Re: [Elecraft_K3] New overview with K3/K3S, November 2015
I would normally say that we need 3 kHz channel spacing to not bother each other with QSOs. Also transmit IMD splatter is almost always worse than the dynamic range of most receivers at 3 kHz spacing. I have never used an FT-920, so I have no idea how well or poorly it works. My old standby rig is an IC-781 with the stock 10.695 MHz and 455 kHz filters, no FL-44A upgrade and of course no DSP. My TS-990S was better from the standpoint of filter selectivity on 10 meters during CQ WW SSB last weekend than my 781 on 15 meters. (I moved chairs to change band !) Obviously differences in selectivity is significant from one rig to another. If I had a K3 or K3S, I would also install the 2.1 kHz roofing filter and dial in the DSP as needed. In my case in the contest with 418 Qs on 10 meters, the Kenwood did very well with a 2.7 kHz roofing filter and DSP set to 2.3 kHz. Is the K3/K3S a better rig in a worst-case CW pile-up? Absolutely.
I am not knocking the K3 in any way, and have used it several times in contests. It is even better now, and upgradable, which rarely if ever happens with a JA rig. My only puzzlement with your example is how you can operate a 2-kHz QSO spacing and not have the QRM in passband, let alone the IMD splatter in passband.
From: Elecraft_K3@... [mailto:Elecraft_K3@...]
* On 2015 31 Oct 09:07 -0500, Rob Sherwood. rob@... [Elecraft_K3] wrote:
If this email is spam, report it to www.OnlyMyEmail.com