Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TenTec\]\s+OMNI\s+VII\s+vs\.\s+K3\s+\?\s+Opinions\s+invited\.\,\s*$/: 34 ]

Total 34 documents matching your query.

21. Re: [TenTec] OMNI VII vs. K3 ? Opinions invited., (score: 1)
Author: Bill Tippett <btippett@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Sun, 25 Apr 2010 15:06:07 -0400
QRM.... The K3 beats about anything except the high end rigs. Hi Rick, Correction...the K3 beats *everything* in this situation...including all "high end" (i.e. more expensive) rigs. You can configur
/archives//html/TenTec/2010-04/msg00445.html (9,519 bytes)

22. Re: [TenTec] OMNI VII vs. K3 ? Opinions invited., (score: 1)
Author: Steve Berg <wa9jml@tbc.net>
Date: Sun, 25 Apr 2010 14:12:31 -0500
I have been enjoying this thread quite a bit. One question that I have about receiver performance may bear a bit on what has been discussed so far. Since upgrading to extra several years ago, I have
/archives//html/TenTec/2010-04/msg00446.html (10,597 bytes)

23. Re: [TenTec] OMNI VII vs. K3 ? Opinions invited., (score: 1)
Author: kc9cdt@aol.com
Date: Sun, 25 Apr 2010 17:44:24 -0400
Sinisa, Why do think TT does not have that power roll back safety feature? 73, Lee say, putting Your thinking is correct, apart from those 40 W being actually 36 W (60 % of the forward power). The te
/archives//html/TenTec/2010-04/msg00453.html (10,895 bytes)

24. Re: [TenTec] OMNI VII vs. K3 ? Opinions invited., (score: 1)
Author: John McAlpine IV <kz4b@hotmail.com>
Date: Sun, 25 Apr 2010 18:33:20 -0400
I have an OMNI 6+ and an OMNI 7. They both put out full or near full power up to an SWR of about 3:1. Somewhere above that they shut down completely. To me this design characteristic is far more usef
/archives//html/TenTec/2010-04/msg00454.html (12,882 bytes)

25. Re: [TenTec] OMNI VII vs. K3 ? Opinions invited., (score: 1)
Author: "Dr. Gerald N. Johnson" <geraldj@weather.net>
Date: Sun, 25 Apr 2010 17:35:32 -0500
Because Tentec uses transistors rated for more power than they rate the radio, but they match the load to them for the rated power. Then those transistors come from the maker rated for operation into
/archives//html/TenTec/2010-04/msg00455.html (11,548 bytes)

26. Re: [TenTec] OMNI VII vs. K3 ? Opinions invited., (score: 1)
Author: "Dr. Gerald N. Johnson" <geraldj@weather.net>
Date: Sun, 25 Apr 2010 17:47:19 -0500
Probably because there are differences in the RF and first IF circuits. Those in the Corsair II use multiple transformer coupled feed back (Ulrich Rohde's favorite circuit though patented by Anzac) a
/archives//html/TenTec/2010-04/msg00457.html (12,126 bytes)

27. Re: [TenTec] OMNI VII vs. K3 ? Opinions invited., (score: 1)
Author: Richards <jruing@ameritech.net>
Date: Sun, 25 Apr 2010 19:17:39 -0400
I think it is at least possible the different radios have different audio output response curves, such that they are not perfectly linear across the entire audio spectrum, and one may have higher vol
/archives//html/TenTec/2010-04/msg00458.html (12,262 bytes)

28. Re: [TenTec] OMNI VII vs. K3 ? Opinions invited., (score: 1)
Author: Steve Berg <wa9jml@tbc.net>
Date: Sun, 25 Apr 2010 18:22:11 -0500
HI Jerry, Thanks for the info. Ten Tec told me that the Corsair II is designed along the lines of Rohde's ideas, and that is not half bad. I initially got the Corsair II to use with my Swan TV2 trans
/archives//html/TenTec/2010-04/msg00459.html (14,537 bytes)

29. Re: [TenTec] OMNI VII vs. K3 ? Opinions invited., (score: 1)
Author: Richards <jruing@ameritech.net>
Date: Sun, 25 Apr 2010 19:51:04 -0400
Just another way to skin the cat. Probably easier to build a shut off than to build a roll off circuit. Just MY take.... pure speculation. == K8JHR == == _____________________________________________
/archives//html/TenTec/2010-04/msg00460.html (9,915 bytes)

30. Re: [TenTec] OMNI VII vs. K3 ? Opinions invited., (score: 1)
Author: "Dr. Gerald N. Johnson" <geraldj@weather.net>
Date: Sun, 25 Apr 2010 19:24:35 -0500
I too, picked up the Corsair II for use with transverters. So far I haven't any transverters to fit. I was looking closely at Omni V or VI but didn't like their going to LSB for CW on 28 MHz which di
/archives//html/TenTec/2010-04/msg00462.html (16,415 bytes)

31. Re: [TenTec] OMNI VII vs. K3 ? Opinions invited., (score: 1)
Author: "CSM\(r\) Gary Huber - AB9M" <glhuber@msn.com>
Date: Sun, 25 Apr 2010 23:08:29 -0500
Is there any phase noise in an analog LC PTO? I believe the only digital circuit in the Corsair II is the frequency counter. When I've had my Corsair II running with either a Paragon or a Omni VI+ as
/archives//html/TenTec/2010-04/msg00465.html (13,637 bytes)

32. Re: [TenTec] OMNI VII vs. K3 ? Opinions invited., (score: 1)
Author: "Dr. Gerald N. Johnson" <geraldj@weather.net>
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2010 01:59:39 -0500
Every oscillator has phase noise. In the analog oscillator it comes from phase modulation of the sinewave by the 1/f and flicker noise of the active device and is usually better with a bipolar transi
/archives//html/TenTec/2010-04/msg00466.html (15,879 bytes)

33. Re: [TenTec] OMNI VII vs. K3 ? Opinions invited., (score: 1)
Author: "CSM\(r\) Gary Huber - AB9M" <glhuber@msn.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2010 08:47:30 -0500
Thanks for the detailed explanation Jerry. The TT folks at Dayton have told me the Corsair II has one of the best if not the best receivers they've built. In fact they discouraged me from buying a co
/archives//html/TenTec/2010-04/msg00467.html (18,559 bytes)

34. Re: [TenTec] OMNI VII vs. K3 ? Opinions invited., (score: 1)
Author: Bwana Bob <wb2vuf@verizon.net>
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2010 22:40:52 -0400
Steve: I have a Paragon (I) and a Corsair (I). While the Paragon is general coverage and more stable, I prefer the Corsair on CW. It has a quieter receiver, probably due to the simpler mixing scheme
/archives//html/TenTec/2010-04/msg00509.html (12,165 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu