Date   

Re: [Elecraft_K3] Re: Rig ergonomics and performance comparison

Tom Whiteside <tomw@...>
 

Bandpass filters depending on the type buy you from 30 to 50dB - I can't imagine a serious multi-multi contest station not using these filters regardless of the radio type... Having said that, our K2 had zero problems hearing other stations in our North American Field Day a couple of weekends ago and the other brand X radios could not say the same thing... This was 100W stations... I hope to have a K3 to add to the K2 for our effort next year.... Had we been running 1500W, even with the separation we had, I'm sure we would have had some effects on even the K2...

I've tried using my subreceiver on my Orion I in diversity mode in 160M contests with terrible results - even using lower input Beverages for the subrx and using the transmit antennas on the much more robust main rx.... This technique works great for DXing but all the overload products on the poorer subrx graphically demonstrate the vagaries of overload products... Now with a K3....

It will be interesting, indeed!

Tom N5TW

----- Original Message -----
From: CR
To: Elecraft_K3@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, July 06, 2007 5:09 PM
Subject: [Elecraft_K3] Re: Rig ergonomics and performance comparison


It will be interesting to see if the Elecraft K3 needs external
bandpass filters when used in a multi multi contest environment.
Considering what the cost is for a full set of W3NQN filters, it
certainly make the K3 a popular if you dont have this additional cost
or weight to carry around on an expedition or in contest station.

I also wonder if a Tracking Preselector will become a future option
for the K3. The Yaesu U tune preselector is a great feature although
old hat! However if the K3's front end is bullet proof it would be
hard to justify the additional expense and marginal performance gain
from a preselector. When bad IMD, Keyclicks and phase noise dominate
the value of such filters is questionable. However it might be handy
in places like Europe. Its going to be torturous operating a perfect
receiver like the K3 and hearing the good, the bad and the ugly
knowing very well its not your receiver when you hear the bad!

Such is the price of perfection!

Craig
VK3HE


Re: [Elecraft_K3] Re: Rig ergonomics and performance comparison

G3SJJ <g3sjj@...>
 

Craig, I think I am correct in saying that the various bandpass filters available, eg ICE, Dunestar were created to reduce tx phase noise from adjacent current design radios in MO and SO2R setups. I have a pair of the Dunestar 600s here and they do just that, although antenna separation plays a big part also. We used them for several years in our GU8D operation in the IOTA Contest and they were very effective.

One of the things that has impressed me in the K3 discussions was the in-band close-in figures. A couple of years ago we did some in-band checks here using 2 FT1kMPs with roofing filters and tx amps. I haven't got the actual data to hand but with mono band antennas on 20m separated by 70m, we were able to operate SSB and CW to within about 100KHz. I wouldn't have thought the Dunestars would have made any difference but I honestly cannot remember.

I'm looking forward to getting my K3 shortly to do some more tests. In particular at the beginning of October we have the RSGB 21/28MHz Contest which I won last year using just the MP. This year I am intending to run SO2R with the MP and K3 and will be looking to do in-band dual mode as well as dual band. That should be interesting.

73 Chris G3SJJ


CR wrote:


It will be interesting to see if the Elecraft K3 needs external
bandpass filters when used in a multi multi contest environment.
Considering what the cost is for a full set of W3NQN filters, it
certainly make the K3 a popular if you dont have this additional cost
or weight to carry around on an expedition or in contest station.

I also wonder if a Tracking Preselector will become a future option
for the K3. The Yaesu U tune preselector is a great feature although
old hat! However if the K3's front end is bullet proof it would be
hard to justify the additional expense and marginal performance gain
from a preselector. When bad IMD, Keyclicks and phase noise dominate
the value of such filters is questionable. However it might be handy
in places like Europe. Its going to be torturous operating a perfect
receiver like the K3 and hearing the good, the bad and the ugly
knowing very well its not your receiver when you hear the bad!

Such is the price of perfection!

Craig
VK3HE

--- In Elecraft_K3@yahoogroups.com <mailto:Elecraft_K3%40yahoogroups.com>, "Jon Pellant" <w1jp@...> wrote:

Thanks for your feedback. I trust my gut instincts sometimes and my gut
made me blindly order a K3. I trust I won't be dissappointed.

