[Elecraft] K2 compared to ?

[Jim Wiley]

Larry -


I owned a pair of  Kenwood TS-940 rigs for about 12 years, and was 
generally very happy with them.  I sold them a couple of years ago and 
replaced them with a pair of Yaesu FT-1000 MK V sets (the 200 W version) 
, with which I am also quite content.  I put the Inrad front-end kit in 
the Mark 5's, along with a selection of Inrad filters for various modes 
and bandwidths.


The K2 I have has the KDSP2, KNB2, KSB2, KBT2, KIO2, and the 160 meter 
kit, but not the 100W amplifier.


The Mark 5 is a lot like the K2 (I only have one of those, HI) in that 
the front end is a lot more resistant to overload than was the 
'940's.    A few operating sessions at the KL7Y contest station 
convinced me of the superior performance of the MK 5 over the 940 when 
the bands are very crowded and signal levels are high to very high.   I 
think I like the DSP in the K2 better than the MK 5, mostly because the 
K2 DSP can be tweaked and fine tuned, whereas the MK 5 DSP is pretty 
much what you see is what you get.  The MK 5 DSP works well enough, but 
I am sure there are lots of advances in noise reduction algorithms yet 
to be discovered.    


I generally prefer the K2 when band conditions permit the use of low 
power, but the Mark 5 has several operating features that the K2 does 
not, and I prefer the MK 5 for day to day use on SSB.  I like the K2 
better for CW, and it's receiver does have a more "open" sound than the 
MK 5.   Either rig performs well, and I am sure the differences are 
simply a matter of personal preference. 


I did like the 940's implementation of passband tuning MUCH more than 
the MK 5 version.  The 940 "high cut / low cut" selectivity control was 
and is much more intuitive, whereas the shift and width controls on the 
MK 5 are much harder to figure out.   If Elecraft ever considers putting 
variable selectivity into a future "K3", then I hope they do it the way 
Kenwood did.


The noise blanker for the K2 is adequate.  The one in the MK 6 is 
better, but the one in the 940 is  the best I have seen, even better 
than the old Drake R4C I had before I switched to the 940's.  


Don't know if this helps, but then again, it was free <grin>


What's wrong with the 940?   One of it's huge advantages is that it was 
built with discrete parts (mostly) and was very easy to service.  Great 
for areas that don't have a well stocked parts house in the same town.   
The 940 is still a great 2nd rig, and I certainly wouldn't toss it out 
if it can be repaired at a reasonable cost.


I have not looked at the Kenwood 2000 or the ICOM 756 series , so cannot 
offer anything there.


- Jim, KL7CC



 
Larry - WA2DGD wrote:

> Hello all,
>
> Like most others on this list, I absolutely love my K2, and I also 
> have a second rig, kenwood ts-940sat.
> The ts940 has been waiting for parts for over 3mos. and I was 
> considering replacing it.
> I would like to know of other list members personal experiences 
> comparing the K2 receiver  to either the Icom 756 pro series, the Knwd 
> TS2000 or most specifically, the Yaesu FT1000MP MKV Field.
> If anyone has any personal experiences comparing the TS940s to the 
> above mentioned rigs, I'd like to hear if you think its even worth 
> replacing the 940s.
>
> Happy and Healthy New Year to all.
>