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]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: FT-817ND vs KX3  (Read 140787 times)
N3AWS
Member

Posts: 108




Ignore
« Reply #75 on: January 19, 2015, 10:26:57 AM »

Just a suggestion:

Have you looked at the Ten Tec Argonaut V?  This is a small, light weight (5 lbs) HF rig with all bands from 160 - 10 meters (60 meters might require a firmware update if not already performed).  It requires 13.8 volts DC and would easily run an amp with it's 20 watts output (1 watt low power).  It has IF DSP.  It offers CW, SSB, AM, FM, and AFSK and easily interfaces for digital modes.

If you are interested check out the April 2003 review in QST.

73 and have fun!

Jim N3AWS
Logged
IZ8FFC
Member

Posts: 13




Ignore
« Reply #76 on: January 27, 2015, 01:16:16 PM »

Here there is a nice comparison.
http://yaesuft817.com/wp/elecraft-kx3-vs-ft-817/

KX3: best receiver and 10 watts output and AUTO TUNER
FT 817: portable, easy, cheaper and TRUE QRP
Logged
N2GIG
Member

Posts: 4




Ignore
« Reply #77 on: February 01, 2015, 12:15:25 AM »

That looks like an EXCELLENT manpack.  I've operated only older, legacy manpacks and other mil HF gear, once-upon-a-time, when I was in that "business". The new generations of manpack radios are simply amazing with auto-linking, data, built-in CRYPTO, spread spectrum on some models, usually fast-hoppers and etc.

Manpacks are fun for some hams and the international appeal of the HFpack group shows that there is a niche' market for them.  To compare mil manpacks with Elecraft however, seems an 'cocoanut -v- oranges' argument: both hang from trees - yes, but very different. KX3 was never designed to be competition for a military manpack, because it's not servicing that market. Now, if a person DOES need or want a portable, channelized radio transceiver capable of operation in jungle, at sea in extreme temperature/humidity and is designed to take a great deal of physical abuse yet to keep working,  then yes -  full mil-spec manpacks are designed for that. CODAN, BARRET, HARRIS et al have a mil/para-mil/NGO market focus which hams like you enjoy - cool!  

I don't speak for Elecraft, but it's clear that the KX1 & KX3 are not even remotely designed for that market - and never intended to be. The cost, weight, size and current consumption etc. for manpacks are generally considered excessive for most hams doing civilian/recreational backpacking, for example.  Paul - W0RW/pm out wandering the Rockie Mountains with one of several military manpacks is a delightful exception, who I have talked with a few times, usually in CW while he is slowly being covered in snow during in howling winds...   Shocked

Looking at the CODAN spec-sheet, the weight listed with one 8 A/H battery was just over 10.3 pounds, to which must be added the essential mil-spec accessories for actual operation like handset - or phones, key & antenna(s) . We're probably beginning the day with 13-15 pounds of radio gear, not counting the ability to recharge in the field. That's very light compared to what I carried decades ago as a soldier, but in an entirely different Size, Weight and Power class from what casual ham hikers and SOTA guys are likely to carry in addition to their backpacking gear for fun.

I'd love to hear more about your CODAN manpack, how you use it and perhaps some of the design features and how they integrate into ham use.  CW filtering informaiton was lacking in the spec sheet I saw, so if you could discuss your experiences with that, it would be helpful. Your preferred antenna types for pedestrian as well as for camp are also something I am curious about.  In decades of carrying HF radios, I still prefer the basic dipole, high and in the clear for all but easy NVIS shots, though a half-square run from the ATU post against a counterpoise wire has helped me much on long-haul/low take-off angle shots in times past.  I never did talking while walking until I did this for fun as a civilian. As a civilian, it was enjoyable mild-exercise while hamming or when car camping.  I did exactly ONE civilian backpack trip with an old PRC-74 and spares in my rucksack -ONE. I was a tough-guy back then.  These days, to be perfectly honest, I would not even attempt that, so I have my light weight, small, 'Up-Armored' KX1 instead.



73 de Ray
W7ASA ..._ ._

Ps.  I always prefer the best, most selective receiver I can have with me.


I don't mean to bring up a 100 year old post.. but that "Rambo radio" is pretty cool. This coming from someone who has  moved over to Motorola gear for VHF/UHF long ago...

 



Logged
KC8VWM
Member

Posts: 3181




Ignore
« Reply #78 on: February 04, 2015, 06:19:42 PM »

I have never needed a high end receiver when working QRP. I was never in the situation where I had the need to pull in the weak ones near the bottom of the noise floor. I figure, if they are that far down in the mud, they are almost 100% likely not to hear me calling them with 5 watts anyways.

Also since I am not using a Mosley Tribander on a 70 foot tower at the picnic table in the campground when working QRP, I have never experienced a situation where I wished I had a higher quality receiver to extinguish overloaded signals, and QRM from my receiver.

I have only desired to use a CW filter for increased selectivity when working CW.
   
