Call Search
     

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Strays
Survey Question

Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation

Resources
Calendar
Classifieds
Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers

Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement
About eHam.net

   Home   Help Search  
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 8 Next   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: K3 or ftdx3000  (Read 69546 times)
KD2CJJ
Member

Posts: 369




Ignore
« on: April 11, 2013, 08:06:01 PM »

Any opinions?
Logged

73

Mike
KD2CJJ
ZENKI
Member

Posts: 956




Ignore
« Reply #1 on: April 13, 2013, 08:42:54 PM »

The K3 will be the winner especially with the P3.

The QST review of the FTDX3000 produced mixed results for receiver transmitter performance.

Disappointments were the poor transmitter IMD and the poor transmitter composite noise figures. If the FTDX3000 uses the same design techniques as the FT5000 its hard to understand why the composite
noise figure is so bad.

The other receiver numbers look good on the FTDX3000 which why the composite noise figure is such a mystery. Whether this matters to you depends on your location, noise floor, antennas and operating styles.

P3 PAN adapter is a  very useful piece of kit. The resolution bandwidth and general performance is unequaled  at the moment.  Its hard to imagine why Yaesu put in such a lousy small screen on the FTDX3000 and one has to shake ones head about the crap bandscope on the FTDX5000.

If Elecraft introduced the K4 with 200 watts and a built in big screen pan adapter that would be the radio for me. Yaesu and Icom seem good at producing crippled radios rather than delivering excellent performance in all aspects of their designs.

Why not consider the TS990S? HaHa





Logged
KD2CJJ
Member

Posts: 369




Ignore
« Reply #2 on: April 14, 2013, 10:10:08 AM »

I almost pulled the trigger last week on the k3...

Then I saw the price difference.   It's tough to justify the difference IMO....

I know performance wise the k3 is in another class...but feature for feature vs price I think the yaesu is a better value.

Tough decision...
The K3 will be the winner especially with the P3.

The QST review of the FTDX3000 produced mixed results for receiver transmitter performance.

Disappointments were the poor transmitter IMD and the poor transmitter composite noise figures. If the FTDX3000 uses the same design techniques as the FT5000 its hard to understand why the composite
noise figure is so bad.

The other receiver numbers look good on the FTDX3000 which why the composite noise figure is such a mystery. Whether this matters to you depends on your location, noise floor, antennas and operating styles.

P3 PAN adapter is a  very useful piece of kit. The resolution bandwidth and general performance is unequaled  at the moment.  Its hard to imagine why Yaesu put in such a lousy small screen on the FTDX3000 and one has to shake ones head about the crap bandscope on the FTDX5000.

If Elecraft introduced the K4 with 200 watts and a built in big screen pan adapter that would be the radio for me. Yaesu and Icom seem good at producing crippled radios rather than delivering excellent performance in all aspects of their designs.

Why not consider the TS990S? HaHa






Logged

73

Mike
KD2CJJ
W9GB
Member

Posts: 2626




Ignore
« Reply #3 on: April 16, 2013, 06:39:22 AM »

I compare the size and weight.  The Japanese still like to build aircraft carrier sized radios.
The FT3000 is the follow-on to the troubled FT-2000 (1st IF design).
http://ac0c.com/main/page_ft2k_roofing_filters_project_overview.html

Personally, I would wait to see if they exercised the FT-2000 demons.
« Last Edit: April 16, 2013, 06:42:36 AM by W9GB » Logged
W8GP
Member

Posts: 215




Ignore
« Reply #4 on: April 16, 2013, 10:01:41 AM »

Yes, the '3000 is a good value and I think it will sell well. It's on my wish list to replace my FT-950 but I'm going to wait a while to see how it plays out.
Logged
K8GU
Member

Posts: 719


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #5 on: April 17, 2013, 10:16:57 AM »

On the surface, this seems like a fair comparison, but these are two fundamentally different radios in completely different operating classes.  If you like one, you probably won't like the other.  The K3 is engineered for raw performance under very specific (crowded) conditions in a portable package.  The fit and finish is not the same as the JA radios (although I really like the ergonomics of my K3).  It's smaller and lighter than the FTDX-3000 in addition to the difference in performance numbers.  For me, the K3 was a no-brainer even versus the very similar and very competitively-priced TS-590S.  I would never use the bells and whistles ("features" you called them) of the FTDX-3000. 
Logged
KF7Z
Member

Posts: 36




Ignore
« Reply #6 on: April 20, 2013, 07:34:12 AM »

I don't know the FTDX3000, but I am happy with my K3.  The small size and light-weight feel of the K3 might be an objection for some people.  It sure isn't as robust feeling as a big Yeasu radio.

P3 PAN adapter is a  very useful piece of kit. The resolution bandwidth and general performance is unequaled  at the moment.  Its hard to imagine why Yaesu put in such a lousy small screen on the FTDX3000 and one has to shake ones head about the crap bandscope on the FTDX5000.

I agree that the P3 is a nice addition, but IMHO performance of the P3 is EXCEEDED if you include consideration of PC-based spectrum scopes.  I considered the P3 seriously, but ended up buying the LP-PAN2 unit instead.  All in, it cost $380 (not counting the investment in a PC), compared to $700 plus shipping for the P3.  The result is a stunningly beautiful and detailed display, as large as your monitor, with many rig control function now enabled by mouse clicks.  The much faster frame update rate of the LP-PAN2 is also significant.  Of course, it isn't as "plug-n-play" and the P3, but setup was not difficult.  It's a great value, and better performance. It's hard to appreciate the difference that the larger display makes until you see it.

