we are already using. I sure hope, when the reviews on these radios come out, they focus on that aspect. But we are a nation of conspicuous consumption. And that isn't all bad! I'm as guilty as most in buying things I don't need. I won't tell you what my XYL calls me!! And don't get me wrong, if you can afford an IC-7800, and get a bunch of "utils" (a word from my college economic class which means a measurement of "utility") from owning one, go for it! But I really look forward to the debate around the campfire about how much better a radio like this can be. In addition to my K2, which I love dearly, I also have a fairly new FT-1000MP Mark V. I'm not even sure I can justify that radio, but I do get a fair amount of "utils" out of it. It has buttons I haven't even used yet! The big deal, I guess, is that it runs 200 watts, so I don't need an amp when I want to just QRO it. But it sure doesn't hear as well as my K2. My K2 really needs to be upgraded--it's an early model, and I haven't even put DSP in it yet. But even in its present state, it runs like a swiss watch. I work DX like crazy with it, even with my puny little R7 vertical--the best I can do with CC&R's around here--it isn't even "legal". If I can't work them on the K2, I can switch to the FT-1000. If that doesn't do it, well tomorrow is another day. Nope, even a gadget freak like me is going to be hard pressed to spend that much money! But I hope some of you get past the "guilt" barrier and buy one. I'm really looking forward to hearing how glad you are that you did it--and why! Dave W7AQK ___ 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/elecraftHelp: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
[Elecraft] Re: IC-7800
Hmmm ... $10,000 would buy a lot of fully loaded K2s ;-) Michael VE3WMB ___ 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/elecraftHelp: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
Re: [Elecraft] Re: IC-7800
Julian wrote: I don't need to own one to know that I get far more pleasure using a radio I built myself than operating some ready-made box of tricks packed with unnecessary bells and whistles. That, for me, is the only comparison that really matters. Jim responds: AMEN, AMEN! Ham radio lives... 73 de Jim, W4ATK K2/100 #4028 ___ 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/elecraftHelp: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
Re: [Elecraft] Re: IC-7800
I don't need to own one to know that I get far more pleasure using a radio I built myself than operating some ready-made box of tricks packed with unnecessary bells and whistles. That, for me, is the only comparison that really matters. 73, -- Julian, G4ILO. (RSGB, ARRL, G-QRP, K2 #392) G4ILO's Shack: http://www.qsl.net/g4ilo Jerry T Dowell" wrote: Hi Group, First of all, I am both an ICOM and K2(s) user. Before we make any comparison between IC7800 and K2, I am looking forward to learning from a ham who really operates these two rigs. As we are all aware, sometimes number itself is not necessarily representing the whole picture. Shall we keep our finger crossed and wait for some one who really operates these two rigs. ___ 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/elecraftHelp: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
Re: [Elecraft] Re: IC-7800
Well in all actuality its receiver does not outperform the K2, while the 7800 does have alot of bells and whistles it is still 10 times the price. Doc YI9RVT - Original Message - From: "Hisashi T Fujinaka" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Jeff Davis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: Sent: Monday, June 28, 2004 5:12 AM Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Re: IC-7800 > Well, to compare them more directly, I think you have to add a bit more > "extras" and the price and is about 3dB higher since most people aren't > looking for a QRP CW rig. > > I know I'll sound like a heretic here, but I'm planning on running 100W > almost exclusively. > > On Sun, 27 Jun 2004, Jeff Davis wrote: > > > What kind of bragging rights is it to say that for $11,000 our receiver > > is better than that of a $599 kit? > > -- > Hisashi T Fujinaka - [EMAIL PROTECTED] > BSEE(6/86) + BSChem(3/95) + BAEnglish(8/95) + MSCS(8/03) + $2.50 = latte > ___ > 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/elecraftHelp: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm > Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com > ___ 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/elecraftHelp: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
Re: Why not? (was: [Elecraft] Re: IC-7800)
On Jun 27, 2004, at 12:51 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Wayne, please take note. The KX1 pretty much defines the "little" end. Now how about a K3 with which to define the "big" end? I suggest a more ergonomic transceiver than the K2, covering contesters and DXers specific needs rather than backpacker's. Why not put to the list the question "what would be desirable in a K3?" Bill K3UJ Hi Bill, Without asking, we've already received a huge list of excellent suggestions for future rigs. I'm afraid of what might happen if we *did* ask ;) That said, feel free to send suggestions directly to me. I'm saving them up. 73, Wayne N6KR --- http://www.elecraft.com ___ 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/elecraftHelp: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
