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

donate to eham
   Home   Help Search  
Pages: Prev 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 Next   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: FT-817ND vs KX3  (Read 97319 times)
K6AER
Member

Posts: 3635




Ignore
« Reply #60 on: June 22, 2014, 08:26:29 PM »

QRP is fun when you have an efficient antenna.

I would buy a used IC-706 or a FT-857D. You can always turn down the power. Your apartment antenna will be at best 30% efficient as a regular dipole. Other hams can run power but if they cannot hear you they cannot work you.

Another thought is buy a used IC-7000. All of these radios come with filters. The DSP on the IC-7000 is very good.
Logged
FP5CJ
Member

Posts: 9




Ignore
« Reply #61 on: December 21, 2014, 03:28:35 AM »

The FT 817 needs for sure BHI DSP to equalmore or less  the KX3 receiving....with the price difference in favor of the 817,buying a small HF amplifier to go along with the  QRP rigwill be very appreciated at one moment or, at another , for sure... (maybe more appreciated than an auto tuner..)
MFO
GL73
JP
Logged
FP5CJ
Member

Posts: 9




Ignore
« Reply #62 on: December 21, 2014, 04:47:42 AM »

HI again!
I have a FT 817ND that gives me almots 200 watts on some HF bands, when I use it with an outside small outboard amplifier , of course.. and that gives me ususally 2 s units more signals compared to the same situation with a barefoot factory no MOD FT 857 100W rig...or with any similar unmodified japanese 100W TX....;(:-)so; then the difference of signal between barefoot and not, is of 4 points on the s-meter of the OM on the other side..
(well,of course, the wire antenna must be well tuned with lowest  SWR..)*
I just want to mention,too, that I use only a small MFJ 25 AMPS PS..for both 817 and small AMP... and  am quite pleased with such station, lightest ever......so far .;anyway (hi!)
MHO
73
JP
Logged
FP5CJ
Member

Posts: 9




Ignore
« Reply #63 on: December 21, 2014, 04:51:22 AM »

just want to mention that my signal oTA is very clear with amplifier;. I always have good reports..and congratulations..
Logged
AD6KA
Member

Posts: 2242




Ignore
« Reply #64 on: January 06, 2015, 12:36:26 PM »


I would buy a used IC-706 or a FT-857D. You can always turn down the power. Your apartment antenna will be at best 30% efficient as a regular dipole. Other hams can run power but if they cannot hear you they cannot work you.

Another thought is buy a used IC-7000. All of these radios come with filters. The DSP on the IC-7000 is very good.

Please tread carefully if you go with a used 706.
Parts for the 706 are getting scarce, and the Final PA transistors
for plain 706's thru the low serial number MKIIG's are
Unobtanium.
Neither from the device manufacturer nor Icom, nor, well.....anywhere.
And there is no suitable drop in replacement.
(Last time I checked a few years ago.). Sorry, I've forgotten that serial
number cutoff, but it shouldn't be too difficult to research.

I bear no truck with the 706 Series, it's quirks are well documented,
but it fit my needs at the time......until the ex-buddy who I leant it to
burned out the finals while working 40m phone into a very short mag mount
CB whip on his truck....and this after he had given an expressly worded "blood oath" that he would never operate mobil with the rig......Eh, forgive and forget. (THAT took some time. I'll never lend anyone a rig again... but I digress........)

Icom completely redesigned the PA board mid-production run
on the MKIIG's....with diferent PA devices. The "new" PA boards are
not backwards compatible.
(Been there, done that, got the T shirt and everything,
had to sell it for parts).

I cannot speak for the 857D...though they too are getting long in the tooth.
However they do have a solid loyal fan base.

If I were going to go the "Small 100w rig and turn down the power" route,
I'd pick something newer (as K6AER suggested) if I had the jingle.

GL ES 73, Ken  AD6KA

« Last Edit: January 06, 2015, 12:39:26 PM by AD6KA » Logged
W8JX
Member

Posts: 8091




Ignore
« Reply #65 on: January 07, 2015, 04:18:00 AM »


If I were going to go the "Small 100w rig and turn down the power" route,
I'd pick something newer (as K6AER suggested) if I had the jingle.


Also consider that a 100 watt rig turned down to 5w will likely use a good bit more power than a true QRP rig particularly on transmit which is a consideration when portable. 
Logged

--------------------------------------
You can embrace new technology and change with it or cling tightly to old technology and fall further behind everyday....
AD6KA
Member

Posts: 2242




Ignore
« Reply #66 on: January 08, 2015, 09:04:44 PM »


If I were going to go the "Small 100w rig and turn down the power" route,
I'd pick something newer (as K6AER suggested) if I had the jingle.


Also consider that a 100 watt rig turned down to 5w will likely use a good bit more power than a true QRP rig particularly on transmit which is a consideration when portable. 