Jon
w1jp

--- In Elecraft_K3@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:Elecraft_K3%40yahoogroups.com>, Rick <mrfarm@> wrote:

Assuming you like the ergonomics of a given rig, the one parameter
that
I look at the most is the close-in IMD3 (Third Order Intermodulation
Distortion).

Currently <snip/>


Re: Rig ergonomics and performance comparison

Eric Swartz - WA6HHQ, Elecraft
 

The K3 transmits through both bandpass filters (before the final
amplifier stages) and through low pass filters after the PAs.

The bandpass filters do an excellent job of removing out of band noise
generated in earlier stages. The low pass filters afer the PA remove
any hamonic energy generated in the final PA stages.

73,
Eric WA6HHQ
Elecraft

--- In Elecraft_K3@yahoogroups.com, "CR" <vk3he@...> wrote:

Hi Chris

I was incorrect, the K3 uses lowpass filters and not bandpass filters
in the TX chain, so they are still needed. However with the great
IMD dynamic range figures that most are expecting its only in cases
where you have 2 transmitters on the same band where the receiver will
be challenged. Until we see what the phase noise performance of the K3
is like we can only presume that it will be good and this wont be a
issue.

I do believe that the W3NQN filters have very good performance, they
are so good in fact that its possible to use a dual band yagi on the
same boom and receive on one band while another station is
transmitting on another band.

Most people use the bandpass filters to null the second harmonic.
Several stations use stubs along with these filters for added
attenuation. Phase noise especially if its very bad will also be
reduced, however i would think that most multi multi contest stations
would avoid using radios with poor phase noise performance. If
a receiver is phase noisy it follows that the transmitter would
probably also have a bad case of phase noise on transmit.


I feel confident that the K3 will deliver.

Craig

--- In Elecraft_K3@yahoogroups.com, G3SJJ <g3sjj@> wrote:

Craig, I think I am correct in saying that the various bandpass
filters
available, eg ICE, Dunestar were created to reduce tx phase noise
from
adjacent current design radios in MO and SO2R setups. I have a
pair of
the Dunestar 600s here and they do just that, although antenna
separation plays a big part also. We used them for several years
in our
GU8D operation in the IOTA Contest and they were very effective.

One of the things that has impressed me in the K3 discussions was the
in-band close-in figures. A couple of years ago we did some in-band
checks here using 2 FT1kMPs with roofing filters and tx amps. I
haven't
got the actual data to hand but with mono band antennas on 20m
separated
by 70m, we were able to operate SSB and CW to within about 100KHz. I
wouldn't have thought the Dunestars would have made any difference
but I
honestly cannot remember.

I'm looking forward to getting my K3 shortly to do some more
tests. In
particular at the beginning of October we have the RSGB 21/28MHz
Contest
which I won last year using just the MP. This year I am intending to
run
SO2R with the MP and K3 and will be looking to do in-band dual
mode as
well as dual band. That should be interesting.

73 Chris G3SJJ


CR wrote:

It will be interesting to see if the Elecraft K3 needs external
bandpass filters when used in a multi multi contest environment.
Considering what the cost is for a full set of W3NQN filters, it
certainly make the K3 a popular if you dont have this additional
cost
or weight to carry around on an expedition or in contest station.

I also wonder if a Tracking Preselector will become a future option
for the K3. The Yaesu U tune preselector is a great feature although
old hat! However if the K3's front end is bullet proof it would be
hard to justify the additional expense and marginal performance gain
from a preselector. When bad IMD, Keyclicks and phase noise dominate
the value of such filters is questionable. However it might be handy
in places like Europe. Its going to be torturous operating a perfect
receiver like the K3 and hearing the good, the bad and the ugly
knowing very well its not your receiver when you hear the bad!

Such is the price of perfection!

Craig
VK3HE

--- In Elecraft_K3@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:Elecraft_K3%40yahoogroups.com>, "Jon Pellant" <w1jp@> wrote:

Thanks for your feedback. I trust my gut instincts sometimes and
my gut
made me blindly order a K3. I trust I won't be dissappointed.

Jon
w1jp

--- In Elecraft_K3@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:Elecraft_K3%40yahoogroups.com>, Rick <mrfarm@> wrote:

Assuming you like the ergonomics of a given rig, the one
parameter
that
I look at the most is the close-in IMD3 (Third Order
Intermodulation
Distortion).

Currently <snip/>


Re: Rig ergonomics and performance comparison

Eric Swartz - WA6HHQ, Elecraft
 

Hmmm - That must be a new form of energy ;-) Of course I meant
'harmonic'.

