[Elecraft] K3-Latest K3 Review on EHAM

[Hisashi T Fujinaka]

I should quit now, but I just realized that a bad review is a good thing
in one respect, it shows that if you get a bad radio, you're not alone.
There's probably TWO out there. :)

Honestly, I doubt all the radios are working at the time they're
received, but if you listen to some of the goings on here you'd think
that a bad radio means it's all your fault and you might as well find a
new hobby.

The good thing is that Elecraft (and Don, and Tom, and please excuse me
if I forgot your name here) will help you fix things. If we could only
focus on that.

On Tue, 26 Feb 2008, Joseph M. Durnal wrote:

> When it comes to reviews, I tend to focus on the bad ones as the good
> ones could simply represent someones feeling that they spent plenty of
> money on something, it must be good.  When it comes to ham gear, a bad
> review without a call sign doesn't get much weight.  I suppose the
> reviewer in this case could have made up for it by giving the serial
> number of his K3, but that wasn't included either.  I don't think it
> is a true review.  Of course, my K3 has been ordered, my review will
> follow after I feel I know the radio, it could be a few weeks, or it
> could be a few months, I won't know until I know.
>
> 73 de Joseph Durnal NE3R
>
> On Sun, Feb 24, 2008 at 3:29 AM, Bob DeHaney <bobdehaney at gmx.net> wrote:
>> The reviewer (Solardx, no call sign) gives a very bad transmitter (SSB)
>> review.  He claims lots of splatter and ineffective speech processing as
>> well as high IMD products.  I have yet to hear a K3 but no one else has
>> noticed such problems?
>>
>> Vy 73, Bob WU5T/DJ0MBC

-- 
Hisashi T Fujinaka - htodd at twofifty.com
BSEE(6/86) + BSChem(3/95) + BAEnglish(8/95) + MSCS(8/03) + $2.50 = latte