The KX2

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
39 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

The KX2

w7aqk
Hi All,

The ink is barely dry on the release announcement for the KX2, but it has
created quite a stir.  A lot of people are very curious about this rig,
including me.  As a KX3 owner already, I'm not chomping at the bit to get a
KX2, but I am trying to discern just what the meaningful differences are.

I think it is intriguing that Elecraft chose to make it's new rig a
"downsized" version of the KX3.  I can certainly see how this has stimulated
a lot of interest.  What I'm trying to figure out is whether or not it does
anything better than the KX3, or is it just a smaller, and less capable,
radio.  At this point, I'm inclined to think the latter.  That's not
necessarily a bad thing, but that seems to be a better generalization.
Nonetheless, what you give up with a KX2 may not outweigh what you might
gain with a KX3--it depends solely on the user.

The KX2 is definitely smaller (about half the volume) and lighter, although
the footprint is not quite that much different.  The price is lighter too!
As a true portable radio, I see this as a nice advantage.  SOTA ops probably
will really appreciate this!  You still have a very competent radio with
just about all the features a portable op would want or need.

The things you give up are not insignificant.  There is a slight power
differential, which may, or may not, be a concern.  Possibly more of a
concern might be not having roofing filters.  I've become a huge fan of
having those.  Also, losing access to 160 and 6 meters may be problematic
for some.  I'm not all that concerned about no AM or FM, but others might
be.  With the emphasis on being a "hand held" radio, some may lament no
VHF/UHF as well.

I can only guess at the decreased capability of the optional ATU.  The one
for the KX2 may still be sufficient for most needs, but I just hate to see
less capability.  Elecraft ATU's in the K3 and KX3 are great, and I guess I
just get nervous about less.  The ATU's in the KX1 and K1 were only
moderately useful, and it was their reduced size that caused that.  Elecraft
can obviously put out superb ATU's, but they need some room to do that.

I was disappointed to see that the PX3 would not mate with the KX2.  In
their "FAQ's", Elecraft sort of deflects that by simply suggesting that
capability is more appropriate for a larger rig, like the KX3 or K3, but I'm
still disappointed.  Personally, I think it would have been a big plus if
they could have made it work, but again, just not enough room in that
smaller package--or I assume that was the problem.  Or, maybe it was to just
hold the cost down???

I know a lot of K3 owners, who also have KX3's, and have found the KX3 to be
a very effective substitute/back-up in their main station.  Lately I've been
tinkering with that same process, and it works pretty darned well.  However,
I'm not sure the KX2 is nearly as good a substitute, or back-up.  The lesser
capabilities described above would explain much of that.  I still much
prefer the K3, but I don't give up all that much with the KX3.  It's a great
reason to own both!

So, how do you describe the difference in ten words or less?  Is the KX2 a
stripped down version of the KX3, or is the KX3 a deluxe KX2?  In any event,
there are sufficient differences to require some analysis if you are trying
to pick one over the other.  If I didn't already have a KX3 I could probably
get a headache trying to make that decision.  Either way you go you are
probably a "winner!"  The "easy" way may be to just conclude you want both,
and apparently some have already made that decision!  I'm not sure that
would be my decision, but hey, I haven't had my hands on a KX2 yet either!
Hi.

I'll be very interested in seeing some real in-depth reviews of the KX2.

73,

Dave W7AQK








______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The KX2

EricJ-2
Is a Miata a stripped down version of an F150 pickup?

Is an F150 a Miata with room to carry drywall?

It's pretty obvious from the announcement the KX2 serves a different
purpose than the KX3. It's not a smaller anything. It's a different rig
for a different purpose.

Looks to me its lineage is more KX1 and the preceding Trail Friendly
Radios than anything else in the Elecraft line.

http://www.elecraft.com/KX1/N6KR_KX1_History.html

There's an evolution of rigs you should be comparing it to.

Eric KE6US




On 5/23/2016 7:25 PM, w7aqk wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> The ink is barely dry on the release announcement for the KX2, but it
> has created quite a stir.  A lot of people are very curious about this
> rig, including me.  As a KX3 owner already, I'm not chomping at the
> bit to get a KX2, but I am trying to discern just what the meaningful
> differences are.
>
> I think it is intriguing that Elecraft chose to make it's new rig a
> "downsized" version of the KX3.  I can certainly see how this has
> stimulated a lot of interest.  What I'm trying to figure out is
> whether or not it does anything better than the KX3, or is it just a
> smaller, and less capable, radio.  At this point, I'm inclined to
> think the latter.  That's not necessarily a bad thing, but that seems
> to be a better generalization. Nonetheless, what you give up with a
> KX2 may not outweigh what you might gain with a KX3--it depends solely
> on the user.
>
> The KX2 is definitely smaller (about half the volume) and lighter,
> although the footprint is not quite that much different.  The price is
> lighter too! As a true portable radio, I see this as a nice
> advantage.  SOTA ops probably will really appreciate this! You still
> have a very competent radio with just about all the features a
> portable op would want or need.
>
> The things you give up are not insignificant.  There is a slight power
> differential, which may, or may not, be a concern.  Possibly more of a
> concern might be not having roofing filters.  I've become a huge fan
> of having those.  Also, losing access to 160 and 6 meters may be
> problematic for some.  I'm not all that concerned about no AM or FM,
> but others might be.  With the emphasis on being a "hand held" radio,
> some may lament no VHF/UHF as well.
>
> I can only guess at the decreased capability of the optional ATU. The
> one for the KX2 may still be sufficient for most needs, but I just
> hate to see less capability.  Elecraft ATU's in the K3 and KX3 are
> great, and I guess I just get nervous about less.  The ATU's in the
> KX1 and K1 were only moderately useful, and it was their reduced size
> that caused that.  Elecraft can obviously put out superb ATU's, but
> they need some room to do that.
>
> I was disappointed to see that the PX3 would not mate with the KX2.  
> In their "FAQ's", Elecraft sort of deflects that by simply suggesting
> that capability is more appropriate for a larger rig, like the KX3 or
> K3, but I'm still disappointed.  Personally, I think it would have
> been a big plus if they could have made it work, but again, just not
> enough room in that smaller package--or I assume that was the
> problem.  Or, maybe it was to just hold the cost down???
>
> I know a lot of K3 owners, who also have KX3's, and have found the KX3
> to be a very effective substitute/back-up in their main station.  
> Lately I've been tinkering with that same process, and it works pretty
> darned well.  However, I'm not sure the KX2 is nearly as good a
> substitute, or back-up.  The lesser capabilities described above would
> explain much of that.  I still much prefer the K3, but I don't give up
> all that much with the KX3.  It's a great reason to own both!
>
> So, how do you describe the difference in ten words or less?  Is the
> KX2 a stripped down version of the KX3, or is the KX3 a deluxe KX2?  
> In any event, there are sufficient differences to require some
> analysis if you are trying to pick one over the other.  If I didn't
> already have a KX3 I could probably get a headache trying to make that
> decision.  Either way you go you are probably a "winner!"  The "easy"
> way may be to just conclude you want both, and apparently some have
> already made that decision!  I'm not sure that would be my decision,
> but hey, I haven't had my hands on a KX2 yet either! Hi.
>
> I'll be very interested in seeing some real in-depth reviews of the KX2.
>
> 73,
>
> Dave W7AQK
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> Message delivered to [hidden email]
>
>

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The KX2

Phil Wheeler-2
In reply to this post by w7aqk
Some good observations, Dale.  A comparison with
the KX1 might also be pertinent, since that is the
radio in the Elecraft line I see it replacing.

One thing: You said "I can only guess at the
decreased capability of the optional ATU.  The one
for the KX2 may still be sufficient for most
needs, but I just hate to see less capability.
Elecraft ATU's in the K3 and KX3 are great, and I
guess I just get nervous about less.". I've seen
nothing to suggest less capability in the ATU vs.
the KX3's ATU. The KX2 FAQ includes "7L/7C network
(KXAT2) - 8L/8C network (KXAT3)", but with fewer
bands I suspect the ATUs are equally capable --
and the spec in the FAQ says "matching range typ.
20:1 or higher" which seems good enough.

Would I want to lug and power my PX3 with the
KX2?  Seems that would defeat the purpose of a
small, portable battery-operated rig. But for
portable ops with an AC supply, I'd take the KX3
so it doesn't matter to me.  Clearly the KX2 is
not intended to replace the KX3 in the Elecraft
product line.