73, Eric


--- In Elecraft_K3@yahoogroups.com, "Eric C. Swartz"
<wa6hhq_lists@...> wrote:
.... The low pass filters afer the PA remove
any hamonic energy generated in the final PA stages.


Re: [Elecraft_K3] Re: Rig ergonomics and performance comparison

G3SJJ <g3sjj@...>
 

All the hamonic energy comes from this Reflector Eric!!

73 Chris G3SJJ


Eric C. Swartz wrote:


Hmmm - That must be a new form of energy ;-) Of course I meant
'harmonic'.

73, Eric

--- In Elecraft_K3@yahoogroups.com <mailto:Elecraft_K3%40yahoogroups.com>, "Eric C. Swartz"
<wa6hhq_lists@...> wrote:
.... The low pass filters afer the PA remove
any hamonic energy generated in the final PA stages.


Re: [Elecraft_K3] Re: Rig ergonomics and performance comparison

G3SJJ <g3sjj@...>
 

Interesting data Craig.


Chris G3SJJ



CR wrote:



Chris

Data from the ON4UN Low Band Handbook.

W3NQN 40 meter Bandpass filter second harmonic suppression >80db
Dunestar 50db
Ice 32db

Theres tables there for the other bands in all cases the W3NQN filters
are superior.

Craig
VK3HE

--- In Elecraft_K3@yahoogroups.com <mailto:Elecraft_K3%40yahoogroups.com>, G3SJJ <g3sjj@...> wrote:

Craig, I think I am correct in saying that the various bandpass filters
available, eg ICE, Dunestar were created to reduce tx phase noise from
adjacent current design radios in MO and SO2R setups. I have a pair of
the Dunestar 600s here and they do just that, although antenna
separation plays a big part also. We used them for several years in our
GU8D operation in the IOTA Contest and they were very effective.

One of the things that has impressed me in the K3 discussions was the
in-band close-in figures. A couple of years ago we did some in-band
checks here using 2 FT1kMPs with roofing filters and tx amps. I haven't
got the actual data to hand but with mono band antennas on 20m
separated
by 70m, we were able to operate SSB and CW to within about 100KHz. I
wouldn't have thought the Dunestars would have made any difference
but I
honestly cannot remember.

I'm looking forward to getting my K3 shortly to do some more tests. In
particular at the beginning of October we have the RSGB 21/28MHz
Contest
which I won last year using just the MP. This year I am intending to
run
SO2R with the MP and K3 and will be looking to do in-band dual mode as
well as dual band. That should be interesting.

73 Chris G3SJJ


CR wrote:

It will be interesting to see if the Elecraft K3 needs external
bandpass filters when used in a multi multi contest environment.
Considering what the cost is for a full set of W3NQN filters, it
certainly make the K3 a popular if you dont have this additional cost
or weight to carry around on an expedition or in contest station.

I also wonder if a Tracking Preselector will become a future option
for the K3. The Yaesu U tune preselector is a great feature although
old hat! However if the K3's front end is bullet proof it would be
hard to justify the additional expense and marginal performance gain
from a preselector. When bad IMD, Keyclicks and phase noise dominate
the value of such filters is questionable. However it might be handy
in places like Europe. Its going to be torturous operating a perfect
receiver like the K3 and hearing the good, the bad and the ugly
knowing very well its not your receiver when you hear the bad!

Such is the price of perfection!

Craig
VK3HE

--- In Elecraft_K3@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:Elecraft_K3%40yahoogroups.com>
<mailto:Elecraft_K3%40yahoogroups.com>, "Jon Pellant" <w1jp@> wrote:

Thanks for your feedback. I trust my gut instincts sometimes and
my gut
made me blindly order a K3. I trust I won't be dissappointed.

Jon
w1jp

--- In Elecraft_K3@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:Elecraft_K3%40yahoogroups.com>
<mailto:Elecraft_K3%40yahoogroups.com>, Rick <mrfarm@> wrote:

Assuming you like the ergonomics of a given rig, the one parameter
that
I look at the most is the close-in IMD3 (Third Order
Intermodulation
Distortion).

Currently <snip/>


Re: [Elecraft_K3] Re: Rig ergonomics and performance comparison

G3SJJ <g3sjj@...>
 

I guess it depends on what the 2nd radio was in SO2R, or the other radios in MM. If any of the other radios were not K3 then you would still need BPFs. External bandpass filters help reduce stuff radiated from transmitters and as well as assisting on receive so it is a two way thing.