Excellent point.......spot on.
I gotta get out and operate in the woods more often like in the old days!:)
Logged
W8JX
Member

Posts: 8091




Ignore
« Reply #67 on: January 10, 2015, 07:42:44 AM »


If I were going to go the "Small 100w rig and turn down the power" route,
I'd pick something newer (as K6AER suggested) if I had the jingle.


Also consider that a 100 watt rig turned down to 5w will likely use a good bit more power than a true QRP rig particularly on transmit which is a consideration when portable. 

Excellent point.......spot on.
I gotta get out and operate in the woods more often like in the old days!:)

Its a shame that no one ever marketed a modern portable 20 watt rig that could play QRP with better power consumption efficiency than a 100  watt  mobile turned done to 5 watts and yet be capable of adding a full S-unit of output on demand. There seems to be a big whole between 5 watt and 100 watt rigs.
Logged

--------------------------------------
You can embrace new technology and change with it or cling tightly to old technology and fall further behind everyday....
G4AON
Member

Posts: 603




Ignore
« Reply #68 on: January 10, 2015, 10:05:29 AM »

Its a shame that no one ever marketed a modern portable 20 watt rig that could play QRP with better power consumption efficiency than a 100  watt  mobile turned done to 5 watts and yet be capable of adding a full S-unit of output on demand. There seems to be a big whole between 5 watt and 100 watt rigs.
The 100 Watt K3 switches out the PA when the power is set below about 12 Watts.

73 Dave
Logged
W8JX
Member

Posts: 8091




Ignore
« Reply #69 on: January 10, 2015, 10:08:55 AM »

Its a shame that no one ever marketed a modern portable 20 watt rig that could play QRP with better power consumption efficiency than a 100  watt  mobile turned done to 5 watts and yet be capable of adding a full S-unit of output on demand. There seems to be a big whole between 5 watt and 100 watt rigs.
The 100 Watt K3 switches out the PA when the power is set below about 12 Watts.

73 Dave

Yes but point is why not a portable rig with a 20 watt PA and heatsink and size/weight. It would be better for a only rig than just 5watts.
Logged

--------------------------------------
You can embrace new technology and change with it or cling tightly to old technology and fall further behind everyday....
WA7NDD
Member

Posts: 23




Ignore
« Reply #70 on: January 11, 2015, 10:08:40 AM »

I bought a 706 MIIG when they fist came out as my main station.
I could not wait to get rid of it. Traded for a FT-720 which I kept for
years. The 706 receiver on a big antenna sounded like mashed potatoes,
over driven. I have had an FT-817ND since 2008. Put it on a big antenna
and it works just fine, or any other type of antenna. Added a 30 watt kit amp
and use from my RV. I have looked at the KX3 and the price is not worth it
after having my 817.
Logged
AE5YJ
Member

Posts: 14




Ignore
« Reply #71 on: January 11, 2015, 01:18:37 PM »

FWIW, if you plan any digital operation, the stock config KX3 has issues. As it heats up it drifts enough to keep you from decoding JT65/JT9 signals. Now you can buy a heat sink and go through this ridiculously tedious temperature calibration routine, but for the price of that radio it should be stable out of the box. So, in all other respects, the KX3 will blow away the 817, but be advised the work you have cut out for you if you need precision for digital modes.
Logged
KC5MO
Member

Posts: 47




Ignore
« Reply #72 on: January 12, 2015, 06:34:02 AM »

Hands down the KX3 is my choice. I had a 817 and found it to be a power hog and the lack of filters was not good. The KX3 has great audio especially with headphones, the filters are very good and it is easy on batteries ( RX is under 200mAh ) and having 10-12W helps offset feed line loss when you have 50' or more of RG-58. I have the ATU, Battery charger and filters in mine and don't regret adding any of them. I do suggest a good external battery such as Bioenno batteries and a good antenna. I have had excellent results with the KX3 helper 40-6 antenna.
I do plan on adding the 2meter module soon.

Here is the link to the batteries and antenna
http://www.bioennopower.com/
http://kx3helper.com/endfed-40-6m-antenna/


Logged
AD5X
Member

Posts: 1469




Ignore
« Reply #73 on: January 12, 2015, 08:01:09 AM »

Here's an interesting article on the performance of the 9:1 unun from 160-10 meters:

http://vk6ysf.com/unun_9-1.htm

Phil - AD5X
Logged
W8JX
Member

Posts: 8091




Ignore
« Reply #74 on: January 12, 2015, 08:13:35 AM »

and having 10-12W helps offset feed line loss when you have 50' or more of RG-58.

News flash, the power loss with 50+ feet of 58 is only a issue in your mind. This loss issue on HF is way over stated.
Logged

--------------------------------------
You can embrace new technology and change with it or cling tightly to old technology and fall further behind everyday....
Pages: Prev 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 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!