As to "So, how do you describe the difference in
ten words or less? Is the KX2 a stripped down
version of the KX3, or is the KX3 a deluxe KX2?",
perhaps a KX1 comparison would be more to the
point, Dale :-)

73, Phil W7OX

On 5/23/16 7:25 PM, w7aqk wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> The ink is barely dry on the release
> announcement for the KX2, but it has created
> quite a stir.  A lot of people are very curious
> about this rig, including me.  As a KX3 owner
> already, I'm not chomping at the bit to get a
> KX2, but I am trying to discern just what the
> meaningful differences are.
>
> I think it is intriguing that Elecraft chose to
> make it's new rig a "downsized" version of the
> KX3.  I can certainly see how this has
> stimulated a lot of interest.  What I'm trying
> to figure out is whether or not it does anything
> better than the KX3, or is it just a smaller,
> and less capable, radio.  At this point, I'm
> inclined to think the latter.  That's not
> necessarily a bad thing, but that seems to be a
> better generalization. Nonetheless, what you
> give up with a KX2 may not outweigh what you
> might gain with a KX3--it depends solely on the
> user.
>
> The KX2 is definitely smaller (about half the
> volume) and lighter, although the footprint is
> not quite that much different.  The price is
> lighter too! As a true portable radio, I see
> this as a nice advantage.  SOTA ops probably
> will really appreciate this! You still have a
> very competent radio with just about all the
> features a portable op would want or need.
>
> The things you give up are not insignificant.  
> There is a slight power differential, which may,
> or may not, be a concern.  Possibly more of a
> concern might be not having roofing filters.  
> I've become a huge fan of having those.  Also,
> losing access to 160 and 6 meters may be
> problematic for some.  I'm not all that
> concerned about no AM or FM, but others might
> be.  With the emphasis on being a "hand held"
> radio, some may lament no VHF/UHF as well.
>
> I can only guess at the decreased capability of
> the optional ATU. The one for the KX2 may still
> be sufficient for most needs, but I just hate to
> see less capability.  Elecraft ATU's in the K3
> and KX3 are great, and I guess I just get
> nervous about less.  The ATU's in the KX1 and K1
> were only moderately useful, and it was their
> reduced size that caused that.  Elecraft can
> obviously put out superb ATU's, but they need
> some room to do that.
>
> I was disappointed to see that the PX3 would not
> mate with the KX2.  In their "FAQ's", Elecraft
> sort of deflects that by simply suggesting that
> capability is more appropriate for a larger rig,
> like the KX3 or K3, but I'm still disappointed.  
> Personally, I think it would have been a big
> plus if they could have made it work, but again,
> just not enough room in that smaller package--or
> I assume that was the problem.  Or, maybe it was
> to just hold the cost down???
>
> I know a lot of K3 owners, who also have KX3's,
> and have found the KX3 to be a very effective
> substitute/back-up in their main station.  
> Lately I've been tinkering with that same
> process, and it works pretty darned well.  
> However, I'm not sure the KX2 is nearly as good
> a substitute, or back-up.  The lesser
> capabilities described above would explain much
> of that.  I still much prefer the K3, but I
> don't give up all that much with the KX3.  It's
> a great reason to own both!
>
> So, how do you describe the difference in ten
> words or less?  Is the KX2 a stripped down
> version of the KX3, or is the KX3 a deluxe KX2?  
> In any event, there are sufficient differences
> to require some analysis if you are trying to
> pick one over the other.  If I didn't already
> have a KX3 I could probably get a headache
> trying to make that decision.  Either way you go
> you are probably a "winner!"  The "easy" way may
> be to just conclude you want both, and
> apparently some have already made that
> decision!  I'm not sure that would be my
> decision, but hey, I haven't had my hands on a
> KX2 yet either! Hi.
>
> I'll be very interested in seeing some real
> in-depth reviews of the KX2.
>
> 73,
>
> Dave W7AQK

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The KX2

wayne burdick
Administrator
The KXAT2 can, over its target range of 80-10 m, match essentially the same load range as the KXAT3 on these bands.

The KXAT3 has one more L and C, improving matches on 160 m.

In exactly 10 words, the KX2 is "the world's first all-HF-band, SSB/CW/data HT" :)

73,
Wayne

On May 23, 2016, at 7:56 PM, Phil Wheeler <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Some good observations, Dale.  A comparison with the KX1 might also be pertinent, since that is the radio in the Elecraft line I see it replacing.
>
> One thing: You said "I can only guess at the decreased capability of the optional ATU.  The one for the KX2 may still be sufficient for most needs, but I just hate to see less capability. Elecraft ATU's in the K3 and KX3 are great, and I guess I just get nervous about less.". I've seen nothing to suggest less capability in the ATU vs. the KX3's ATU. The KX2 FAQ includes "7L/7C network (KXAT2) - 8L/8C network (KXAT3)", but with fewer bands I suspect the ATUs are equally capable -- and the spec in the FAQ says "matching range typ. 20:1 or higher" which seems good enough.
>
> Would I want to lug and power my PX3 with the KX2?  Seems that would defeat the purpose of a small, portable battery-operated rig. But for portable ops with an AC supply, I'd take the KX3 so it doesn't matter to me.  Clearly the KX2 is not intended to replace the KX3 in the Elecraft product line.
>
> As to "So, how do you describe the difference in ten words or less? Is the KX2 a stripped down version of the KX3, or is the KX3 a deluxe KX2?", perhaps a KX1 comparison would be more to the point, Dale :-)
>
> 73, Phil W7OX
>
> On 5/23/16 7:25 PM, w7aqk wrote:
>> Hi All,
>>
>> The ink is barely dry on the release announcement for the KX2, but it has created quite a stir.  A lot of people are very curious about this rig, including me.  As a KX3 owner already, I'm not chomping at the bit to get a KX2, but I am trying to discern just what the meaningful differences are.
>>
>> I think it is intriguing that Elecraft chose to make it's new rig a "downsized" version of the KX3.  I can certainly see how this has stimulated a lot of interest.  What I'm trying to figure out is whether or not it does anything better than the KX3, or is it just a smaller, and less capable, radio.  At this point, I'm inclined to think the latter.  That's not necessarily a bad thing, but that seems to be a better generalization. Nonetheless, what you give up with a KX2 may not outweigh what you might gain with a KX3--it depends solely on the user.
>>
>> The KX2 is definitely smaller (about half the volume) and lighter, although the footprint is not quite that much different.  The price is lighter too! As a true portable radio, I see this as a nice advantage.  SOTA ops probably will really appreciate this! You still have a very competent radio with just about all the features a portable op would want or need.
>>
>> The things you give up are not insignificant.  There is a slight power differential, which may, or may not, be a concern.  Possibly more of a concern might be not having roofing filters.  I've become a huge fan of having those.  Also, losing access to 160 and 6 meters may be problematic for some.  I'm not all that concerned about no AM or FM, but others might be.  With the emphasis on being a "hand held" radio, some may lament no VHF/UHF as well.
>>
>> I can only guess at the decreased capability of the optional ATU. The one for the KX2 may still be sufficient for most needs, but I just hate to see less capability.  Elecraft ATU's in the K3 and KX3 are great, and I guess I just get nervous about less.  The ATU's in the KX1 and K1 were only moderately useful, and it was their reduced size that caused that.  Elecraft can obviously put out superb ATU's, but they need some room to do that.
>>
>> I was disappointed to see that the PX3 would not mate with the KX2.  In their "FAQ's", Elecraft sort of deflects that by simply suggesting that capability is more appropriate for a larger rig, like the KX3 or K3, but I'm still disappointed.  Personally, I think it would have been a big plus if they could have made it work, but again, just not enough room in that smaller package--or I assume that was the problem.  Or, maybe it was to just hold the cost down???
>>
>> I know a lot of K3 owners, who also have KX3's, and have found the KX3 to be a very effective substitute/back-up in their main station.  Lately I've been tinkering with that same process, and it works pretty darned well.  However, I'm not sure the KX2 is nearly as good a substitute, or back-up.  The lesser capabilities described above would explain much of that.  I still much prefer the K3, but I don't give up all that much with the KX3.  It's a great reason to own both!
>>
>> So, how do you describe the difference in ten words or less?  Is the KX2 a stripped down version of the KX3, or is the KX3 a deluxe KX2?  In any event, there are sufficient differences to require some analysis if you are trying to pick one over the other.  If I didn't already have a KX3 I could probably get a headache trying to make that decision.  Either way you go you are probably a "winner!"  The "easy" way may be to just conclude you want both, and apparently some have already made that decision!  I'm not sure that would be my decision, but hey, I haven't had my hands on a KX2 yet either! Hi.
>>
>> I'll be very interested in seeing some real in-depth reviews of the KX2.
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> Dave W7AQK
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> Message delivered to [hidden email]

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The KX2

Don Wilhelm
Is the Dick Tracy "wrist radio" next?  How do the paddles connect to
that one?

73,
Don W3FPR

On 5/23/2016 11:41 PM, Wayne Burdick wrote:
> The KXAT2 can, over its target range of 80-10 m, match essentially the same load range as the KXAT3 on these bands.
>
> The KXAT3 has one more L and C, improving matches on 160 m.
>
> In exactly 10 words, the KX2 is "the world's first all-HF-band, SSB/CW/data HT" :)
>
>

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The KX2

wayne burdick
Administrator
In reply to this post by w7aqk
Hi Dave,


> I think it is intriguing that Elecraft chose to make it's new rig a "downsized" version of the KX3.  I can certainly see how this has stimulated a lot of interest.  What I'm trying to figure out is whether or not it does anything better than the KX3, or is it just a smaller, and less capable, radio.  At this point, I'm inclined to think the latter.

The KX2, given its size/weight, can go places no other 9-band/mutli-mode HF transceiver can go. This makes it "more capable" in a sense. It has fewer controls, but they're the ones you generally need for ultra portable operation.

It has a number of features that make it ideal for HT-style (or horizontally deployed/hand-held) operation:

  - built-in mic
  - battery shifted to the left (bottom, when hand-held)
  - heat sink on the right (top, when hand-held)
  - XMIT switch easily accessible for use as PTT
  - attached paddle length reduced, easily accessible during HT use
  - amp-hours metering for better tracking battery life
  - quick-disconnet jack for trailing counterpoise wire


> I can only guess at the decreased capability of the optional ATU.  The one for the KX2 may still be sufficient for most needs, but I just hate to see less capability.  

See previous post. There is one less L and C, and those were primarily for better coverage of 160 meters.


> I was disappointed to see that the PX3 would not mate with the KX2.... that capability is more appropriate for a larger rig ... just not enough room in that smaller package ... maybe it was to just hold the cost down???

All of the above.

The feature set was carefully targeted to keep the cost lower, making it a good first HF rig for new operators.

>

> So, how do you describe the difference in ten words or less?

See previous email :)

73,
Wayne
N6KR



______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The KX2

w7aqk
In reply to this post by w7aqk
Eric and All,

Boy, I don't know Eric!!!  I see your point, but I don't agree at all that
this is more a move from/towards the KX1/K1 than it is from the KX3.  Even
Elecraft seems to view this as a comparison between the KX2 and the KX3.
Just look at the FAQ page:

http://www.elecraft.com/manual/KX2%20FAQ%20v-1-1a.pdf

They even have a chart of feature comparisons between those two rigs
specifically!!!  No mention of either the KX1 or K1 there!

The KX2 is a reduced size look-alike to the KX3.  It's just got some feature
differentials, but even more feature inclusions!  It's an SDR, just as the
KX3 is, and it takes much the same advantage of that platform.

Yes, it is a move towards smaller size, like the K1 and KX1, but the KX2 has
KX3 "genes" all over it!  That's my only point, and not intended to be
critical either.  There is a huge comparability to the KX3, but not much to
either of those older rigs.

In any event, I'm not sure very many people will be evaluating acquiring
this new radio as opposed to a K1 or KX1, but I bet bunches of folks will be
evaluating the KX2 vs. the KX3.  That said, I suppose even more people will
be motivated to put their K1's and KX3's on the shelf, but I think the KX3
already had the biggest impact on that.  For that matter, so did a lot of
other more recent offerings from other sources.  The K1 or KX1 is an
apples/oranges comparison to the KX2.  The KX2 is an oranges/tangerines
comparison to the KX3.  Or, to use your comparison, how about an F-150 crew
cab 4X4, vs. an F-150 standard with a short bed???  Well, you get my point
even if you don't agree with it.

Cheers!

Dave W7AQK


______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The KX2

vk2rq
In reply to this post by w7aqk
Wow, ten words or less is tough, like writing a haiku :-)
"Smaller KX3 with fewer bands, no panadapter, no roofing filter".
There, that's 10 words. Note that even without a roofing filter, the performance is still excellent, and its compact size makes it the perfect little "grab-n-go" radio.
73, Matt VK2RQ





On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 7:25 PM -0700, "w7aqk" <[hidden email]> wrote:










Hi All,

The ink is barely dry on the release announcement for the KX2, but it has
created quite a stir.  A lot of people are very curious about this rig,
including me.  As a KX3 owner already, I'm not chomping at the bit to get a
KX2, but I am trying to discern just what the meaningful differences are.

I think it is intriguing that Elecraft chose to make it's new rig a
"downsized" version of the KX3.  I can certainly see how this has stimulated
a lot of interest.  What I'm trying to figure out is whether or not it does
anything better than the KX3, or is it just a smaller, and less capable,
radio.  At this point, I'm inclined to think the latter.  That's not
necessarily a bad thing, but that seems to be a better generalization.
Nonetheless, what you give up with a KX2 may not outweigh what you might
gain with a KX3--it depends solely on the user.

The KX2 is definitely smaller (about half the volume) and lighter, although
the footprint is not quite that much different.  The price is lighter too!
As a true portable radio, I see this as a nice advantage.  SOTA ops probably
will really appreciate this!  You still have a very competent radio with
just about all the features a portable op would want or need.

The things you give up are not insignificant.  There is a slight power
differential, which may, or may not, be a concern.  Possibly more of a
concern might be not having roofing filters.  I've become a huge fan of
having those.  Also, losing access to 160 and 6 meters may be problematic
for some.  I'm not all that concerned about no AM or FM, but others might
be.  With the emphasis on being a "hand held" radio, some may lament no
VHF/UHF as well.

I can only guess at the decreased capability of the optional ATU.  The one
for the KX2 may still be sufficient for most needs, but I just hate to see
less capability.  Elecraft ATU's in the K3 and KX3 are great, and I guess I
just get nervous about less.  The ATU's in the KX1 and K1 were only
moderately useful, and it was their reduced size that caused that.  Elecraft
can obviously put out superb ATU's, but they need some room to do that.

I was disappointed to see that the PX3 would not mate with the KX2.  In
their "FAQ's", Elecraft sort of deflects that by simply suggesting that
capability is more appropriate for a larger rig, like the KX3 or K3, but I'm
still disappointed.  Personally, I think it would have been a big plus if
they could have made it work, but again, just not enough room in that
smaller package--or I assume that was the problem.  Or, maybe it was to just
hold the cost down???

I know a lot of K3 owners, who also have KX3's, and have found the KX3 to be
a very effective substitute/back-up in their main station.  Lately I've been
tinkering with that same process, and it works pretty darned well.  However,
I'm not sure the KX2 is nearly as good a substitute, or back-up.  The lesser
capabilities described above would explain much of that.  I still much
prefer the K3, but I don't give up all that much with the KX3.  It's a great
reason to own both!

So, how do you describe the difference in ten words or less?  Is the KX2 a
stripped down version of the KX3, or is the KX3 a deluxe KX2?  In any event,
there are sufficient differences to require some analysis if you are trying
to pick one over the other.  If I didn't already have a KX3 I could probably
get a headache trying to make that decision.  Either way you go you are
probably a "winner!"  The "easy" way may be to just conclude you want both,
and apparently some have already made that decision!  I'm not sure that
would be my decision, but hey, I haven't had my hands on a KX2 yet either!
Hi.

I'll be very interested in seeing some real in-depth reviews of the KX2.

73,

Dave W7AQK








______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]





______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The KX2

wayne burdick
Administrator
In his book "The Joy of QRP," Ade Weiss famously said:

    If there is a place, and you can get to it, you must operate from there.

This is the motivation behind the KX2. Thanks to its small size and high level of integration, it's the radio you'd wish you had while hanging precariously from a cliff, sitting high in a tree, hiding from burglars in an attic, or any of numerous other likely operating scenarios.

73,
Wayne
N6KR


On May 23, 2016, at 9:04 PM, Matt Maguire <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Wow, ten words or less is tough, like writing a haiku :-)
> "Smaller KX3 with fewer bands, no panadapter, no roofing filter".
> There, that's 10 words. Note that even without a roofing filter, the performance is still excellent, and its compact size makes it the perfect little "grab-n-go" radio.
> 73, Matt VK2RQ
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 7:25 PM -0700, "w7aqk" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Hi All,
>
> The ink is barely dry on the release announcement for the KX2, but it has
> created quite a stir.  A lot of people are very curious about this rig,
> including me.  As a KX3 owner already, I'm not chomping at the bit to get a
> KX2, but I am trying to discern just what the meaningful differences are.
>
> I think it is intriguing that Elecraft chose to make it's new rig a
> "downsized" version of the KX3.  I can certainly see how this has stimulated
> a lot of interest.  What I'm trying to figure out is whether or not it does
> anything better than the KX3, or is it just a smaller, and less capable,
> radio.  At this point, I'm inclined to think the latter.  That's not
> necessarily a bad thing, but that seems to be a better generalization.
> Nonetheless, what you give up with a KX2 may not outweigh what you might
> gain with a KX3--it depends solely on the user.
>
> The KX2 is definitely smaller (about half the volume) and lighter, although
> the footprint is not quite that much different.  The price is lighter too!
> As a true portable radio, I see this as a nice advantage.  SOTA ops probably
> will really appreciate this!  You still have a very competent radio with
> just about all the features a portable op would want or need.
>
> The things you give up are not insignificant.  There is a slight power
> differential, which may, or may not, be a concern.  Possibly more of a
> concern might be not having roofing filters.  I've become a huge fan of
> having those.  Also, losing access to 160 and 6 meters may be problematic
> for some.  I'm not all that concerned about no AM or FM, but others might
> be.  With the emphasis on being a "hand held" radio, some may lament no
> VHF/UHF as well.
>
> I can only guess at the decreased capability of the optional ATU.  The one
> for the KX2 may still be sufficient for most needs, but I just hate to see
> less capability.  Elecraft ATU's in the K3 and KX3 are great, and I guess I
> just get nervous about less.  The ATU's in the KX1 and K1 were only
> moderately useful, and it was their reduced size that caused that.  Elecraft
> can obviously put out superb ATU's, but they need some room to do that.
>
> I was disappointed to see that the PX3 would not mate with the KX2.  In
> their "FAQ's", Elecraft sort of deflects that by simply suggesting that
> capability is more appropriate for a larger rig, like the KX3 or K3, but I'm
> still disappointed.  Personally, I think it would have been a big plus if
> they could have made it work, but again, just not enough room in that
> smaller package--or I assume that was the problem.  Or, maybe it was to just
> hold the cost down???
>
> I know a lot of K3 owners, who also have KX3's, and have found the KX3 to be
> a very effective substitute/back-up in their main station.  Lately I've been
> tinkering with that same process, and it works pretty darned well.  However,
> I'm not sure the KX2 is nearly as good a substitute, or back-up.  The lesser
> capabilities described above would explain much of that.  I still much
> prefer the K3, but I don't give up all that much with the KX3.  It's a great
> reason to own both!
>
> So, how do you describe the difference in ten words or less?  Is the KX2 a
> stripped down version of the KX3, or is the KX3 a deluxe KX2?  In any event,
> there are sufficient differences to require some analysis if you are trying
> to pick one over the other.  If I didn't already have a KX3 I could probably
> get a headache trying to make that decision.  Either way you go you are
> probably a "winner!"  The "easy" way may be to just conclude you want both,
> and apparently some have already made that decision!  I'm not sure that
> would be my decision, but hey, I haven't had my hands on a KX2 yet either!
> Hi.
>
> I'll be very interested in seeing some real in-depth reviews of the KX2.
>
> 73,
>
> Dave W7AQK
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> Message delivered to [hidden email]
>
>
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> Message delivered to [hidden email]

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The KX2

Nr4c
In reply to this post by Phil Wheeler-2
As to the ATU in the KX2, 7K/7C is the same range as the KX1, T1 and I think the K2 ATU.

Comparisons with KX1 make sense but how bout a small pocket sized "next step" to the K2?

Sent from my iPhone
...nr4c. bill


> On May 23, 2016, at 10:56 PM, Phil Wheeler <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Some good observations, Dale.  A comparison with the KX1 might also be pertinent, since that is the radio in the Elecraft line I see it replacing.
>
> One thing: You said "I can only guess at the decreased capability of the optional ATU.  The one for the KX2 may still be sufficient for most needs, but I just hate to see less capability. Elecraft ATU's in the K3 and KX3 are great, and I guess I just get nervous about less.". I've seen nothing to suggest less capability in the ATU vs. the KX3's ATU. The KX2 FAQ includes "7L/7C network (KXAT2) - 8L/8C network (KXAT3)", but with fewer bands I suspect the ATUs are equally capable -- and the spec in the FAQ says "matching range typ. 20:1 or higher" which seems good enough.
>
> Would I want to lug and power my PX3 with the KX2?  Seems that would defeat the purpose of a small, portable battery-operated rig. But for portable ops with an AC supply, I'd take the KX3 so it doesn't matter to me.  Clearly the KX2 is not intended to replace the KX3 in the Elecraft product line.
>
> As to "So, how do you describe the difference in ten words or less? Is the KX2 a stripped down version of the KX3, or is the KX3 a deluxe KX2?", perhaps a KX1 comparison would be more to the point, Dale :-)
>
> 73, Phil W7OX
>
>> On 5/23/16 7:25 PM, w7aqk wrote:
>> Hi All,
>>
>> The ink is barely dry on the release announcement for the KX2, but it has created quite a stir.  A lot of people are very curious about this rig, including me.  As a KX3 owner
> Some good observations, Dale.  A comparison with the KX1 might also be pertinent, since that is the radio in the Elecraft line I see it replacing.
>
> One thing: You said "I can only guess at the decreased capability of the optional ATU.  The one for the KX2 may still be sufficient for most needs, but I just hate to see less capability. Elecraft ATU's in the K3 and KX3 are great, and I guess I just get nervous about less.". I've seen nothing to suggest less capability in the ATU vs. the KX3's ATU. The KX2 FAQ includes "7L/7C network (KXAT2) - 8L/8C network (KXAT3)", but with fewer bands I suspect the ATUs are equally capable -- and the spec in the FAQ says "matching range typ. 20:1 or higher" which seems good enough.
>
> Would I want to lug and power my PX3 with the KX2?  Seems that would defeat the purpose of a small, portable battery-operated rig. But for portable ops with an AC supply, I'd take the KX3 so it doesn't matter to me.  Clearly the KX2 is not intended to replace the KX3 in the Elecraft product line.
>
> As to "So, how do you describe the difference in ten words or less? Is the KX2 a stripped down version of the KX3, or is the KX3 a deluxe KX2?", perhaps a KX1 comparison would be more to the point, Dale :-)
>
> 73, Phil W7OX
>
>> On 5/23/16 7:25 PM, w7aqk wrote:
>> Hi All,
>>
>> The ink is barely dry on the release announcement for the KX2, but it has created quite a stir.  A lot of people are very curious about this rig, including me.  As a KX3 owner already, I'm not chomping at the bit to get a KX2, but I am trying to discern just what the meaningful differences are.
>>
>> I think it is intriguing that Elecraft chose to make it's new rig a "downsized" version of the KX3.  I can certainly see how this has stimulated a lot of interest.  What I'm trying to figure out is whether or not it does anything better than the KX3, or is it just a smaller, and less capable, radio.  At this point, I'm inclined to think the latter.  That's not necessarily a bad thing, but that seems to be a better generalization. Nonetheless, what you give up with a KX2 may not outweigh what you might gain with a KX3--it depends solely on the user.
>>
>> The KX2 is definitely smaller (about half the volume) and lighter, although the footprint is not quite that much different.  The price is lighter too! As a true portable radio, I see this as a nice advantage.  SOTA ops probably will really appreciate this! You still have a very competent radio with just about all the features a portable op would want or need.
>>
>> The things you give up are not insignificant.  There is a slight power differential, which may, or may not, be a concern.  Possibly more of a concern might be not having roofing filters.  I've become a huge fan of having those.  Also, losing access to 160 and 6 meters may be problematic for some.  I'm not all that concerned about no AM or FM, but others might be.  With the emphasis on being a "hand held" radio, some may lament no VHF/UHF as well.
>>
>> I can only guess at the decreased capability of the optional ATU. The one for the KX2 may still be sufficient for most needs, but I just hate to see less capability.  Elecraft ATU's in the K3 and KX3 are great, and I guess I just get nervous about less.  The ATU's in the KX1 and K1 were only moderately useful, and it was their reduced size that caused that.  Elecraft can obviously put out superb ATU's, but they need some room to do that.
>>
>> I was disappointed to see that the PX3 would not mate with the KX2.  In their "FAQ's", Elecraft sort of deflects that by simply suggesting that capability is more appropriate for a larger rig, like the KX3 or K3, but I'm still disappointed.  Personally, I think it would have been a big plus if they could have made it work, but again, just not enough room in that smaller package--or I assume that was the problem.  Or, maybe it was to just hold the cost down???
>>
>> I know a lot of K3 owners, who also have KX3's, and have found the KX3 to be a very effective substitute/back-up in their main station.  Lately I've been tinkering with that same process, and it works pretty darned well.  However, I'm not sure the KX2 is nearly as good a substitute, or back-up.  The lesser capabilities described above would explain much of that.  I still much prefer the K3, but I don't give up all that much with the KX3.  It's a great reason to own both!
>>
>> So, how do you describe the difference in ten words or less?  Is the KX2 a stripped down version of the KX3, or is the KX3 a deluxe KX2?  In any event, there are sufficient differences to require some analysis if you are trying to pick one over the other.  If I didn't already have a KX3 I could probably get a headache trying to make that decision.  Either way you go you are probably a "winner!"  The "easy" way may be to just conclude you want both, and apparently some have already made that decision!  I'm not sure that would be my decision, but hey, I haven't had my hands on a KX2 yet either! Hi.
>>
>> I'll be very interested in seeing some real in-depth reviews of the KX2.
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> Dave W7AQK
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> Message delivered to [hidden email]

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The KX2

vk2rq
Architecturally the KX2 much more closely resembles the KX3 than the K2.

73, Matt VK2RQ




On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 5:28 AM -0700, "Nr4c" <[hidden email]> wrote:










As to the ATU in the KX2, 7K/7C is the same range as the KX1, T1 and I think the K2 ATU.

Comparisons with KX1 make sense but how bout a small pocket sized "next step" to the K2?

Sent from my iPhone
...nr4c. bill


> On May 23, 2016, at 10:56 PM, Phil Wheeler  wrote:
>
> Some good observations, Dale.  A comparison with the KX1 might also be pertinent, since that is the radio in the Elecraft line I see it replacing.
>
> One thing: You said "I can only guess at the decreased capability of the optional ATU.  The one for the KX2 may still be sufficient for most needs, but I just hate to see less capability. Elecraft ATU's in the K3 and KX3 are great, and I guess I just get nervous about less.". I've seen nothing to suggest less capability in the ATU vs. the KX3's ATU. The KX2 FAQ includes "7L/7C network (KXAT2) - 8L/8C network (KXAT3)", but with fewer bands I suspect the ATUs are equally capable -- and the spec in the FAQ says "matching range typ. 20:1 or higher" which seems good enough.
>
> Would I want to lug and power my PX3 with the KX2?  Seems that would defeat the purpose of a small, portable battery-operated rig. But for portable ops with an AC supply, I'd take the KX3 so it doesn't matter to me.  Clearly the KX2 is not intended to replace the KX3 in the Elecraft product line.
>
> As to "So, how do you describe the difference in ten words or less? Is the KX2 a stripped down version of the KX3, or is the KX3 a deluxe KX2?", perhaps a KX1 comparison would be more to the point, Dale :-)
>
> 73, Phil W7OX
>
>> On 5/23/16 7:25 PM, w7aqk wrote:
>> Hi All,
>>
>> The ink is barely dry on the release announcement for the KX2, but it has created quite a stir.  A lot of people are very curious about this rig, including me.  As a KX3 owner
> Some good observations, Dale.  A comparison with the KX1 might also be pertinent, since that is the radio in the Elecraft line I see it replacing.
>
> One thing: You said "I can only guess at the decreased capability of the optional ATU.  The one for the KX2 may still be sufficient for most needs, but I just hate to see less capability. Elecraft ATU's in the K3 and KX3 are great, and I guess I just get nervous about less.". I've seen nothing to suggest less capability in the ATU vs. the KX3's ATU. The KX2 FAQ includes "7L/7C network (KXAT2) - 8L/8C network (KXAT3)", but with fewer bands I suspect the ATUs are equally capable -- and the spec in the FAQ says "matching range typ. 20:1 or higher" which seems good enough.
>
> Would I want to lug and power my PX3 with the KX2?  Seems that would defeat the purpose of a small, portable battery-operated rig. But for portable ops with an AC supply, I'd take the KX3 so it doesn't matter to me.  Clearly the KX2 is not intended to replace the KX3 in the Elecraft product line.
>
> As to "So, how do you describe the difference in ten words or less? Is the KX2 a stripped down version of the KX3, or is the KX3 a deluxe KX2?", perhaps a KX1 comparison would be more to the point, Dale :-)
>
> 73, Phil W7OX
>
>> On 5/23/16 7:25 PM, w7aqk wrote:
>> Hi All,
>>
>> The ink is barely dry on the release announcement for the KX2, but it has created quite a stir.  A lot of people are very curious about this rig, including me.  As a KX3 owner already, I'm not chomping at the bit to get a KX2, but I am trying to discern just what the meaningful differences are.
>>
>> I think it is intriguing that Elecraft chose to make it's new rig a "downsized" version of the KX3.  I can certainly see how this has stimulated a lot of interest.  What I'm trying to figure out is whether or not it does anything better than the KX3, or is it just a smaller, and less capable, radio.  At this point, I'm inclined to think the latter.  That's not necessarily a bad thing, but that seems to be a better generalization. Nonetheless, what you give up with a KX2 may not outweigh what you might gain with a KX3--it depends solely on the user.
>>
>> The KX2 is definitely smaller (about half the volume) and lighter, although the footprint is not quite that much different.  The price is lighter too! As a true portable radio, I see this as a nice advantage.  SOTA ops probably will really appreciate this! You still have a very competent radio with just about all the features a portable op would want or need.
>>
>> The things you give up are not insignificant.  There is a slight power differential, which may, or may not, be a concern.  Possibly more of a concern might be not having roofing filters.  I've become a huge fan of having those.  Also, losing access to 160 and 6 meters may be problematic for some.  I'm not all that concerned about no AM or FM, but others might be.  With the emphasis on being a "hand held" radio, some may lament no VHF/UHF as well.
>>
>> I can only guess at the decreased capability of the optional ATU. The one for the KX2 may still be sufficient for most needs, but I just hate to see less capability.  Elecraft ATU's in the K3 and KX3 are great, and I guess I just get nervous about less.  The ATU's in the KX1 and K1 were only moderately useful, and it was their reduced size that caused that.  Elecraft can obviously put out superb ATU's, but they need some room to do that.
>>
>> I was disappointed to see that the PX3 would not mate with the KX2.  In their "FAQ's", Elecraft sort of deflects that by simply suggesting that capability is more appropriate for a larger rig, like the KX3 or K3, but I'm still disappointed.  Personally, I think it would have been a big plus if they could have made it work, but again, just not enough room in that smaller package--or I assume that was the problem.  Or, maybe it was to just hold the cost down???
>>
>> I know a lot of K3 owners, who also have KX3's, and have found the KX3 to be a very effective substitute/back-up in their main station.  Lately I've been tinkering with that same process, and it works pretty darned well.  However, I'm not sure the KX2 is nearly as good a substitute, or back-up.  The lesser capabilities described above would explain much of that.  I still much prefer the K3, but I don't give up all that much with the KX3.  It's a great reason to own both!
>>
>> So, how do you describe the difference in ten words or less?  Is the KX2 a stripped down version of the KX3, or is the KX3 a deluxe KX2?  In any event, there are sufficient differences to require some analysis if you are trying to pick one over the other.  If I didn't already have a KX3 I could probably get a headache trying to make that decision.  Either way you go you are probably a "winner!"  The "easy" way may be to just conclude you want both, and apparently some have already made that decision!  I'm not sure that would be my decision, but hey, I haven't had my hands on a KX2 yet either! Hi.
>>
>> I'll be very interested in seeing some real in-depth reviews of the KX2.
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> Dave W7AQK
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> Message delivered to [hidden email]

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]





______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The KX2

Phil Wheeler-2
In reply to this post by Don Wilhelm
Don, perhaps you speak into the mic and the
firmware converts that to CW. Come to think of it,
all the hardware is there now -- so maybe new KX2
firmware will do it :-)

Since Wayne says "the world's first all-HF-band,
SSB/CW/data HT", I wonder if a rubber ducky is
included?

73, Phil W7OX

On 5/23/16 8:49 PM, Don Wilhelm wrote:

> Is the Dick Tracy "wrist radio" next?  How do
> the paddles connect to that one?
>
> 73,
> Don W3FPR
>
> On 5/23/2016 11:41 PM, Wayne Burdick wrote:
>> The KXAT2 can, over its target range of 80-10
>> m, match essentially the same load range as the
>> KXAT3 on these bands.
>>
>> The KXAT3 has one more L and C, improving
>> matches on 160 m.
>>
>> In exactly 10 words, the KX2 is "the world's
>> first all-HF-band, SSB/CW/data HT" :)
>>

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The KX2

vk2rq
Rubber duck is too inefficient on HF, try this instead:http://youtu.be/hoHNoIK_OUo
73, Matt VK2RQ




On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 6:14 AM -0700, "Phil Wheeler" <[hidden email]> wrote:










Don, perhaps you speak into the mic and the
firmware converts that to CW. Come to think of it,
all the hardware is there now -- so maybe new KX2
firmware will do it :-)

Since Wayne says "the world's first all-HF-band,
SSB/CW/data HT", I wonder if a rubber ducky is
included?

73, Phil W7OX

On 5/23/16 8:49 PM, Don Wilhelm wrote:

> Is the Dick Tracy "wrist radio" next?  How do
> the paddles connect to that one?
>
> 73,
> Don W3FPR
>
> On 5/23/2016 11:41 PM, Wayne Burdick wrote:
>> The KXAT2 can, over its target range of 80-10
>> m, match essentially the same load range as the
>> KXAT3 on these bands.
>>
>> The KXAT3 has one more L and C, improving
>> matches on 160 m.
>>
>> In exactly 10 words, the KX2 is "the world's
>> first all-HF-band, SSB/CW/data HT" :)
>>

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]





______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The KX2

Elecraft mailing list
In reply to this post by Don Wilhelm
>>> Is the Dick Tracy "wrist radio" next?  How do the paddles connect to 


that one?
Given Wayne and Eric's track record of innovation, I can imagine separatepaddles powered by a coin battery using Bluetooth to talk to the rig. Thereal question would then be which would weigh more, the rig or the paddles? :-)
I'm not personally interested in a rig to take camping, since I don't go camping,but the KX2 appears to be an ideal rig for ARES/RACES emergency operations,particularly in the aftermath of a major weather event when there might not bean infrastructure available. Very impressive design/cost trade-offs and attentionto detail - the earlier comment about the knob dimple, for example.
Nice work !!
73 de N1HO

 
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The KX2

wayne burdick
Administrator
In reply to this post by vk2rq
In fact the two are so close that they share exactly the same DSP code. Hardware overlaps about 80%.

73,
Wayne
N6KR


On May 24, 2016, at 5:32 AM, Matt Maguire <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Architecturally the KX2 much more closely resembles the KX3 than the K2.
>
> 73, Matt VK2RQ
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 5:28 AM -0700, "Nr4c" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> As to the ATU in the KX2, 7K/7C is the same range as the KX1, T1 and I think the K2 ATU.
>
> Comparisons with KX1 make sense but how bout a small pocket sized "next step" to the K2?
>
> Sent from my iPhone
> ...nr4c. bill
>
>
>> On May 23, 2016, at 10:56 PM, Phil Wheeler  wrote:
>>
>> Some good observations, Dale.  A comparison with the KX1 might also be pertinent, since that is the radio in the Elecraft line I see it replacing.
>>
>> One thing: You said "I can only guess at the decreased capability of the optional ATU.  The one for the KX2 may still be sufficient for most needs, but I just hate to see less capability. Elecraft ATU's in the K3 and KX3 are great, and I guess I just get nervous about less.". I've seen nothing to suggest less capability in the ATU vs. the KX3's ATU. The KX2 FAQ includes "7L/7C network (KXAT2) - 8L/8C network (KXAT3)", but with fewer bands I suspect the ATUs are equally capable -- and the spec in the FAQ says "matching range typ. 20:1 or higher" which seems good enough.
>>
>> Would I want to lug and power my PX3 with the KX2?  Seems that would defeat the purpose of a small, portable battery-operated rig. But for portable ops with an AC supply, I'd take the KX3 so it doesn't matter to me.  Clearly the KX2 is not intended to replace the KX3 in the Elecraft product line.
>>
>> As to "So, how do you describe the difference in ten words or less? Is the KX2 a stripped down version of the KX3, or is the KX3 a deluxe KX2?", perhaps a KX1 comparison would be more to the point, Dale :-)
>>
>> 73, Phil W7OX
>>
>>> On 5/23/16 7:25 PM, w7aqk wrote:
>>> Hi All,
>>>
>>> The ink is barely dry on the release announcement for the KX2, but it has created quite a stir.  A lot of people are very curious about this rig, including me.  As a KX3 owner
>> Some good observations, Dale.  A comparison with the KX1 might also be pertinent, since that is the radio in the Elecraft line I see it replacing.
>>
>> One thing: You said "I can only guess at the decreased capability of the optional ATU.  The one for the KX2 may still be sufficient for most needs, but I just hate to see less capability. Elecraft ATU's in the K3 and KX3 are great, and I guess I just get nervous about less.". I've seen nothing to suggest less capability in the ATU vs. the KX3's ATU. The KX2 FAQ includes "7L/7C network (KXAT2) - 8L/8C network (KXAT3)", but with fewer bands I suspect the ATUs are equally capable -- and the spec in the FAQ says "matching range typ. 20:1 or higher" which seems good enough.
>>
>> Would I want to lug and power my PX3 with the KX2?  Seems that would defeat the purpose of a small, portable battery-operated rig. But for portable ops with an AC supply, I'd take the KX3 so it doesn't matter to me.  Clearly the KX2 is not intended to replace the KX3 in the Elecraft product line.
>>
>> As to "So, how do you describe the difference in ten words or less? Is the KX2 a stripped down version of the KX3, or is the KX3 a deluxe KX2?", perhaps a KX1 comparison would be more to the point, Dale :-)
>>
>> 73, Phil W7OX
>>
>>> On 5/23/16 7:25 PM, w7aqk wrote:
>>> Hi All,
>>>
>>> The ink is barely dry on the release announcement for the KX2, but it has created quite a stir.  A lot of people are very curious about this rig, including me.  As a KX3 owner already, I'm not chomping at the bit to get a KX2, but I am trying to discern just what the meaningful differences are.
>>>
>>> I think it is intriguing that Elecraft chose to make it's new rig a "downsized" version of the KX3.  I can certainly see how this has stimulated a lot of interest.  What I'm trying to figure out is whether or not it does anything better than the KX3, or is it just a smaller, and less capable, radio.  At this point, I'm inclined to think the latter.  That's not necessarily a bad thing, but that seems to be a better generalization. Nonetheless, what you give up with a KX2 may not outweigh what you might gain with a KX3--it depends solely on the user.
>>>
>>> The KX2 is definitely smaller (about half the volume) and lighter, although the footprint is not quite that much different.  The price is lighter too! As a true portable radio, I see this as a nice advantage.  SOTA ops probably will really appreciate this! You still have a very competent radio with just about all the features a portable op would want or need.
>>>
>>> The things you give up are not insignificant.  There is a slight power differential, which may, or may not, be a concern.  Possibly more of a concern might be not having roofing filters.  I've become a huge fan of having those.  Also, losing access to 160 and 6 meters may be problematic for some.  I'm not all that concerned about no AM or FM, but others might be.  With the emphasis on being a "hand held" radio, some may lament no VHF/UHF as well.
>>>
>>> I can only guess at the decreased capability of the optional ATU. The one for the KX2 may still be sufficient for most needs, but I just hate to see less capability.  Elecraft ATU's in the K3 and KX3 are great, and I guess I just get nervous about less.  The ATU's in the KX1 and K1 were only moderately useful, and it was their reduced size that caused that.  Elecraft can obviously put out superb ATU's, but they need some room to do that.
>>>
>>> I was disappointed to see that the PX3 would not mate with the KX2.  In their "FAQ's", Elecraft sort of deflects that by simply suggesting that capability is more appropriate for a larger rig, like the KX3 or K3, but I'm still disappointed.  Personally, I think it would have been a big plus if they could have made it work, but again, just not enough room in that smaller package--or I assume that was the problem.  Or, maybe it was to just hold the cost down???
>>>
>>> I know a lot of K3 owners, who also have KX3's, and have found the KX3 to be a very effective substitute/back-up in their main station.  Lately I've been tinkering with that same process, and it works pretty darned well.  However, I'm not sure the KX2 is nearly as good a substitute, or back-up.  The lesser capabilities described above would explain much of that.  I still much prefer the K3, but I don't give up all that much with the KX3.  It's a great reason to own both!
>>>
>>> So, how do you describe the difference in ten words or less?  Is the KX2 a stripped down version of the KX3, or is the KX3 a deluxe KX2?  In any event, there are sufficient differences to require some analysis if you are trying to pick one over the other.  If I didn't already have a KX3 I could probably get a headache trying to make that decision.  Either way you go you are probably a "winner!"  The "easy" way may be to just conclude you want both, and apparently some have already made that decision!  I'm not sure that would be my decision, but hey, I haven't had my hands on a KX2 yet either! Hi.
>>>
>>> I'll be very interested in seeing some real in-depth reviews of the KX2.
>>>
>>> 73,
>>>
>>> Dave W7AQK
>>
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> Elecraft mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>>
>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>> Message delivered to [hidden email]
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> Message delivered to [hidden email]
>
>
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> Message delivered to [hidden email]

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The KX2

Edward R Cole
In reply to this post by w7aqk
One type of radio that Elecraft has avoided making to date:
multi-band, multi-mode VHF/UHF, cross-band duplex radio.

I recently bought a (not new) radio that, at its time, was considered
one of the finest radios for this:
Yaesu FT-736R.  It is still held in considerable respect.

I wanted a VHF/UHF multi-mode radio capable of satellite operation
and had considered a cross-band duplex-capable FM mobile radio, but
it would have limited me to FM.  For approximately $200 more I
obtained a "cherry" FT-736R with basic 2m/70cm capability.

The radio is capable of expansion to two more bands via installation
of internal modules for 6m, 220, and 1.2 GHz.  Quite a remarkable
model of adaptability for its time.

I previously owned its successor, the  FT-847, which was HF, 6m, 2m,
70cm.  But on used market cost double what I spent on the FT-736R.

Had Elecraft offered a VHF/UHF cross-band duplex multi-mode radio I
would have considered it.  Nothing on the current market equals the
Elecraft radio quality (my opinion).  I chose the K3/10 plus
transverters for eme, but the K3 is not capable of duplex operation.

If a KVX3sat were produced - I think the market is there.  Current
competitors: IC-9100 and TS2000X;Yaesu is out of the satellite radio market.

73, Ed - KL7UW
http://www.kl7uw.com
     "Kits made by KL7UW"
Dubus Mag business:
     [hidden email]

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The KX2

EricJ-2
In reply to this post by EricJ-2
The Miata/F150 analogy was meant to be ludicrous. As are comparisons
between the KX2 and KX3. Apples and oranges.

There's a straight line between ZOIs Mountaineer, Norcal 40, KX1 and KX2.

The K2 intentionally jumped off that line and the K3 said, "What line?".
The K1 was barely ever on it. The KX1 moved solidly back on the line.
The KX3 day-hikes on groomed trails, but prefers full hookups in the RV
park at the end of the day.

I got more, but I'm saving them for my book.


Eric KE6US




On 5/23/2016 8:34 PM, Walter Underwood wrote:

> We have a 1991 Miata and a 2013 Mazdaspeed 3, plus a KX3, so I don’t think this is a useful analogy. The Miata and the KX3 are both original, clean, minimal designs that perform way above their weight.
>
> The KX2 is very obviously a stripped-down, lightweight KX3.
>
> Yes, the lineage goes back through the KX1, the NorCal 40A, and the Sierra. That lineage includes the KX3.
>
> wunder
> K6WRU
> Walter Underwood
> CM87wj
> http://observer.wunderwood.org/ (my blog)
>
>> On May 23, 2016, at 7:53 PM, EricJ <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> Is a Miata a stripped down version of an F150 pickup?
>>
>> Is an F150 a Miata with room to carry drywall?
>>
>> It's pretty obvious from the announcement the KX2 serves a different purpose than the KX3. It's not a smaller anything. It's a different rig for a different purpose.
>>
>> Looks to me its lineage is more KX1 and the preceding Trail Friendly Radios than anything else in the Elecraft line.
>>
>> http://www.elecraft.com/KX1/N6KR_KX1_History.html
>>
>> There's an evolution of rigs you should be comparing it to.
>>
>> Eric KE6US
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 5/23/2016 7:25 PM, w7aqk wrote:
>>> Hi All,
>>>
>>> The ink is barely dry on the release announcement for the KX2, but it has created quite a stir.  A lot of people are very curious about this rig, including me.  As a KX3 owner already, I'm not chomping at the bit to get a KX2, but I am trying to discern just what the meaningful differences are.
>>>
>>> I think it is intriguing that Elecraft chose to make it's new rig a "downsized" version of the KX3.  I can certainly see how this has stimulated a lot of interest.  What I'm trying to figure out is whether or not it does anything better than the KX3, or is it just a smaller, and less capable, radio.  At this point, I'm inclined to think the latter.  That's not necessarily a bad thing, but that seems to be a better generalization. Nonetheless, what you give up with a KX2 may not outweigh what you might gain with a KX3--it depends solely on the user.
>>>
>>> The KX2 is definitely smaller (about half the volume) and lighter, although the footprint is not quite that much different.  The price is lighter too! As a true portable radio, I see this as a nice advantage.  SOTA ops probably will really appreciate this! You still have a very competent radio with just about all the features a portable op would want or need.
>>>
>>> The things you give up are not insignificant.  There is a slight power differential, which may, or may not, be a concern.  Possibly more of a concern might be not having roofing filters.  I've become a huge fan of having those.  Also, losing access to 160 and 6 meters may be problematic for some.  I'm not all that concerned about no AM or FM, but others might be.  With the emphasis on being a "hand held" radio, some may lament no VHF/UHF as well.
>>>
>>> I can only guess at the decreased capability of the optional ATU. The one for the KX2 may still be sufficient for most needs, but I just hate to see less capability.  Elecraft ATU's in the K3 and KX3 are great, and I guess I just get nervous about less.  The ATU's in the KX1 and K1 were only moderately useful, and it was their reduced size that caused that.  Elecraft can obviously put out superb ATU's, but they need some room to do that.
>>>
>>> I was disappointed to see that the PX3 would not mate with the KX2.  In their "FAQ's", Elecraft sort of deflects that by simply suggesting that capability is more appropriate for a larger rig, like the KX3 or K3, but I'm still disappointed.  Personally, I think it would have been a big plus if they could have made it work, but again, just not enough room in that smaller package--or I assume that was the problem.  Or, maybe it was to just hold the cost down???
>>>
>>> I know a lot of K3 owners, who also have KX3's, and have found the KX3 to be a very effective substitute/back-up in their main station.  Lately I've been tinkering with that same process, and it works pretty darned well.  However, I'm not sure the KX2 is nearly as good a substitute, or back-up.  The lesser capabilities described above would explain much of that.  I still much prefer the K3, but I don't give up all that much with the KX3.  It's a great reason to own both!
>>>
>>> So, how do you describe the difference in ten words or less?  Is the KX2 a stripped down version of the KX3, or is the KX3 a deluxe KX2?  In any event, there are sufficient differences to require some analysis if you are trying to pick one over the other.  If I didn't already have a KX3 I could probably get a headache trying to make that decision.  Either way you go you are probably a "winner!"  The "easy" way may be to just conclude you want both, and apparently some have already made that decision!  I'm not sure that would be my decision, but hey, I haven't had my hands on a KX2 yet either! Hi.
>>>
>>> I'll be very interested in seeing some real in-depth reviews of the KX2.
>>>
>>> 73,
>>>
>>> Dave W7AQK
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ______________________________________________________________
>>> Elecraft mailing list
>>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>>> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>>>
>>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>> Message delivered to [hidden email]
>>>
>>>
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> Elecraft mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>>
>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>> Message delivered to [hidden email]
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> Message delivered to [hidden email]

