[Elecraft] K2 vs K3 ?

[Don Wilhelm]

I must agree with Jim Duffey's assessment.
The K2 is a great transceiver, but when all the options are added to 
make it an all band 160m through 10 meter transceiver with SSB and noise 
blanker and audio DSP, the K3 with its built-in 160 meter through 6 
meter coverage, built-in IF DSP which allows not only SSB but FM and AM 
modes too, the small price differential makes the K3 a bargain priced 
transceiver.

A basic K3/10 will do all that a K2/10 will do and more.  One does not 
need to fill all the filter slots, nor add all the options to have a 
great performing transceiver, so the price comparison should be between 
a basic K3 and a K2 with the K160RX, KNB2, KSB2 and KDSP2 options - 
there is not much of a difference.

Of course, the K2 is built from parts soldered in by the builder while 
the K3 is a plug-together kit.  Some may define a hand-built K2 as being 
more personal and therefore having more value than a plug-together K3 
kit, and who am I to argue with that perspective, it is a thrill to see 
something you assembled from small bits and pieces come to life.

Both the K2 and the K3 have their great points, but if you are after the 
best performance for the dollar, the basic K3 is IMHO the best deal on 
the ham market today.  The K2 is also a bargain if one is willing to 
give up some of the bands and features that come 'stock' with the basic 
K3, and for portable QRP operation, the K2 has less current draw which 
leads to more operating time on a battery.

73,
Don W3FPR

James Duffey wrote:
> The difference in price between a fully equipped K2 at $1230 and a  
> bare bones K3 at $1400 is $170, or slightly more than 10%. For that  
> extra $170 you get a better integrated rig, six meters, FM, 20 dB  
> better dynamic range, and a host of other features typical of top of  
> the line rigs. If you add the 6M transverter to the K2 to bring 6M  
> capability to the K2, the price of the K2/XV50 combination is actually  
> higher.
>
> The base K-2 is a very nice reasonably priced CW only rig for either  
> base or portable operation. When you add in SSB, computer I/o  
> interface, 160M, 60M/transverter interface, noise blanker, and the DSP  
> filter, it seems like less of a good deal, especially when compared to  
> the K3. So if you want a barebones K2, that is a good deal. If you  
> want a full featured rig, you are better off with the K3.
>
> The K2 is better than the K3 in two respects, it is smaller and it  
> draws less current.
>
> For most people, the K3 is a much better deal than the K2. - Duffey
> --
> KK6MC
> James Duffey
> Cedar Crest NM
>   
>