[CQ-Contest] FTDX 3000 as a contest radio?

Fri Oct 20 08:49:10 EDT 2017

Well said.

Reminds me of the old saying:
What is the best antenna?
The one that you have.

73, Keith NM5G

-----Original Message-----
From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of
Kelly Taylor
Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2017 10:04 PM
To: Charles Harpole <hs0zcw at gmail.com>
Cc: billamader at gmail.com; CQ-Contest Reflector <cq-contest at contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] FTDX 3000 as a contest radio?

Charly makes a really good point: the technical analysis aside (K9YC and
others have very solid reasoning and research behind their opinions), it
seems in radio and in life, if you love something, you can't comprehend why
others wouldn't, and if you hate something, you can't comprehend why others
would like it. 

73, kelly, ve4xt 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Oct 19, 2017, at 21:09, Charles Harpole <hs0zcw at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Radios and prices
> TS-590SG  $1400
> IC-7300      1250
> FT-1200      1100
> FT-3000      1800
> FT-5000MP ltd  3840.+scope
> K3 loaded    5500+-
> 
> By Universal Radio prices, the Sherwood list would have you a TS-590SG 
> and you just do without the extras the $400 more bought on the 
> FT-3000.  Both are ok for contesting in a normal ham environment.
> 
> Ham radio prejudices are very fickle.  When the FT-1000MP was sold, it 
> was "the rig to have".... it is still around and still "that good."  
> Now it is the K3.
> 
> I say buy what you can afford AND LIKE.  Ignore prejudices and enjoy 
> what pleases you.  An ordinary ham, like me, cant hear phase noise nor 
> a big % of other stuff.
> 
> Charly
> 
> Note that Universal Radio has no price listed for the FT-5000 nor 
> 9000. -- does this mean a new model on the horizon? See HRO.
> 
> 
>> On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 11:46 AM, Bill Mader <billamader at gmail.com>
wrote:
>> 
>> Good question Dave,
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> I had the opportunity to bring my K3 to a local FD site where an 
>> IC-7600 was the "primary" radio, used exclusively for SSB and PSK-31.  
>> I ran CW exclusively on the K3 with a short stint on SSB with the 
>> 7600 during a very long op change.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> I had some minor desense on the K3 from the 7600 and continued operating.
>> The 7600's receiver completely crashed if I keyed up on the same 
>> band, but in the CW sub-band.  This is with the original K3 
>> synthesizer which I have yet to replace.  BTW, I kicked the other 
>> radio's butt in QSO's/hour, even though there were about eight ops on
that radio.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> I experience similar symptoms at another station with the same radios.
>> We'll use the K-Line as the primary rig the last weekend of this 
>> month and the 7600 for finding mults.  The K-Line integration makes 
>> band changes so much easier!
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> If you want to run more than one radio at-a-time or have a neighbor 
>> who also contests, I would be very concerned about dynamic range and 
>> look closely at Rob Sherwood's receiver performance tests prior to 
>> plunking down my hard-earned cash.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> I bought my first K3 after I witnessed several of them and a K2 
>> operate together at FD.  We frequently had three K3's on 20m (SSB, 
>> CW, and GOTA) with no problems among them.  Antennas separation was about
700 ft.
>> After
>> someone kicked off one SSB K3 power supply and the battery rand down 
>> to 10 VDC, the CW guys complained about "hash" which a switched on 
>> supply "squelched."  And, the K3 is much improved now with the new
synthesizer!
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Yes, I frequently drink Elecraft Kool-Aid and own a bunch of their gear.
>> Still, it's performance that matters most to me and the K3 has proven 
>> to come out on top in multi-multi environments.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> I compared the IC-7300 and K3 in one of my HF University 
>> presentations at the Duke City Hamfest this past August.  While a 
>> fine radio for the price, there is no performance comparison.  
>> Elecraft haters (there are some whom I
>> know) would disagree, of course.  And, if one amortizes the radio's 
>> cost over ten years, the annual difference in cost is well worth the 
>> improved performance, IMHO.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 73, Bill, K8TE
>> 
>> Faith, Family, Radio-Life is Good!
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Message: 8
>> 
>> Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2017 15:14:59 -0700
>> 
>> From: David Gilbert <xdavid at cis-broadband.com>
>> 
>> To: cq-contest at contesting.com
>> 
>> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] FTDX 3000 as a contest radio?
>> 
>> Message-ID: <0600986e-f566-133f-8170-f4b82881df27 at cis-broadband.com>
>> 
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> How in the world did you ever get the idea that dynamic range wasn't 
>> important for contesting?? I'm truly curious.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Dave?? AB7E
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On 10/17/2017 6:01 PM, Keith Dutson wrote:
>>> 
>>> I think the actual contesters do not really care what is posted on
>> 
>>> this reflector.  Postings seem to follow popularity, which often is
>> 
>>> biased by numbers such as dynamic range, that have little to do with
>> contesting.
>> 
>>> These numbers are not important to contesting, just bragging rights.
>> 
>>> 
>> 
>>> 73, Keith NM5G
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> CQ-Contest mailing list
>> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Charly, HS0ZCW
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest at contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest