[Elecraft] Anything News at Dayton from Elecraft??

[Larry Phipps]

Thanks for the input Eric.

You may be right on a couple of counts. I am only a QRPer in the field, 
and tend to be more more a "100-watter" at home. Since I had 90dB of 
dynamic range to play with, I decided to use it all, thus the 2500W top 
end (I also picked 2500W because it represents 2dB of headroom over 
1500W... and indicates to high duty cycle users that there is some 
design headroom).

I also see the E-meter as more of an accessory for K2 users, which is 
what I have, and only selected the EC1 style case because that's the 
size I need. I really don't expect many K1 owners, or probably any KX1 
owners to be interested in my kit, but the K2 is a different story in my 
opinion. The K2 is not a bare bones rig by any stretch... just a low 
power ( w/o KPA100). Owners of the more portable gear will undoubtedly 
want a meter with small size, low power consumption and low price.

I could easily offer a lower cost, smaller coupler for "QRP-only", and 
change the power range so that it covers .1 microwatt to 20W for 
example, instead of .01 milliwatt to 2500W in the current config. That 
would save considerable money as well, but would not work for you if you 
add a KPA100. Would a 100W or 200W top-end offend people? Don't know.

It would also save money to put the coupler in the case with the meter 
as opposed to a remoteable coupler, which would be easy with a low-power 
coupler like the one in the T1.

I suspect part of the problem is that a  company associated with 
expensive beams offered the table space to me... thereby skewing the 
type of op who was likely to see my meter.

I don't think it's appropriate to post prices here, but I will put them 
on the website in a few minutes for those who are interested.

Larry N8LP



EricJ wrote:

>Hi Larry,
>
>I saw your original announcement and checked your web site. At the time, I
>thought it was a remarkable piece of equipment and I still do. I'm not
>surprised the QRO guys were very interested. But I am surprised that you
>don't understand why more QRP ops have not expressed interest.
>
>For many of us QRP types, "Less is More". That's what attracted us to QRP in
>the first place. Not the ability to get crappy signal reports as a reward
>for running low power, but the ability to get any signal report with
>"relatively" simple equipment. An SWR/wattmeter that seems to be more
>sophisticated than my K1 isn't exactly at the top of my shopping list even
>if it does match it in size. And the very idea of owning an instrument with
>a 2500W range flat turns me off. (Yes, I could just ignore it). Of course,
>that might just be me. Others might see that as an appealing feature.
>
>My purpose is not to knock your SWR/Wattmeter. As I said it is a remarkable
>instrument. It may very well be the best QRP/QRPp wattmeter out there; it
>has the right range and resolution to fill that bill. You wouldn't be the
>first manufacturer to wonder why customers don't see the same value you see
>in your product. It may be as simple as getting back in touch with the
>customers you are trying to appeal to. You obviously are making an impact on
>the QRO ops. It might be worth figuring out what QRP ops are looking for in
>an SWR/wattmeter.
>
>Also, I can't seem to find any price for the SWR/Wattmeter on your website.
>I understand you were taking orders at Dayton so pricing must have been
>established. Maybe you could share it here.
>
>Eric
>KE6US
>