[ICOM] Collins instead of Murata?

[Tim Kass]

I agree here with Clark, also I tend to like the INRAD crystal filters 
rather than the Collins mechanical filters, steeper slopes on the INRAD 
crystal filters in most cases.

73, Tim
K8WBL

>From: Clark Savage Turner <csturner at kcbx.net>
>Reply-To: ICOM Reflector <icom at mailman.qth.net>
>To: ICOM Reflector <icom at mailman.qth.net>
>Subject: Re: [ICOM] Collins instead of Murata?
>Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 19:03:26 -0700
>
>Just a note, watch the specs on these filters.  There is no magic in the 
>Collins mechanical filters.  The Murata ceramics are as good (and better) 
>in some cases.  I use the Collins 2.3 KHz filter that is 10 poles and has a 
>somewhat better shape factor than the Murata K14, but the K5 is pretty 
>close.  The Collins mechanical filters at 8 poles are not the best of shape 
>factors (I think the phase delay is different too, but I don't use digital 
>modes where it might really matter.)  The K12 may be a "better" filter for 
>many purposes.  I suspect it does have a bit more ripple depending on the 
>match in the circuit but gives a pretty darned good shape factor.  Anyway, 
>look at specs such as shape factor and ultimate rejection (and price?  hi 
>hi)  I use filters from Murata and from Collins in different applications.
>
>Clark
>WA3JPG
>
>On Apr 12, 2005, at 3:20 PM, Tim Kass wrote:
>>
>>I would be interested in what mod you did to the Murata filter, replaced 
>>it?  Thanks
>
>----
>Your Moderator: Dick Flanagan K7VC, icom-owner at mailman.qth.net
>Icom Users Net: Sundays, 1700Z, 14.316 MHz
>Icom FAQ: http://www.qsl.net/icom/