Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Down

Author Topic: A different version of the IC7300 or FTDX3000 question - no contesting  (Read 1056 times)

K0UA

  • Member
  • Posts: 9589
Re: A different version of the IC7300 or FTDX3000 question - no contesting
« Reply #15 on: April 18, 2020, 12:23:51 PM »

Receive only antennas are normally used by DX'ers wanting better performance on Noisy bands like 160 and 80 meters. sometimes 40, but not much higher. The idea is working long haul DX and being able to hear better with Beverage or Beverage on the ground antennas.  I have a LOG (loop on the ground). If you don't have the real estate (most don't) that you can devote to receive only antennas (yes I know there are other Receive only antennas that take less space) and are the usual mix of operation, it is not going to be a big deal to you. I have operated multiple transmitters at the same time as one of my 7300's has been receiving with damage so far.  Have been doing that for a couple of years. BUT there is always a first time I guess.  I have 3 rigs two 7300's and one 7610 which has of course 2 receivers. I have utilized all 4 receivers and 3 transmitters of course into different antennas and on different bands often and repeatedly.  I have a patch panel, I don't use coax switches for HF.  Not trying to talk you out of the 3000, which by all reports is a great rig, but for the money, the 7300 can't be beat.
Logged
73  James K0UA

W6SOX

  • Member
  • Posts: 35
Re: A different version of the IC7300 or FTDX3000 question - no contesting
« Reply #16 on: April 18, 2020, 03:34:48 PM »

Yup, that was the kind of thing I was hoping to hear. Sounds like I shouldn't put too much emphasis on the receive-only input - and if I wanted to, I could probably get away with the RX7300 for under $50. (Clearly others are doing the same).  I'm about 90% decided on the 7300.
Thanks again.
Logged

W6SOX

  • Member
  • Posts: 35
Re: A different version of the IC7300 or FTDX3000 question - no contesting
« Reply #17 on: April 18, 2020, 04:35:59 PM »

Was thinking of ordering from either Gigaparts or R&L.  Wondered if folks have had particularly good or bad experiences or had other recommended distributors.  In the past, I've purchased a lot of less expensive items (cable, antennas, etc) from Univ Radio but have never found their customer service all that great.  Seems like no one has free returns with no restocking like Amazon!  :)
Logged

K0UA

  • Member
  • Posts: 9589
Re: A different version of the IC7300 or FTDX3000 question - no contesting
« Reply #18 on: April 18, 2020, 06:17:55 PM »

Was thinking of ordering from either Gigaparts or R&L.  Wondered if folks have had particularly good or bad experiences or had other recommended distributors.  In the past, I've purchased a lot of less expensive items (cable, antennas, etc) from Univ Radio but have never found their customer service all that great.  Seems like no one has free returns with no restocking like Amazon!  :)

This won't help much, but I have had good service from both Gigaparts AND R&L.  ordered stuff from both, with no problems. I got the two 7300's from Gigaparts, but I just ordered a Diawa wattmeter from R&L because they had the best price.  I have dealt with R&L for rigs in years past too.. So   6 of one...... :)
Logged
73  James K0UA

K7JQ

  • Member
  • Posts: 2602
Re: A different version of the IC7300 or FTDX3000 question - no contesting
« Reply #19 on: April 19, 2020, 06:41:28 AM »

I never bought from Gigaparts, but made transceiver purchases from HRO, DX Engineering, and MTC Trading. No problems with anyone of them, but never had an issue with anything defective out of the box, to test their customer service response. They're all pretty reputable. I'd go with one that has the best price, free shipping, and no sales tax. The radio has a one year warranty, and none of the vendors do in-house repairs anyway.
Logged

W6SOX

  • Member
  • Posts: 35
Re: A different version of the IC7300 or FTDX3000 question - no contesting
« Reply #20 on: April 19, 2020, 10:21:29 AM »

Last question  which I should have asked at the very beginning.  Is my assumption that the IC7300 performance will be substantially better than the FT-857D a valid one?
I ask because I saw a couple posts around saying noise reduction on the FT857 was better than the IC7300, which surprised me given the difference in vintage and technology.

Logged

AF5CC

  • Posts: 1664
    • HomeURL
Re: A different version of the IC7300 or FTDX3000 question - no contesting
« Reply #21 on: April 19, 2020, 10:04:35 PM »

The FT857D outperforms the 7300 on 2m and 70cm  :)
Logged

W6SOX

  • Member
  • Posts: 35
Re: A different version of the IC7300 or FTDX3000 question - no contesting
« Reply #22 on: April 19, 2020, 10:13:40 PM »

Okay, I'll give ya points for that one... ;D
Logged

K2TPZ

  • Posts: 32
    • HomeURL
Re: A different version of the IC7300 or FTDX3000 question - no contesting
« Reply #23 on: April 19, 2020, 11:17:31 PM »

Years ago I had the FT857D and used it as my primary portable rig. In that capacity it worked well. But it is not in the same league as the IC7300. Having owned and used both rigs I can assure you the 7300 will be an upgrade and you will likely gain much enjoyment from its use.

73,

Mike
Logged

W6SOX

  • Member
  • Posts: 35
Re: A different version of the IC7300 or FTDX3000 question - no contesting
« Reply #24 on: April 19, 2020, 11:59:55 PM »

Just put in the IC7300 order.  :) And now it's 3am and I'm going to bed.
Thank you all for your patience and extremely helpful responses.
Michael KB1PIE
Logged

KX2T

  • Member
  • Posts: 1545

You cannot go wrong with the 7300 and if you did your research into the SDR architecture you will immediate learn that small amounts of turning the RF gain control really changed how that radio performs with crowded band condition. many hams do not read the manual and some do but that one control works wonders, also try an not use any of the built in pre amps if you don't really need them with home antennas cause the sensitivity of the 7300 without pre amps engaged is about were most radio's are with there pre amp stages in line, the 7300 is that sensitive.
I used to own both the FTDX3000 and the 7300 at the same time for over six months, the 7300 was purchased as a backup rig but after three months time I started using the 7300 instead of the 3000, yes the 3000 had an APF which worked well but on CW when contest time came around side by side comparo's between the two radio's on the same signal next to +20 rock crushing signals showed that the 3000 DSP IF was getting swamped by a 1Khz signal plus the tell take sound of key clicks then I would go to the 7300 and the 1Khz meat grinders was not even heard, look man no key clicks. That difference was between ultimate channel selectivity between the two were the 3000 was around 85db at best and the 7300 was besting 110db. It really is the little radio that can!
Logged

K6BRN

  • Member
  • Posts: 2231

Quote
the 3000 DSP IF was getting swamped by a 1Khz signal

I take it you were operating CW without the optional 300 Hz roofing filter.

Regardless, the FTDX-3000 has a far superior Gonkulator, with quasi-veriable underpass tuning and Smitt-Lyson product detector!  How did you miss that!

One word:  Menus!  :)

In reality these are both great radios and I'be been able to use both with good results.  My FTDX-3000 is also fully loaded, with the micro-tune elements and CW roofing filter, etc.  It works great.  In fact, I have two of them so could not possibly be wrong in my choice!  But I also have other radios, too.  The reason to choose this radio is for its great receiver, robust TX section that handles FT/JT modes without issue and the many, many I/O options it has compared to the IC-7300 (basically, NONE)

The reason to choose the IC-7300 radio is that operating it is simple and it works well with no options or overly complex menus to deal with.  Pretty much a microwave oven with autosense cooking.  Push the button and it goes.  I love appliances that are done well.  And I mean this sincerely.  It takes a bit of engineering genius to make something so complex so simple to use.