Logged
NO9E
Member

Posts: 579




Ignore
« Reply #79 on: February 06, 2015, 08:10:01 PM »

Quote
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

He uses an iron core T200-2  that has way too little inductance on the lower bands. With ferrite cores, which can be way smaller from QRP,   the losses are way lower. Elecraft has 4:1 BL1 or BL2 on very simpler ferrite cores. Losses are like < 0.25db from 1 to 30 MHz. Their version of 9:1 would have higher loses but most likely < 1 db.

Ignacy, NO9E
Logged
AD5X
Member

Posts: 1523




Ignore
« Reply #80 on: February 07, 2015, 07:31:16 AM »

Quote
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

He uses an iron core T200-2  that has way too little inductance on the lower bands. With ferrite cores, which can be way smaller from QRP,   the losses are way lower. Elecraft has 4:1 BL1 or BL2 on very simpler ferrite cores. Losses are like < 0.25db from 1 to 30 MHz. Their version of 9:1 would have higher loses but most likely < 1 db.

Ignacy, NO9E

Hi Ignacy - I agree with you.  But for some reason, the popular core in these 9:1 ununs is the T200-2, even though it doesn't make sense.
Phil - AD5X
Logged
WB6BYU
Member

Posts: 15581




Ignore
« Reply #81 on: February 07, 2015, 01:32:54 PM »

The losses and shunt inductance of the T-200-2 core may improve the
SWR on the lower bands where the antenna is less than 1/4 wavelength.

When your only performance criteria is SWR and not efficiency, radiation
pattern, common mode current rejection, or how strong your signal is
at the receiving station, it might not be a bad choice.
Logged
K1BQT
Member

Posts: 77




Ignore
« Reply #82 on: February 07, 2015, 05:59:27 PM »

It just depends on what tool you want in your toolbox. The KX3 is clearly a superior performing HF radio. If you chase serious DX or spend all of your time "hamming", the KX3 will make you a happier guy. The FT-817 is a Swiss-army radio that does a lot more stuff admittedly not as well.

That said, if I could have but one radio in the world, it would be a FT-817 -- and that's what I do have. I set mine up for 10-W out on HF, installed a 3 kHz Collins SSB filter, got a decent dynamic mike for it, and added a nice-sounding extension speaker (DSP and a CW filter are good options). The 600-Watt FET amplifier under the desk doesn't hurt ether when QRP becomes tedious. With the FT-817 you get AM broadcast, entry-level all-mode HF, VHF, and UHF coverage, general SW coverage, FM broadcast, Airband, and some public service FM. With a good filter, it delivers decent (if not superb) SSB reception with very good transmit audio. In reality, it's a FT-847 in paperback. But, when the band is scummy, that may not be enough.   Wink



 


 
Logged
WA2TPU
Member

Posts: 290




Ignore
« Reply #83 on: February 09, 2015, 04:51:49 PM »

WA2TPU    Rating: 5/5    Feb 9, 2015 11:42    Send this review to a friend
BEYOND WOW!     Time owned: more than 12 months
I've owned my KX3 for a couple years now. I previously stated herein this review forum that it was the BEST rig I had ever owned. Sincerely those are FACTS and has not changed. Now a update, the KX3's PERFORMANCE IS ABSOLUTELY BEYOND ANYTHING I'VE EVER EXPERIENCED. PERIOD!!And I've been a ham for many decades.MY KX3's TRULY SUPERB UNBELIEVABLE FILTERING IS SO FANTASTIC IT ALLOWED ME TO FIND OPEN SLOTS IN THE AWFUL NASTY TERRIBLE PILE-UPS OF THE K1NAVASSA DX-pedition. Don't believe me? I'm in their Logs on 3 different bands using SSB Qrp.
Logged
K5TED
Member

Posts: 1218




Ignore
« Reply #84 on: February 09, 2015, 09:44:51 PM »

Apples and oranges. Exercise in Elecrafturbation.
Logged
W8JX
Member

Posts: 9639




Ignore
« Reply #85 on: February 10, 2015, 04:18:14 AM »

Apples and oranges. Exercise in Elecrafturbation.

Just like Chevys and Fords where you love them or hate them.
Logged

--------------------------------------
Ham since 1969....  Old School 20 WPM Extra
N2GIG
Member

Posts: 4




Ignore
« Reply #86 on: February 13, 2015, 07:27:09 PM »

I'm glad I stumbled on the thread....   lots of good information  here... 
Logged
N2ADV
Member

Posts: 89




Ignore
« Reply #87 on: February 18, 2015, 11:13:11 AM »

I now have one of each and have had time to use both side by side.

Both are great rigs. The KX3 does a little better in a crowded environment on a "good" antenna and I found the noise floor seems to be lower and I can dig out JT mode signals with the KX3 but it's not THAT huge of a difference and I'll be likely to grab either one heading out the door.

I like the controls of the KX3 a lot more because most of the stuff I really need is right on the front panel when I am sitting at home, but, to be honest, if I'm running portable, it does not make that huge of a difference.

The screen on getting KX3 is a lot easier to see, obviously.

In the shack, the KX3 is what I am using for QRP experimentation because it has the IF output that I can use for HDSDR.
Logged
Pages: Prev 1 2 3 4 5 [6]   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!