My inclination would be to plan for using external BPFs anyway as well as coax stubs, the more help the better. I have a pair of Dunestar 600s and a pair of Topten band decoders with source driver boards, so I can use any combination to reduce inter-station problems. The 2nd radio is an FT1kMP with Inrad roofing and IF filters and key click mod, so I am certainly looking forward to integrating the K3 and doing some comparative tests.

73 Chris G3SJJ



CR wrote:


So whats the performance of the K3's bandpass filters like? Would
you still require outboard bandpass filters for contest environment
if you require further second harmonic suppression?

Craig

-- In Elecraft_K3@yahoogroups.com <mailto:Elecraft_K3%40yahoogroups.com>, "Eric C. Swartz" <wa6hhq_lists@...>
wrote:

The K3 transmits through both bandpass filters (before the final
amplifier stages) and through low pass filters after the PAs.

The bandpass filters do an excellent job of removing out of band noise
generated in earlier stages. The low pass filters afer the PA remove
any hamonic energy generated in the final PA stages.

73,
Eric WA6HHQ
Elecraft

--- In Elecraft_K3@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:Elecraft_K3%40yahoogroups.com>, "CR" <vk3he@> wrote:

Hi Chris

I was incorrect, the K3 uses lowpass filters and not bandpass filters
in the TX chain, so they are still needed. However with the great
IMD dynamic range figures that most are expecting its only in cases
where you have 2 transmitters on the same band where the receiver will
be challenged. Until we see what the phase noise performance of the K3
is like we can only presume that it will be good and this wont be a
issue.

I do believe that the W3NQN filters have very good performance, they
are so good in fact that its possible to use a dual band yagi on the
same boom and receive on one band while another station is
transmitting on another band.

Most people use the bandpass filters to null the second harmonic.
Several stations use stubs along with these filters for added
attenuation. Phase noise especially if its very bad will also be
reduced, however i would think that most multi multi contest stations
would avoid using radios with poor phase noise performance. If
a receiver is phase noisy it follows that the transmitter would
probably also have a bad case of phase noise on transmit.


I feel confident that the K3 will deliver.

Craig

--- In Elecraft_K3@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:Elecraft_K3%40yahoogroups.com>, G3SJJ <g3sjj@> wrote:

Craig, I think I am correct in saying that the various bandpass
filters
available, eg ICE, Dunestar were created to reduce tx phase noise
from
adjacent current design radios in MO and SO2R setups. I have a
pair of
the Dunestar 600s here and they do just that, although antenna
separation plays a big part also. We used them for several years
in our
GU8D operation in the IOTA Contest and they were very effective.

One of the things that has impressed me in the K3 discussions
was the
in-band close-in figures. A couple of years ago we did some in-band
checks here using 2 FT1kMPs with roofing filters and tx amps. I
haven't
got the actual data to hand but with mono band antennas on 20m
separated
by 70m, we were able to operate SSB and CW to within about
100KHz. I
wouldn't have thought the Dunestars would have made any difference
but I
honestly cannot remember.

I'm looking forward to getting my K3 shortly to do some more
tests. In
particular at the beginning of October we have the RSGB 21/28MHz
Contest
which I won last year using just the MP. This year I am intending to
run
SO2R with the MP and K3 and will be looking to do in-band dual
mode as
well as dual band. That should be interesting.

73 Chris G3SJJ


CR wrote:

It will be interesting to see if the Elecraft K3 needs external
bandpass filters when used in a multi multi contest environment.
Considering what the cost is for a full set of W3NQN filters, it
certainly make the K3 a popular if you dont have this additional
cost
or weight to carry around on an expedition or in contest station.

I also wonder if a Tracking Preselector will become a future
option
for the K3. The Yaesu U tune preselector is a great feature
although
old hat! However if the K3's front end is bullet proof it would be
hard to justify the additional expense and marginal
performance gain
from a preselector. When bad IMD, Keyclicks and phase noise
dominate
the value of such filters is questionable. However it might be
handy
in places like Europe. Its going to be torturous operating a
perfect
receiver like the K3 and hearing the good, the bad and the ugly
knowing very well its not your receiver when you hear the bad!

Such is the price of perfection!

