[1000mp] Comparison Mark V

[andrew]

In message <137.b5ba200.29cb8976@aol.com>, DL9FCC@aol.com writes
>the mark v is 100 time better from the mp 
>the reciver on the mp is not good as the mark v 
>i just sold the mp buy 2 mark v 
>i sold the 1000d as well 
>the mark v is the best 

You might want to check out the laboratory test results that were taken
from the RSGBs journal RadCom at 
http://www.qsl.net/va3cr/pdf/1000esMKV.pdf

I posted these to the reflector with the permission of the RadCom editor
(thanks Steve) just after the review of the MkV was published in RadCom.

These tests show the original MP to have better 3rd order
intermodulation figures on all bands except 10M when tested with 50kHz
tone spacing.  Also, the close-in 3rd order intermodulation on the
original MP tests better than the MkV in most cases.  In the worst case
scenario (15kHz tone spacing) the original MP is some 19dB better,
though below 15kHz the MkV has better blocking performance (by approx
10dB).  

The two-tone dynamic range of the original MP is also quite a bit
better... biggest difference is 14dB better at 15kHz spacing and
continues to be 9dB better right down to 5kHz spacing.  Above 15kHz
spacing, it continues to be a few dB better than the MkV.

The filter selection on the MkV (or lack of) was causing me to think
twice whether I should change my MP.  These test results made up my
mind.  I still have my MP.

Andrew Williamson GI0NWG / AC6WI
Homepage = http://www.gi0nwg.freeserve.co.uk/

One of the ZL9CI gang
http://www.qsl.net/zl9ci/