[Elecraft] OT: QST's review of the Yaesu FTDX5000MP

[Joe Subich, W4TV]

>> 2. When we calculate the cost for comparison, we have to add P3 to K3 to bring
>> it in line.  Bearing in mind, IC7600 only costs US$3,250 in Hong Kong

And you need to include a second Icom receiver (R?) to bring the
receive capability up to that of the K3 with KRX3.  Icom's "dual watch"
is a poorly performing joke compared to even the second complete 
receiver in the FT-2000


73,

    ... Joe, W4TV

On 11/16/2010 8:59 AM, Johnny Siu wrote:
> Hello Nate,
>
> In relation to your comments about IC7600, I would add the following:
>
> 1.  There is 'manual notch within AGC loop' in IC7600.  This function is very
> useful when I use it to notch out a strong offending carrier right adjoining to
> my wanted desired weak signal.  Since the notch is within AGC loop, the wanted
> weak DX signal will pop out right from the noise ground after the
> carrier is notched.  The desense of AGC by the strong carrier disappears at the
> same time.
>
> I did an A/B comparison of the above during the recent CQ WW SSB contest.
>
> 2. When we calculate the cost for comparison, we have to add P3 to K3 to bring
> it in line.  Bearing in mind, IC7600 only costs US$3,250 in Hong Kong
>
> I am still running my K3 but just plainly spell out the fact as above.
>   cheers,
>
>
> Johnny VR2XMC
> www.qrz.com/callsign/vr2xmc
>
>
>
> ----- 郵件原件 ----
> 寄件人﹕ Nate Bargmann<n0nb at n0nb.us>
> 收件人﹕ elecraft at mailman.qth.net
> 傳送日期﹕ 2010/11/16 (二) 8:14:42 PM
> 主題： Re: [Elecraft] OT: QST's review of the Yaesu FTDX5000MP
>
> * On 2010 15 Nov 21:49 -0600, Luis V. Romero wrote:
>> Good Marketing will take care of the rest!  "We build Legends" is
>> "performance by association" from the era when there were resources for
>> product line development and R&D.  There's still a lot of Goodwill from the
>> TS950/TS850 days! Even from TS520 days!
>
> Bingo!  I've long thought that Kenwood had rested on its laurels from
> the TS-520/TS-820/TS-830 era.  That's not say that some of their later
> products weren't good, just that they had lost their edge, especially to
> Yaesu in the early '90s.
>
>> And Larry, you're right, from a technical perspective, the 590 receiver
>> schema is really Goofy!
>
> It strikes me as rather odd as well.  I suppose that the Kenwood
> engineers and management have their reasons, but wow!  When I read
> preliminary information on it, I came to the conclusion that it was more
> complicated than it needed to be.
>
>> Elecraft's well targeted market niche is being attacked from above by the
>> FTdx5k and from below by the 590 and to a lesser extent, the Eagle.  Most of
>> the erosion will be in the lower side of the equation.  Main K3 competitor
>> is really the IC7600, and technically it leaves a lot to be desired and is
>> not as customizable, but undercuts K3 in price and it has the Icom "mystique
>> by association".  Icom has done a masterful job at brand identity.
>
> And here I thought ICOM stood for "I Can Only Monitor"!  ;-)  To be
> fair, I've only owned two Icom transceivers over the years, an IC-290A
> 2m all mode that was the first commercial rig I bought in 1985 and later
> a 4AT HT.  Both served their purposes well.  Early on I would fall into
> the Kenwood camp for HF gear and later Yaesu for all my gear.  In fact,
> I was all Yaesu until I received the K3 last month.  I liked the idea of
> performance that rivaled the big boxes in a size near that of my
> FT-890AT.  Watching this list and seeing Elecraft's interaction with its
> customers won me over.
>
>> So the K3 niche is still rather exclusive, but eroding a little bit.
>
> I'll agree the K3 is niche, but I'm not sure it's saleas are eroding.
> Of course I don't have sales figures, but it would appear that at least
> 100 more have sold since I got mine on the air about a month ago which
> seems healthy for a niche product that is positioned toward the high end
> of a niche hobby.  Considering as well that the overall economy is not
> doing as well as when the K3 was introduced, I'd say it's doing quite
> well.
>
> I'd also submit that as mentioned earlier in this thread that there are
> those who would not be comfortable buying a K3 for their main
> transceiver as they feel more comfortable going with a product from one
> of the brand names.  I can understand that as it took me a while to
> accept the idea as I spent several months evaluating Elecraft as a
> company before I took the plunge.  The established players are known
> quantities while Elecraft is still building its reputation in the larger
> amateur radio community.  I'm a bit of a risk taker on things like this
> so I suspect I'll receive some questions about the K3 at tonight's club
> meeting.
>
>> Elecraft is a lot like Honda in the mid 70's.  Pick the niche, build a solid
>> product and back it with uncompromising service, winning one customer at a
>> time.
>
> I take for granted you're referring to Honda cars.  In motorcycles, they
> were a juggernaut at the time.  Which allowed them to bring products
> like the CBX to market.  By 1980 they had forced Kawasaki into catch-up
> mode where Kawi had been regarded as the performance king just a few
> years earlier.  Then Suzuki came along with its GSX-R line...
>
> 73, de Nate N0NB>>
>