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
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.):
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
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
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
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
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,
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
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
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
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
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
It's on the web. http://www.arrl.org/members-only/prodrev/pdf/pr0408.pdf
Dan / WG4S / K2 #2456
snip
I haven't seen my QST yet. But I'll be looking for it
/snip
___
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post
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!
snip
It's on the web. http://www.arrl.org/members-only/prodrev/pdf/pr0408.pdf
/snip
___
Elecraft mailing list
Post
14 matches
Mail list logo