Craig
VK3HE

--- In Elecraft_K3@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:Elecraft_K3%40yahoogroups.com>
<mailto:Elecraft_K3%40yahoogroups.com>, "Jon Pellant" <w1jp@>
wrote:

Thanks for your feedback. I trust my gut instincts sometimes and
my gut
made me blindly order a K3. I trust I won't be dissappointed.

Jon
w1jp

--- In Elecraft_K3@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:Elecraft_K3%40yahoogroups.com>
<mailto:Elecraft_K3%40yahoogroups.com>, Rick <mrfarm@> wrote:

Assuming you like the ergonomics of a given rig, the one
parameter
that
I look at the most is the close-in IMD3 (Third Order
Intermodulation
Distortion).

Currently <snip/>


Re: Rig ergonomics and performance comparison

N1EU <barry.n1eu@...>
 

--- In Elecraft_K3@yahoogroups.com, "Tom Whiteside" <tomw@...> wrote:

I've tried using my subreceiver on my Orion I in diversity mode in
160M contests with terrible results - even using lower input Beverages
for the subrx and using the transmit antennas on the much more robust
main rx....
This technique works great for DXing but all the overload products
on the poorer subrx graphically demonstrate the vagaries of overload
products...
Now with a K3....
Indeed. I've been using the Orion on topband in diversity mode with
multiple Beverage ants for almost 4 years
(http://n1eu.com/orion/diversity.htm) and am now convinced the
subreceiver was originally designed for only casual use at best.
Diversity subrx use must have been an after-thought at the factory.
Although with no strong signals on the band, it works quite good ;-)

Bring on the K3 . . .

73,
Barry N1EU


High power bandpass filters [Re: Rig ergonomics and performance comparison]

Toby Deinhardt
 

One thing one must not forget is that in a Multi-Multi or Multi-2 situation a certain amount of power will be coming back into the receivers.

The worst case situation at our contest QTH (Multi-2) is over 10 Watts at the receiver input without extra external band passes.

vy 73 de toby
--
DD5FZ, 4N6FZ (ex dj7mgq, dg5mgq, dd5fz)
K2 #885, K2/100 #3248
K3/100 #??? (< #200)
DOK C12, BCC, DL-QRP-AG


Re: [Elecraft_K3] Re: Rig ergonomics and performance comparison

Joe-aa4nn <aa4nn@...>
 

The K3 is not a solve-all solution.
If you are multi-multi or dxpedition
for Pete's sake get some band pass
filters.  Your partner will thank you.
de Joe, aa4nn


Re: Rig ergonomics and performance comparison

Eric Swartz - WA6HHQ, Elecraft
 

In multi transmitter situations I would expect that external bandpass
filters would still be required, as they are for most rigs. In some
cases you might be able to get away without them, but the external
units are very high Q and probably a little narrower than the rig's
internal bandpass filters, so they should offer even better out of
band rejection.

73, Eric
P.S We're extremely busy getting the K3 ready to ship so I may not
always be able to reply to postings and emails.




CR wrote:

So whats the performance of the K3's bandpass filters like? Would
you still require outboard bandpass filters for contest environment
if you require further second harmonic suppression?

Craig

-- In Elecraft_K3@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:Elecraft_K3%40yahoogroups.com>, "Eric C. Swartz"
<wa6hhq_lists@>
wrote:

The K3 transmits through both bandpass filters (before the final
amplifier stages) and through low pass filters after the PAs.

The bandpass filters do an excellent job of removing out of band
noise
generated in earlier stages. The low pass filters afer the PA remove
any hamonic energy generated in the final PA stages.

73,
Eric WA6HHQ
Elecraft

--- In Elecraft_K3@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:Elecraft_K3%40yahoogroups.com>, "CR" <vk3he@> wrote:

Hi Chris

I was incorrect, the K3 uses lowpass filters and not bandpass
filters
in the TX chain, so they are still needed. However with the great
IMD dynamic range figures that most are expecting its only in
cases
where you have 2 transmitters on the same band where the
receiver will
be challenged. Until we see what the phase noise performance
of the K3
is like we can only presume that it will be good and this wont
be a
issue.

I do believe that the W3NQN filters have very good
performance, they
are so good in fact that its possible to use a dual band yagi
on the
same boom and receive on one band while another station is
transmitting on another band.

