Jeff,
I had an FT1000MP for 6 years before purchasing the K3. The K3 definitely has a
better receiver and a lot more options for tailoring the operation to your
preferences. It also has much better support for digital modes and zero beating
CW signals - not surprising for a design that is a decade newer than the FT1000
series. The K3 receiver also benefits from being designed as a ham band only
rig vs. general coverage.
I have traveled with both radios. Not only is the K3 smaller and lighter, the
internal tuner has a much wider range (specified for up to 10:1 SWR). This can
be useful with temporary antennas.
That said, I loved my FT1000MP. The larger size makes it easier to get to and
manipulate some of the controls. There are more of them on the front panel and
they are larger. The learning curve on the K3 is a bit longer. If I were going
to use one of these rigs to operate a contest without having used either
before, the FT1000MP would be my choice.
Overall, I prefer the K3. Once I learned where everything is and how to adjust
it for my needs, it became easy to use. A couple of examples may help clarify
this.
Out of the box, K3 does not have buttons for each band. You push up and down
arrows to cycle through the bands. However, it is easy to configure so that
each button on the keypad selects a band (only 10 buttons for 11 bands, but I
am happy to omit 60 meters from instant band selection).
To enjoy the full benefits of the K3 receiver's dynamic range, you need to make
use of the attenuator, preamp (generally off), AGC, and RF gain controls.
Otherwise, you may mistakenly perceive the K3 receiver as "noisy" (see
<http://n1eu.com/K3/K3_agcgain.htm> ).
Both are great rigs. Three of the top 160 meter contesters I know (K3ZM,
VY2ZM/K1ZM, and our own W8JI), have at least one K3 and one FT1000 series.
73,
Jim AD4J
On Jan 11, 2011, at 10:46 AM, Tad Williamson wrote:
> Jeff, I can't speak about the 1000MP, but did have an FT-2000 and my K3
> side-by-side for a few days.
> I thought the K3 was much quieter and had a superior receiver.
> I had a noise problem on 20, 17 and 15 mostly with the 2000. It was man-made
> and hard as we tried, we could never track it down. Sometimes it was hardly
> there and other times it was s8-s9. When I finished my K3, I A-B switched
> between the 2000 and the K3. The noise was there for the 3-4 nights I was
> testing and was s5-s6 on the 2000 and almost non-existent on the K3. I found
> some weak CW signals with the K3 that I couldn't hear on the 2000.
> Overall, I've been thoroughly pleased with my K3. A few other plusses to
> mention:
> --If you have to do any repair, the K3 is modular and easier to repair.
> --Elecraft's tech support is excellent
> --You can run in CW-to-Digital mode and you don't need a PC to run RTTY or
> PSK.
> --Firmware updates are a piece of cake.
> --I run portable a few times a year and the K3 is nice and compact.
> --I also have the P3 Panadapter and it is nice for viewing the band
>
> My radio, my opinions---please no flames. Hope that helps, Jeff
> 73, Tad, WF4W
>
>
>
> "What a long, strange trip it's been"
>
> The Grateful Dead
>
> Truckin'
>
>
> --- On Mon, 1/10/11, Jeffrey Clarke <ku8e at bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
> From: Jeffrey Clarke <ku8e at bellsouth.net>
> Subject: [SECC] FT1000MP vs K3
> To: secc at contesting.com
> Date: Monday, January 10, 2011, 7:10 PM
>
> I wonder if anyone has played with a Elecraft K3 and Yaesu FT-1000MP side
> by side ? I was toying with the idea of splurging and getting a K3 but a
> friend of mine in Ohio ,who owns both radios, compared them side by side and
> liked the MP better. He said the MP had a quieter receiver and had better
> audio on SSB then a K3. He ended selling his K3. I also seem to remember
> Don, W4OC, bringing a K3 on one of the Bonaire trips a few years ago and he
> ended up selling his in favor of the FT1000MP.
>
>
> I have never had a chance to play with a K3. Everyone seems to rave about
> them. Are they really worth another $1000 over what you can buy a FT1000MP
> for, which is a proven good contest radio? Any thoughts on which you liked
> better?
>
>
> Jeff KU8E
>
>
> -----Inline Attachment Follows-----
>
> _______________________________________________
> SECC mailing list
> SECC at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/secc
> _______________________________________________
> SECC mailing list
> SECC at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/secc
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://lists.contesting.com/pipermail/secc/attachments/20110111/250975e7/attachment.html
|