[Elecraft] 2.7 vs 2.8 filter choice K3

[Bill Tippett]

AC0DS:

 >In my opinion the difficulty in making the choice is because of the pricing
structure adapted by Elecraft for this option.  If the filters were sold
"ala carte", and you needed to buy the 2.7 or 2.8 in addition to the K3 (or
sub receiver), I'm guessing that most people, including me, would elect to
pay $120 for the 2.8 rather than $100 for the 2.7.  At only a $20
differential, the better skirt performance is very reasonably priced.  But
last time I checked, there was a $70 price adder to substitute the 2.8 for
the "standard" 2.7.  That is a much bigger out-of-pocket cost for a
questionable increase in performance and has people scratching their heads
before making the decision.  I went with the 2.7, but would have gone with
the 2.8 if the cost differential was less.

         Just to correct some of your numbers...

The 2.7k is included in the K3 base price.
The 2.8k is an incremental $125.
If the 2.8k is substituted for the 2.7k at the time of initial order, 
you get a $30 credit for the 2.7k making the 2.8k an incremental $95 
(125-30) on the base price which includes the 2.7k.

$95 may not be important to some but my point is there is very little 
difference in BW or *measured* IMD performance between those two 
filters.  However, if it makes you feel good...by all means do it!

         If I wanted a better filter than the 2.7k or 2.8k for 
serious contesting use, I would rather spend an extra $125 for a 1.8k 
(or possibly the rumored 1.5k) which would truly make a *significant* 
improvement over either of the wider filters.

         I'll also repeat that anyone ordering BOTH the 400 and 250 
Hz filters is wasting $125 IMHO, because there is only 65 Hz BW 
difference (~15%) between these two filters.  If you can hear the 
difference between 370 Hz (for the nominal 250) and 435 Hz (for the 
nominal 400), you may be deceiving yourself.

                                         73,  Bill  W4ZV