Brian - K6BRN

Logged

KX2T

  • Member
  • Posts: 1545

I had the 300Hz roofing filter and I did not have either the NB or the NR engaged Brian, I have owned enough Yeasu radio's to know well the NB engaged is like opening up the IF stage on a superhet. Since were on that point the NR in the 7300 is much better in  reducing band noise which makes it more comfortable to listen too for hours on end plus does not have the under water effect unless turned all the way up. Maybe the MU tuned options on the Yaesu would have improved things somewhat but by the time you end up with all three filters plus it leaves out 10&15 meters your at a way different price point. Hell I liked my 3000 but that little test during the CQWW CW weekend showed me that the 7300 was a clear game changer but also buy reading lab reports I also found that the 7300 had more sensitivity than most other rigs so that was the only thing that had to be tamed. Many of the Youtube reports showing the 7300 getting overloaded were with radio's were the op would have the Pre Amp stage engaged, clear and simple these folks never did RTFM.
I also think Icom may be missing the boat here as well, at some time the sales of 7300 rigs are going to drop off, yes they have that DC to light QRP thing which is an overpriced Tonka Toy just like the Elecraft KX3 is but to me that is a nitch market. Then they have the 7610 which is $2k more than the 7300, they really need to look at maybe a 7300 or SDR version of the 746Pro, yes HF 6&2 same package, separate antenna jacks plus RX in/out, I/O output so you can use it with HDSDR software for a great pan display and a slightly larger color screen display at around the $2K selling mark. There IC9100  did not last long, nobody really cared for the above UHF and microwave bands but HF six plus two gives allot of station in one box and clearly every 746Pro I hear on the higher bands sound 10 times better and no were near as wide of an SSB signal as those dirty little Kenwood 2000's, every one of those Kenwood's I hear on six is 10 plus Khz wide!
The way you have your 3K with the external MU tune units may improve close in operation but when I lived up north on Long Island NY for most of my life having some of the biggest super stations either around me or there close proximity during a contest weekend on the low bands the 3K didn't cut the mustard so maybe the MU tunes would have helped but the bare bones 7300 really shocked me, I thought that radio would turn to dust but it held its own against the 3K. BTW I stopped reading all the add copy a while back, Yeasu does a great job on there brochures but the proof is in the pudding!
Logged

K6BRN

  • Member
  • Posts: 2231

Hi James (KX2T):

Quote
Since were on that point the NR in the 7300 is much better in  reducing band noise which makes it more comfortable to listen too for hours on end

Oddly enough, I find it to be just the opposite, with the FTDX-3000 NR being more effective and the receiver inherently quieter.  This debate happens enough that I'm convinced we all hear quite differently.  I'm very sensitive to high frequency noise and distortion.  Regardless, both are great radios and work well.

The Yaesu micro-tune units mostly help with out of band signal suppression and some in-band attenuation.  They DO help unwanted AGC pumping from signals starting > 8 KHz away (more or less depending on band).  They certainly are not "miracle filters".  Just very broad passive preselectors in front of the active receiver elements.  They HAVE been useful on FT8 on the lower frequency bands.

I'm biased.  Most of my work has been architecting, designing, building and delivering DSP comms systems - so I very much appreciate the design compromises and attention to user interface in the IC-7300 - all done well and in the right places to hit a fantastic mix of price/performance/usability.  This is one reason I often recommend it.

That said, I really like the FTDX-3000 and FT-991, too.  Both work very well in my stations and on travel.

We are fortunate to have many good choices.

Brian - K6BRN

Logged

HB9PJT

  • Member
  • Posts: 458
    • homeURL

I can't imagine that uTune can make a difference at 8 kHz. So the interfering signal must be at least 70 kHz from the wanted signal (160 m) or 630 kHz (20 m band). You should not overestimate uTune.

73, Peter - HB9PJT

https://ac0c.com/main/img_1273626795_16445_1389932750_mod_385_156.png
« Last Edit: July 09, 2020, 11:07:15 AM by HB9PJT »
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3   Go Up