Most people use the bandpass filters to null the second harmonic.
Several stations use stubs along with these filters for added
attenuation. Phase noise especially if its very bad will also be
reduced, however i would think that most multi multi contest
stations
would avoid using radios with poor phase noise performance. If
a receiver is phase noisy it follows that the transmitter would
probably also have a bad case of phase noise on transmit.


I feel confident that the K3 will deliver.

Craig

--- In Elecraft_K3@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:Elecraft_K3%40yahoogroups.com>, G3SJJ <g3sjj@> wrote:

Craig, I think I am correct in saying that the various bandpass
filters
available, eg ICE, Dunestar were created to reduce tx phase
noise
from
adjacent current design radios in MO and SO2R setups. I have a
pair of
the Dunestar 600s here and they do just that, although antenna
separation plays a big part also. We used them for several years
in our
GU8D operation in the IOTA Contest and they were very effective.

One of the things that has impressed me in the K3 discussions
was the
in-band close-in figures. A couple of years ago we did some
in-band
checks here using 2 FT1kMPs with roofing filters and tx amps. I
haven't
got the actual data to hand but with mono band antennas on 20m
separated
by 70m, we were able to operate SSB and CW to within about
100KHz. I
wouldn't have thought the Dunestars would have made any
difference
but I
honestly cannot remember.

I'm looking forward to getting my K3 shortly to do some more
tests. In
particular at the beginning of October we have the RSGB 21/28MHz
Contest
which I won last year using just the MP. This year I am
intending to
run
SO2R with the MP and K3 and will be looking to do in-band dual
mode as
well as dual band. That should be interesting.

73 Chris G3SJJ


CR wrote:

It will be interesting to see if the Elecraft K3 needs
external
bandpass filters when used in a multi multi contest
environment.
Considering what the cost is for a full set of W3NQN
filters, it
certainly make the K3 a popular if you dont have this
additional
cost
or weight to carry around on an expedition or in contest
station.

I also wonder if a Tracking Preselector will become a future
option
for the K3. The Yaesu U tune preselector is a great feature
although
old hat! However if the K3's front end is bullet proof it
would be
hard to justify the additional expense and marginal
performance gain
from a preselector. When bad IMD, Keyclicks and phase noise
dominate
the value of such filters is questionable. However it might be
handy
in places like Europe. Its going to be torturous operating a
perfect
receiver like the K3 and hearing the good, the bad and the
ugly
knowing very well its not your receiver when you hear the bad!

Such is the price of perfection!

Craig
VK3HE

--- In Elecraft_K3@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:Elecraft_K3%40yahoogroups.com>
<mailto:Elecraft_K3%40yahoogroups.com>, "Jon Pellant" <w1jp@>
wrote:

Thanks for your feedback. I trust my gut instincts
sometimes and
my gut
made me blindly order a K3. I trust I won't be
dissappointed.

Jon
w1jp

--- In Elecraft_K3@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:Elecraft_K3%40yahoogroups.com>
<mailto:Elecraft_K3%40yahoogroups.com>, Rick <mrfarm@> wrote:

Assuming you like the ergonomics of a given rig, the one
parameter
that
I look at the most is the close-in IMD3 (Third Order
Intermodulation
Distortion).

Currently <snip/>


K3 10 watt to be in Alaska on July 14

bigfork04
 

The K3 10 watt transceiver will be in Alaska during next Saturdays
contest and will be Demo at the Moosehorn Amateur Radio Clubs Hamfest.
http://www.kl7uw.com/Hamfest.htm

N6TR will be using the rig for beta testing during the contest. They
will be using KL7RA contesting homestead in Kenai.
I will post any information I get from the hour long presentation.

KL1J


Re: [Elecraft_K3] K3 Beta testers ???

Joe-aa4nn <aa4nn@...>
 

Simple and complex questions have been answered
by the FAQ at www.elecraft.com
 
de Joe, aa4nn
 

----- Original Message -----
From: wb8yqj
Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2007 12:05 AM
Subject: [Elecraft_K3] K3 Beta testers ???

Is there anyone on this list that has an early release K3 that wouldn't
mind answering some simple questions about the radio for list members?


Re: K3 Beta testers ???

Joe Stofko <wb1aiu@...>
 

Hello Don,

There have been a couple of posts, with links to
other forums, on the Elecraft reflector. Check the archives
from a week or two back. I believe that the thread was
regarding "ergonomics". There were comments from at least
two Beta testers.

Good luck.