RE: [Elecraft] Re: IC-7800 vs K2
Let's not loose sight of the fact of the number of failed companies that tried to be everything to everyone. Elecraft has a nice nitch that they have deservedly carved out for themselves. Straying from that nitch by trying to compete with the rest of the crowd may not be in their best interests or ours. 73, Mike, W1USN K2 #1964 Boxford, MA USA [EMAIL PROTECTED] WN1DAE, WN1TPE, WA1TPE, NW1J, VE1/WA1TPE, DL/WA1TPE, G0/NW1J, EA7/NW1J, P4/NW1J, P4/W1USN, V31RN, 8P9CI, VP2ERN, V26NR, FS/W1USN, PJ8/W1USN, J75RN, J3/W1USN ___ 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/elecraftHelp: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
Re: [Elecraft] Re: IC-7800
Well, to compare them more directly, I think you have to add a bit more "extras" and the price and is about 3dB higher since most people aren't looking for a QRP CW rig. I know I'll sound like a heretic here, but I'm planning on running 100W almost exclusively. On Sun, 27 Jun 2004, Jeff Davis wrote: What kind of bragging rights is it to say that for $11,000 our receiver is better than that of a $599 kit? -- Hisashi T Fujinaka - [EMAIL PROTECTED] BSEE(6/86) + BSChem(3/95) + BAEnglish(8/95) + MSCS(8/03) + $2.50 = latte ___ 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/elecraftHelp: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
RE: [Elecraft] Re: IC-7800
Any comparison has to consider what the rig is used for too. Most comparisons are made by contesters. Assuming a rig that is best for contesting is best for other operating is like saying that a championship Formula 1 racing car is best vehicle for taking a drive to the grocery store. Frankly, I *hate* tiny-bandwidth pinched filters. I use the OPT1 filter for CW on my K2 more than any other filter settings. I don't care one whit if I can hear the clicks from a rig 10 feet away 25 Hz from the signal because 1) I don't operate 10 feet from another rig and 2) I believe that polite operating requires more than 25 Hz signal separation on CW. Obviously I am not trying to score the highest in a contest and I'd rather work DX that isn't at the bottom of a pileup. I could go on ad-infinitum, but I've made my point. For those who are looking for the ultimate "contest" rig, FB. Go for it and have fun. If you are looking for a rig that's fun to operate, you may want something quite different. Bottom line, don't let a "guru" tell you what's right for you unless he's doing exactly what you want to do. Even then, you might be disappointed in the results. Ron AC7AC ___ 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/elecraftHelp: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
RE: [Elecraft] Re: IC-7800
I love my K2, but the 11x price comparison number vs the 7800 offered up in a previous post is as unfair a comparison as I have seen in a long while. If the only operating you ever do is QRP CW to a resonant antenna, then the price comparison to a base K2 might be fair - for your operating tastes. Then again this is not in any way Icom's targeted user, or they would not have put 200W finals and a line cord on the rig. In fact if you try to come anywhere close to the feature set offered by the 7800, using K2 components as much as possible, you can easily spend over $5,000, and not be able to do it nearly as well as the 7800 from an operational point of view. Before you reply and tell me a fully stocked K2 is only $2,000, remember the 7800 has a completely separate 2nd receiver, a band scope, and integrated data modes. Please note that I am a K2 builder/owner and love it, and neither have a 7800 nor plan to buy one. I just hate to see such an unjustified comparison become "fact" by virtue of being unchallenged. There are many things that we can feel good about owning a K2 without going so far over the top. Using the same narrow analysis used to come up with the 11x price comparison of the 7800 to the K2, I can prove the K2 is overpriced by a factor of 30X! After all, I can build a tuna-tin for what, 20 bucks? :) <- obligatory smiley for the humor impaired. Dale N9XD ___ 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/elecraftHelp: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
RE: [Elecraft] Re: IC-7800