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

KX2 Satellite Derivative? (Was: Re: The KX2)

Barry Baines
In reply to this post by Edward R Cole
Ed:

Please allow me to second your suggestion for a “KXV3Sat”, though a KX2 derivative with FM + VHF + UHF and full duplex would certainly be another option that would be very intriguing. Whether such a design built into a K2/K3 footprint (with or without HF) is feasible from an engineering/cost of production perspective is something else…

Given the rapid growth of the amateur satellite ’fleet,’ there are plenty of opportunities to take advantage of such a product for satellite operations.  AMSAT-NA’s AO-85 (FM) was placed in service in October, 2015.  Between now and January there will be three more FM Cubesats built by AMSAT-NA that will be launched.  In addition, AMSAT-NA is building a 30 KHz wide linear transponder satellite (Fox-1E).  AMSAT-UK launched FunCube-1 (AO-73) which is also a linear transponder satellite.  The Chinese placed a number of sats last fall in orbit on one launcher  with a variety of capabilities, including liner transponder.  These satellites, coupled with FO-29 and AO-7 are certainly candidates for operating with a low power, SSB/CW capable transceiver operating duplex.

As you know, a number of satellite operators are working these satellites in the field using an Arrow or Elk Antenna with the FT-817x class transceivers which to my knowledge is the only backpack size QRP-capable HF-VHF-UHF multimode radio with built-in battery for portable operation in the field currently on the market.  The FT-817x is not full duplex, so satellite operators use two of these radios to be able to hear their downlink when working the linear transponder satellites.  While the FT-817x does work well for this type of operation, it does have a confusing set of options in the menu and in my opinion is  more difficult to learn to operate than what Elecraft offers in their firmware architecture;  having to use for FT-817s for full duplex adds to the complexity and cost of such operations. Interest in satellite operations is increasing and such a product would spur further growth.  It seems to me that an Elecraft-designed radio capable of FM + UHF + VHF + full duplex in an integrated package with the footprint of a KX2 or the KX3 would be a winner; a HT-size transceiver (KX2) capable of working the linear satellites plus the FM sates would be a game changer for satellite operators.
 
FWIW,

Barry Baines, WD4ASW
Westborough, MA
(Currently in Deshler, OH after ’surviving’ Hamvention)




> On May 24, 2016, at 1:11 PM, Edward R Cole <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> One type of radio that Elecraft has avoided making to date:
> multi-band, multi-mode VHF/UHF, cross-band duplex radio.
>
> I recently bought a (not new) radio that, at its time, was considered one of the finest radios for this:
> Yaesu FT-736R.  It is still held in considerable respect.
>
> I wanted a VHF/UHF multi-mode radio capable of satellite operation and had considered a cross-band duplex-capable FM mobile radio, but it would have limited me to FM.  For approximately $200 more I obtained a "cherry" FT-736R with basic 2m/70cm capability.
>
> The radio is capable of expansion to two more bands via installation of internal modules for 6m, 220, and 1.2 GHz.  Quite a remarkable model of adaptability for its time.
>
> I previously owned its successor, the  FT-847, which was HF, 6m, 2m, 70cm.  But on used market cost double what I spent on the FT-736R.
>
> Had Elecraft offered a VHF/UHF cross-band duplex multi-mode radio I would have considered it.  Nothing on the current market equals the Elecraft radio quality (my opinion).  I chose the K3/10 plus transverters for eme, but the K3 is not capable of duplex operation.
>
> If a KVX3sat were produced - I think the market is there.  Current competitors: IC-9100 and TS2000X;Yaesu is out of the satellite radio market.
>
> 73, Ed - KL7UW
> http://www.kl7uw.com
>    "Kits made by KL7UW"
> Dubus Mag business:
>    [hidden email]
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> Message delivered to [hidden email]

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The KX2

Elecraft mailing list
In reply to this post by Edward R Cole
I'd love to see Elecraft sell a set of plug and play VHF/UHF transverters and a k3-sized box to hold, say, 1 to 4 of the transverters, which would be a flexible and cost effective way to address VHF/UHF capability, much like the 736 optionally provided for 50 and 1296 MHz.

A few higher orbit satellites could drive this market pretty well.....

73 Scott

(PS - Wayne my QTH address is ok for the beta test unit😳)

Make something good happen!

> On May 24, 2016, at 12:11 PM, Edward R Cole <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> One type of radio that Elecraft has avoided making to date:
> multi-band, multi-mode VHF/UHF, cross-band duplex radio.
>
> I recently bought a (not new) radio that, at its time, was considered one of the finest radios for this:
> Yaesu FT-736R.  It is still held in considerable respect.
>
> I wanted a VHF/UHF multi-mode radio capable of satellite operation and had considered a cross-band duplex-capable FM mobile radio, but it would have limited me to FM.  For approximately $200 more I obtained a "cherry" FT-736R with basic 2m/70cm capability.
>
> The radio is capable of expansion to two more bands via installation of internal modules for 6m, 220, and 1.2 GHz.  Quite a remarkable model of adaptability for its time.
>
> I previously owned its successor, the  FT-847, which was HF, 6m, 2m, 70cm.  But on used market cost double what I spent on the FT-736R.
>
> Had Elecraft offered a VHF/UHF cross-band duplex multi-mode radio I would have considered it.  Nothing on the current market equals the Elecraft radio quality (my opinion).  I chose the K3/10 plus transverters for eme, but the K3 is not capable of duplex operation.
>
> If a KVX3sat were produced - I think the market is there.  Current competitors: IC-9100 and TS2000X;Yaesu is out of the satellite radio market.
>
> 73, Ed - KL7UW
> http://www.kl7uw.com
>    "Kits made by KL7UW"
> Dubus Mag business:
>    [hidden email]
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> Message delivered to [hidden email]
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: KX2 Satellite Derivative? (Was: Re: The KX2)

Edward R Cole
In reply to this post by Barry Baines
I replied in depth to Barry but let me share that more briefly with the List:

My vision for a "KXV3sat" would be based on a 50-MHz direct
conversion SDR (if that is practical at this time).
That would establish the IF for other bands which would be
accomplished with transverters.   HF would be unnecessary and just
take up valuable real estate inside the radio.

To keep a KX3 sized concept power would likely be held to 10w on 2m
and 70cm.  The radio would have IQ baseband access for running other
sw on external computers.  Similar I/F for Line in audio and computer
PTT would enable use of   sw other than the internal DSP.  SDR means
any number of modes could be accommodated.  Stable LO would be
required for NB digital modes and use with mw.  Full cross-band
duplex plus computer tuning of both VFO's to enable satellite
auto-tune from external sw.  BNC would suffice for ANT connections
since power is low.  Battery operation (option).

An option would be a K3 sized transverter housing which modules for
222, 432, 902, and 1.2 GHz that could be added making a complete
50-1296 package, or just what you want.  The KXV3sat would dock to
this "console" for 'no external interconnect' wiring
package.  Probably modules would be 10w or maybe 25w.  If enough
room, 60-80w PA boards might be included for 6m/2m/70cm.  Though
there are ext. PA's available from the ham community.

Keeping the power down in the KXV3sat would make it usable for
portable operating and keep it light.  Also 100w linears would likely
add $300 per band to the total price.

Design considerations would emcompass VHF/UHF SSB/CW/FM plus digital
modes.  Interconnection for ext amps, ext freq. source, ext computer
I/F, Panadaptor.  One could operate satellite in full-duplex and
operating eme/ms/weak-signal modes.  Perhaps optional Rx antenna
ports could be incorporated as options.

My belief there is a large market for such a radio.  Satellite
population is on the rise, so is small-scale eme.  VHF/eme
Dxpeditions are on the rise for which a small footprint is desirable
for airline baggage.

Who will build it?

73, Ed - KL7UW
http://www.kl7uw.com
     "Kits made by KL7UW"
Dubus Mag business:
     [hidden email]

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [hidden email]
12