Joe - WB1AIU

--- In Elecraft_K3@yahoogroups.com, "wb8yqj" <wb8yqj@...> wrote:

Is there anyone on this list that has an early release K3 that
wouldn't
mind answering some simple questions about the radio for list
members?


Re: K3 Beta testers ???

josephlevy
 

For those of you who are not contesters, but are
interested in the K3, a couple of the beta testers
have posted some general remarks on CQ-Contest
recently. This link will take you to the July Archive.
You can scan for the appropriate topic.

Cheers,
Julius
n2wn

http://lists.contesting.com/_cq-contest/2007-07/threads.html



--- In Elecraft_K3@yahoogroups.com, "wb8yqj" <wb8yqj@> wrote:

Is there anyone on this list that has an early release K3 that
wouldn't
mind answering some simple questions about the radio for list
members?


Are there any really news?

Daniel <schaeffler@...>
 

Hi folks

Are there any really news about the new K3? Comparison data between the K3 and other
transceivers? Tech. data? Lab data?

All are talking about the ergonomic, thats it?

Daniel, HB9DDS


Re: Are there any really news?

Joseph Stofko <wb1aiu@...>
 

Daniel,

    I expect that technical specifications and "hard numbers"
will not be available until the first production run shipments
leave the factory.

   There have been some hints realeased, with figures
measured in the lab. these can be found by perusing posts
here and elsewhere. Also, plots for the roofing filters are
available on the Elecraft sight.

  Meanwhile, we all sit.. and... wait !

73,  Joe - WB1AIU
 


Re: Are there any really news?

Allan
 

--- In Elecraft_K3@yahoogroups.com, "Daniel" <schaeffler@...> wrote:

Hi folks

Are there any really news about the new K3? Comparison data between
the K3 and other
transceivers? Tech. data? Lab data?

All are talking about the ergonomic, thats it?

Daniel, HB9DDS
Patience, patience. Units are due to start shipping at the end of the
month.. which is 2 weeks away. Beta testing and field checks are
going on right now. You waited this long, wait a little longer.
Enough of the conjecture.. real info is on its way,

Allan, AE2J


Re: Are there any really news?

bill_w4zv <w0zv@...>
 

--- In Elecraft_K3@yahoogroups.com, "Daniel" <schaeffler@...> wrote:

Are there any really news about the new K3? Comparison data between
the K3 and other
transceivers? Tech. data? Lab data?
http://lists.contesting.com/pipermail/topband/2007-June/026875.html

73, Bill


Moosehorn Amateur Radio Club K3-100w Demo

bigfork04
 

What a great radio to say the least. N6TRE brought the K3-100w
without auto tuner to our Hamfest today and talked about using it and
answered questions. N6TRE is a beta tester and does not work for
Elecraft.
He indicated that this transceiver will be as good or better then any
Amateur radio like the more expensive ones i.e. $10,00.00. The dynamic
range is extremely good. He also opened the radio up by removing the
top and bottom. There is not much in it to look at. The heat sink is
the biggest part and looks to be the heaviest also. They have been
running it at 125W output with no heat build up. They ran it as a 10
meter beacon for 2 hours at full power and indicated that it ran
without any problems. They have been using it and supplying feed back
to the design engineers while they are testing it. It appears
Elecraft is full bore on getting this radio right. KL7RA also
indicated that his use of it on CW proved to back up N6TRE comment
about the dynamic range.
This radio is going to be the top contesting rig to have. It appears
the first run is going to be about 250 units. The question was asked if
delivery is on track and N6TRE could not answer the question as he did
not know. This rig had the 2.8Khz 8 pole filter in it and N6TRE liked
the filter as the standard filter of 2.7Khz was not available when it
was shipped up to Alaska late last week. I would like to thank
Elecraft for getting this radio up to Alaska in time for the HamFest,
they shipped it early to do this. I will try and post some pictures
of the unit opened up on the web site. Kl7RA also commented that
there will be a learning curve on getting up to full use of this
radio. You won't just open the box and power it up and be talking.
They had a beta copy of the manual but I did not get a chance to look
at it. I have one ordered but ordered late, so I am in the Oct.
shipping schedule.
It's going to define Amateur radio for the for-see-able future and it
will be from the USA, with the Elecraft great customer service.
No I am not working for Elecraft just very impressed with the radio
and with the responses form talking to the factory about my order.

KL1J
Jim

101 - 120 of 34517