However, as the P3 is not crystal controlled, it does have the advantage in ability to connect to different receivers (though still only one at a time).  The LP-PAN has slots for two crystals, and those crystals are not easy to find for all radios.
« Last Edit: April 20, 2013, 07:41:12 AM by KF7Z » Logged
KD2CJJ
Member

Posts: 369




Ignore
« Reply #7 on: April 28, 2013, 06:01:50 AM »

I ended up getting the yaesu... It really just boiled down to price / feature / performance.  The yaesu had more friendly features, with relative similar performance for my needs and was considerably less in cost equally equipped.   I am astonished how much better the rig is over my ic7000.  I also can't believe how quiet it is and can pill in signals with such little rf gain!  The noise reduction is also amazing.  The only feature I am disappointed in is the noise blanketer.  It's just about useless for aggressive electrical noise like high power lines which I have near me.  Honestly the ic7000 NB is far superior.... Everything else I love...

I probably would have went with the k3 if all was equal but I understand the k3 is a true contesting rig with no frills and what was important to me was not equal thus the yaesu won out for me...  To each is own..
Logged

73

Mike
KD2CJJ
W4OP
Member

Posts: 436


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #8 on: April 28, 2013, 10:42:34 AM »

The first time you require company support or repair, you'll wish you had the American made K3.

Dale W4OP
Logged
K8AC
Member

Posts: 1477




Ignore
« Reply #9 on: April 28, 2013, 01:30:29 PM »

Have to agree with Dale on that.  I owned a K3 and just didn't like the compact physical design of the unit and replaced it with an FTDX-5000.  Typical of Yaesu rigs in recent years, it had some serious problems when sending CW (variable length dits, and a couple of other things).  After some time, Yaesu offered a fix but that required you to pay shipping both ways to the west coast.  One fellow who had Yaesu fix his 5000 then reported that you could no longer operate QSK above 20 wpm after the fix was applied.  If you're considering the Yaesu 3000, and will ever operate CW with it, I'd suggest that you first listen to the 3000's CW signal on a separate receiver (do NOT trust what you hear in the sidetone) and make sure the keying is what it should be.  That's best seen on a scope or capture of the monitor receiver audio so that you can examine spacing and duration of code elements with an audio file editor. 

On the other hand, an early problem I experienced with the K3 resulted in them sending me a replacement card which fixed the problem at very little cost to me.  Same with my current Tentec transceiver. 
Logged
SWL2002
Member

Posts: 346




Ignore
« Reply #10 on: April 29, 2013, 03:45:02 AM »

The first time you require company support or repair, you'll wish you had the American made K3.

Dale W4OP

Give the guy a break.  So he didn't pick your favorite rig and validate your decision.  No need to give him a hard time about that.  Hams like you have such fragile egos that if someone does not pick YOUR favorite rig, you then trash everyone else's decision.
Logged
W8JX
Member

Posts: 6043




Ignore
« Reply #11 on: April 29, 2013, 12:38:35 PM »

The first time you require company support or repair, you'll wish you had the American made K3.

Dale W4OP

Give the guy a break.  So he didn't pick your favorite rig and validate your decision.  No need to give him a hard time about that.  Hams like you have such fragile egos that if someone does not pick YOUR favorite rig, you then trash everyone else's decision.

Yes, ergonomics (look and fell) are important to many as well. K3 does look pretty plain. I  personally have no had a chance to play with a 3000 yet so jury is still out with me.
Logged

--------------------------------------
All posted wireless using Win 8.1 RT, a Android tablet using 4G/LTE/WiFi or Sprint Note 3.
AD9DX
Member

Posts: 1488




Ignore
« Reply #12 on: May 06, 2013, 07:12:45 AM »

While I do not own a FT-3000 I had a FT-2000 before I purchased my K3. The 2000 was a wonderful SSB rig. I was a terrible CW rig. I have heard hat the CW capabilities of the 3000 is only marginally better.

The K3 is an expensive rig and quite frankly the external package looks like it should cost less than $500.  However that's the beauty of it, it just plain works. And works better than any other rig on the market.
Logged

EX, KC9TRM, KB9IRZ
K8AG
Member

Posts: 352




Ignore
« Reply #13 on: May 12, 2013, 08:06:21 AM »

The first time you require company support or repair, you'll wish you had the American made K3.

Dale W4OP
I have to agree here.  I have been running Elecraft since I bought my second hand K2 a couple of years ago.  They simply have the parts and support.  The K2 had a couple of significant issues (disclosed by the seller).  With the docs and the available parts it now has been repaired and upgraded.  This caused me to go K3 and now KX1.  The K3 was a kit, but no soldering was necessary.  Still nice to know the pieces are available.

Its a box, true.  But a really fun one.  Enjoy the Yaesu.

73, JP, K8AG
Logged
KH6DC
Member

Posts: 642




Ignore
« Reply #14 on: May 12, 2013, 10:34:33 PM »

K3 and K4 in the future.  Had my K3 for 1-1/2 years now and still loving it.  Sold my Icoms 756 Pro III and 7600 for the K3, P3 and KPA-500.
Logged

73 and Aloha,
de Delwyn, KH6DC
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 8 Next   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!