1600 bucks compared to 4400 or 10,000 is still a heck of a bargain. Personally, the size and ergonomics are two things I happen to like about the K2. These features are definitely on par with the IC-706 or the comparable Yeasu offerings, as far as I am concerned. If you have big hands you're going to have trouble with all of the portable/mobile type rigs. At least the K2 is not a cookie cutter rig. It's styling stands somewhat alone among it's competitors, and I kind of like that. To me it is kind of like being a new Mini Cooper owner amongst a bunch of BMW owners...looks different but there is definitely quality there. Stan Rife WD5EWA Houston, TX K2 S/N 4216 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of WQ8Q Sent: Sunday, June 27, 2004 2:22 PM To: Jeff Davis; elecraft@mailman.qth.net Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Re: IC-7800 Yeah, that's if you're comparing the "base" K2 - when you add all the options, like I have, it's upwards of $1600+ for a tricked out K2 - and it still has mediocre knobs and I still had to jury rig a circuit for fixed audio out - on a $1600 radio! The K2 is a great performing radio - but for those of us who don't care about low current drain/portability it's small size and mini-ergonomics leave a bit to be desired. Rick WQ8Q - Original Message - From: "Jeff Davis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Sunday, June 27, 2004 11:10 AM Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Re: IC-7800 On Sun, 27 Jun 2004 21:45:21 +0800, js wrote: > First of all, I am both an ICOM and K2(s) user. Before we make any > comparison between IC7800 and K2, I am looking forward to learning > from a ham who really operates these two rigs. As we are all > aware, sometimes number itself is not necessarily representing the > whole picture. I find the whole discussion just a tad bit amusing. It began with the Orion users who sure were proud that TenTec came up with a 'better' receiver than the K2. Now it seems that the Icom faithful are anxious to compare their offering to the K2. Yaesu will be next. Elecraft can't buy better promotion than this at any price. Think about it, when fully filtered to 'better' the K2 performance a user would have to spend $4400 for an Orion. That is SEVEN times the cost of a K2. The new Icom is a mere EIGHTEEN times more costly. The new Yaesu will no doubt have a similar price tag. What kind of bragging rights is it to say that for $11,000 our receiver is better than that of a $599 kit? It borders on the ridiculous to even make such comparisons unless of course you concede that the K2 has become the benchmark for amateur receiver performance--and that may very well be the case since all the "big boys" are anxious to compare their performance numbers against it. We should also consider that the K2 has apparently raised the bar for amateur receiver performance across the entire industry. The performance numbers that really distinguished the K2 were infrequently considered in the pre-K2 days. Now most all receiver reviews include them and manufacturers are focusing on improving them. That means that even non-Elecraft customers are benefiting from the 'K2 Revolution'. I just imagine that every time someone compares a $4400 Orion or an $11,000 Icom to the K2 that the staff in Aptos break out in high fives... :-) -- 73 de Jeff, KE9V K2 #524 KX1 #717 ___ 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/elecraftHelp: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com ___ 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/elecraftHelp: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com ___ 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/elecraftHelp: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
Why not? (was: [Elecraft] Re: IC-7800)
Wayne, please take note. The KX1 pretty much defines the "little" end. Now how about a K3 with which to define the "big" end? I suggest a more ergonomic transceiver than the K2, covering contesters and DXers specific needs rather than backpacker's. Why not put to the list the question "what would be desirable in a K3?" Bill K3UJ ~ >Yeah, that's if you're comparing the "base" K2 - when you add all the options, like I have, it's upwards of $1600+ for a tricked out K2 - and it still has mediocre knobs and I still had to jury rig a circuit for fixed audio out - on a $1600 radio! The K2 is a great performing radio - but for those of us who don't care about low current drain/portability it's small size and mini-ergonomics leave a bit to be desired. Rick WQ8Q ___ 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/elecraftHelp: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
Re: [Elecraft] Re: IC-7800
Yeah, that's if you're comparing the "base" K2 - when you add all the options, like I have, it's upwards of $1600+ for a tricked out K2 - and it still has mediocre knobs and I still had to jury rig a circuit for fixed audio out - on a $1600 radio! The K2 is a great performing radio - but for those of us who don't care about low current drain/portability it's small size and mini-ergonomics leave a bit to be desired. Rick WQ8Q - Original Message - From: "Jeff Davis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Sunday, June 27, 2004 11:10 AM Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Re: IC-7800 On Sun, 27 Jun 2004 21:45:21 +0800, js wrote: > First of all, I am both an ICOM and K2(s) user. Before we make any > comparison between IC7800 and K2, I am looking forward to learning > from a ham who really operates these two rigs. As we are all > aware, sometimes number itself is not necessarily representing the > whole picture. I find the whole discussion just a tad bit amusing. It began with the Orion users who sure were proud that TenTec came up with a 'better' receiver than the K2. Now it seems that the Icom faithful are anxious to compare their offering to the K2. Yaesu will be next. Elecraft can't buy better promotion than this at any price. Think about it, when fully filtered to 'better' the K2 performance a user would have to spend $4400 for an Orion. That is SEVEN times the cost of a K2. The new Icom is a mere EIGHTEEN times more costly. The new Yaesu will no doubt have a similar price tag. What kind of bragging rights is it to say that for $11,000 our receiver is better than that of a $599 kit? It borders on the ridiculous to even make such comparisons unless of course you concede that the K2 has become the benchmark for amateur receiver performance--and that may very well be the case since all the "big boys" are anxious to compare their performance numbers against it. We should also consider that the K2 has apparently raised the bar for amateur receiver performance across the entire industry. The performance numbers that really distinguished the K2 were infrequently considered in the pre-K2 days. Now most all receiver reviews include them and manufacturers are focusing on improving them. That means that even non-Elecraft customers are benefiting from the 'K2 Revolution'. I just imagine that every time someone compares a $4400 Orion or an $11,000 Icom to the K2 that the staff in Aptos break out in high fives... :-) -- 73 de Jeff, KE9V K2 #524 KX1 #717 ___ 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/elecraftHelp: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com ___ 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/elecraftHelp: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
RE: [Elecraft] Re: IC-7800
Some of you guys just have a way with words! I could not have said it as well if I took two weeks to compose it. Here Here, Jeff! Stan Rife WD5EWA Houston, TX K2 S/N 4216 -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jeff Davis Sent: Sunday, June 27, 2004 10:10 AM To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Re: IC-7800 On Sun, 27 Jun 2004 21:45:21 +0800, js wrote: > First of all, I am both an ICOM and K2(s) user. Before we make any > comparison between IC7800 and K2, I am looking forward to learning > from a ham who really operates these two rigs. As we are all > aware, sometimes number itself is not necessarily representing the > whole picture. I find the whole discussion just a tad bit amusing. It began with the Orion users who sure were proud that TenTec came up with a 'better' receiver than the K2. Now it seems that the Icom faithful are anxious to compare their offering to the K2. Yaesu will be next. Elecraft can't buy better promotion than this at any price. Think about it, when fully filtered to 'better' the K2 performance a user would have to spend $4400 for an Orion. That is SEVEN times the cost of a K2. The new Icom is a mere EIGHTEEN times more costly. The new Yaesu will no doubt have a similar price tag. What kind of bragging rights is it to say that for $11,000 our receiver is better than that of a $599 kit? It borders on the ridiculous to even make such comparisons unless of course you concede that the K2 has become the benchmark for amateur receiver performance--and that may very well be the case since all the "big boys" are anxious to compare their performance numbers against it. We should also consider that the K2 has apparently raised the bar for amateur receiver performance across the entire industry. The performance numbers that really distinguished the K2 were infrequently considered in the pre-K2 days. Now most all receiver reviews include them and manufacturers are focusing on improving them. That means that even non-Elecraft customers are benefiting from the 'K2 Revolution'. I just imagine that every time someone compares a $4400 Orion or an $11,000 Icom to the K2 that the staff in Aptos break out in high fives... :-) -- 73 de Jeff, KE9V K2 #524 KX1 #717 ___ 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/elecraftHelp: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com ___ 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/elecraftHelp: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
Re: [Elecraft] Re: IC-7800
On Sun, 27 Jun 2004 21:45:21 +0800, js wrote: > First of all, I am both an ICOM and K2(s) user. Before we make any > comparison between IC7800 and K2, I am looking forward to learning > from a ham who really operates these two rigs. As we are all > aware, sometimes number itself is not necessarily representing the > whole picture. I find the whole discussion just a tad bit amusing. It began with the Orion users who sure were proud that TenTec came up with a 'better' receiver than the K2. Now it seems that the Icom faithful are anxious to compare their offering to the K2. Yaesu will be next. Elecraft can't buy better promotion than this at any price. Think about it, when fully filtered to 'better' the K2 performance a user would have to spend $4400 for an Orion. That is SEVEN times the cost of a K2. The new Icom is a mere EIGHTEEN times more costly. The new Yaesu will no doubt have a similar price tag. What kind of bragging rights is it to say that for $11,000 our receiver is better than that of a $599 kit? It borders on the ridiculous to even make such comparisons unless of course you concede that the K2 has become the benchmark for amateur receiver performance--and that may very well be the case since all the "big boys" are anxious to compare their performance numbers against it. We should also consider that the K2 has apparently raised the bar for amateur receiver performance across the entire industry. The performance numbers that really distinguished the K2 were infrequently considered in the pre-K2 days. Now most all receiver reviews include them and manufacturers are focusing on improving them. That means that even non-Elecraft customers are benefiting from the 'K2 Revolution'. I just imagine that every time someone compares a $4400 Orion or an $11,000 Icom to the K2 that the staff in Aptos break out in high fives... :-) -- 73 de Jeff, KE9V K2 #524 KX1 #717 ___ 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/elecraftHelp: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
RE: [Elecraft] Re: IC-7800
One of the local hams who is a heavy contester now has a K2, 7800, Orion and 756Pro II. Of those the only one he hasn't put through the paces yet is the 7800. So far, the Orion seems to be on top. Wonder when the in-depth ARRL report on the 7800 will be available? Would like to see what the 2KHZ spacing Dynamic Range numbers look like. I like my K2/100. It works great. It is a very good value for the quality of the receiver. It's great to put in my brief case for Dxpediitons. It's great to have around in case my main rig should fail. I can hook it up to a battery if I need to get on the air in an emergency. I do use it as an outboard receiver for my rain rig. But in certain areas it is not as good as the high price rigs. I like to be able to listen in stereo when chasing DX that is operating split. I like to be able to listen to another band while working stuff on a different band. I like full QSK on CW. Some think it is okay to pay the higher price of the other rigs for those features. One other point - One feature of the K2 is the continuing upgrade program. On the FT1000 series and the Orion there are now second source upgrades to improve dynamic range, key clicks, etc. So, even though Yaesu and Ten-Tec haven't come out with the upgrades themselves, the after market has developed upgrades for these rigs. It's kind of like what Elecraft has done, but in there case they are also marketing many of the upgrades. By the way, I would not want a Cavalier. #3481 N2TK, Tony -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Kenneth E. Harker Sent: Sunday, June 27, 2004 10:02 AM To: Elecraft Reflector Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Re: IC-7800 On Sun, Jun 27, 2004 at 09:45:21PM +0800, js wrote: > Hi Group, > > First of all, I am both an ICOM and K2(s) user. Before we make any > comparison between IC7800 and K2, I am looking forward to learning from a > ham who really operates these two rigs. As we are all aware, sometimes > number itself is not necessarily representing the whole picture. At Ham-Com last weekend, an Icom rep was heard to mention that at least 125 Icom IC-7800s have been sold in the USA so far, but that they were still back-ordered and waiting for more units to ship from Japan. Someone on another list I'm on pointed out that a savvy negotiator could probably buy a brand-new Chevrolet Cavalier (with racing stripes) and have an Elecraft K2 installed in it for the same price as an Icom IC-7800. -- Kenneth E. Harker WM5R [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.kenharker.com/ ___ 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/elecraftHelp: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com ___ 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/elecraftHelp: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
Re: [Elecraft] Re: IC-7800
Well, Whoever that might be will need lots of money. I have never used Icom but love my K2. Seems to me that measurements are the only objective way to compare rigs. Actually whatever is determined my the" experts" I will not stop using my K2. Not very scientific but just the way I feel. Jimmy, AE4DT js wrote: > Hi Group, > > First of all, I am both an ICOM and K2(s) user. Before we make any > comparison between IC7800 and K2, I am looking forward to learning from a > ham who really operates these two rigs. As we are all aware, sometimes > number itself is not necessarily representing the whole picture. > > Shall we keep our finger crossed and wait for some one who really operates > these two rigs. > > 73 > > Johnny Siu VR2XMC > s/n 1146, 3837, 4165, 4225, 4255 > > - Original Message - > From: "Jerry T Dowell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: > Sent: Sunday, June 27, 2004 8:43 PM > Subject: [Elecraft] Re: IC-7800 > > > Looking at the QST review of the IC-7800, a couple of things leap out. The > > first is the keying waveform. It looks to me like this rig will have key > > clicks. ICOM will probably have the same attitude as Yaesu in cleaning up > > their act. Secondly, the transmit IMD is nothing to write home about. > Third > > order only 23 dB down from a single tone, really marginal in my opinion. > > Especially for a $10,000 radio. > > > > I will stick with my K2, thank you. > > > > Jerry AI6L > > ___ > 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/elecraftHelp: > http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm > Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com ___ 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/elecraftHelp: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
Re: [Elecraft] Re: IC-7800
On Sun, Jun 27, 2004 at 09:45:21PM +0800, js wrote: > Hi Group, > > First of all, I am both an ICOM and K2(s) user. Before we make any > comparison between IC7800 and K2, I am looking forward to learning from a > ham who really operates these two rigs. As we are all aware, sometimes > number itself is not necessarily representing the whole picture. At Ham-Com last weekend, an Icom rep was heard to mention that at least 125 Icom IC-7800s have been sold in the USA so far, but that they were still back-ordered and waiting for more units to ship from Japan. Someone on another list I'm on pointed out that a savvy negotiator could probably buy a brand-new Chevrolet Cavalier (with racing stripes) and have an Elecraft K2 installed in it for the same price as an Icom IC-7800. -- Kenneth E. Harker WM5R [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.kenharker.com/ ___ 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/elecraftHelp: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
Re: [Elecraft] Re: IC-7800
Hi Group, First of all, I am both an ICOM and K2(s) user. Before we make any comparison between IC7800 and K2, I am looking forward to learning from a ham who really operates these two rigs. As we are all aware, sometimes number itself is not necessarily representing the whole picture. Shall we keep our finger crossed and wait for some one who really operates these two rigs. 73 Johnny Siu VR2XMC s/n 1146, 3837, 4165, 4225, 4255 - Original Message - From: "Jerry T Dowell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Sunday, June 27, 2004 8:43 PM Subject: [Elecraft] Re: IC-7800 > Looking at the QST review of the IC-7800, a couple of things leap out. The > first is the keying waveform. It looks to me like this rig will have key > clicks. ICOM will probably have the same attitude as Yaesu in cleaning up > their act. Secondly, the transmit IMD is nothing to write home about. Third > order only 23 dB down from a single tone, really marginal in my opinion. > Especially for a $10,000 radio. > > I will stick with my K2, thank you. > > Jerry AI6L ___ 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/elecraftHelp: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
[Elecraft] Re: IC-7800
Looking at the QST review of the IC-7800, a couple of things leap out. The first is the keying waveform. It looks to me like this rig will have key clicks. ICOM will probably have the same attitude as Yaesu in cleaning up their act. Secondly, the transmit IMD is nothing to write home about. Third order only 23 dB down from a single tone, really marginal in my opinion. Especially for a $10,000 radio. I will stick with my K2, thank you. Jerry AI6L ___ 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/elecraftHelp: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
FW: [Elecraft] Re: IC-7800 vs K2
I haven't heard one, but looking at the report, it appears they need to do some work on the CW keying shape. Looks rather clicky to me! It's on the web. http://www.arrl.org/members-only/prodrev/pdf/pr0408.pdf ___ 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/elecraftHelp: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
[Elecraft] Re: IC-7800 vs K2
It's on the web. http://www.arrl.org/members-only/prodrev/pdf/pr0408.pdf Dan / WG4S / K2 #2456 I haven't seen my QST yet. But I'll be looking for it ___ 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/elecraftHelp: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
[Elecraft] Re: IC-7800 vs K2
Gene A. Williamson wrote: Looking at what I consider the three most important measurements of a receiver's contest performance -- BDR, Ip3, and IMD at 5khz spacing -- in the new ARRL review of the IC-7800, I read the K2 as superior in ALL THREE areas. Thank you, thank you, thank you, N6KR and WA6HHQ. Gene, I haven't seen my QST yet. But I'll be looking for it ;) We'll add the new data to our rig comparison table on Monday. 73, Wayne N6KR --- http://www.elecraft.com ___ 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/elecraftHelp: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
