[Elecraft] K2 vs K3 ?

[John Jeffers]

Hi

I looked through the Archives and FAQ's and see the K3 is a All in one
rig with top of line features.

The K2 was the former one. With a little less features and not all in
one processor. It uses pic 18C452 instead of 18F452 etc so you can't
flash upgrade it as easily.

(I program Linux systems and PIC systems.)

But I can make a qrp rig for $770 K2 kit instead of $1400 K3 semi-kit
and I am an electrical engineer.

Is there any good reason to go to the K3?

VE3GYV John

P.S. K1's sell for more assembled on Ebay than Kits........ So the
issues of losing money on the rig appear to not be true.

[Bill Johnson]

Yes, It's called features and you get what you pay for. I Have both and they
are great radios. Let your budget help you decide.


73,

Bill
K9YEQ
K2 #35; KX1 #35; K3 #1744; mini mods


-----Original Message-----
From: elecraft-bounces at mailman.qth.net
[mailto:elecraft-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of John Jeffers
Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2009 5:02 PM
To: elecraft at mailman.qth.net
Subject: [Elecraft] K2 vs K3 ?

Hi

I looked through the Archives and FAQ's and see the K3 is a All in one
rig with top of line features.

The K2 was the former one. With a little less features and not all in
one processor. It uses pic 18C452 instead of 18F452 etc so you can't
flash upgrade it as easily.

(I program Linux systems and PIC systems.)

But I can make a qrp rig for $770 K2 kit instead of $1400 K3 semi-kit
and I am an electrical engineer.

Is there any good reason to go to the K3?

VE3GYV John

P.S. K1's sell for more assembled on Ebay than Kits........ So the
issues of losing money on the rig appear to not be true.
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft at mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

[Mike-WE0H]

Here's my perspective from not owning any Elecraft radio until ~ a month ago. I have read about the K2 for many years and always wanted one. I heard them on the air and heard others comments about owning one. I have never owned a new rig, only bought repair-ables and repaired them to use. So along comes the opportunity to buy a Elecraft radio at the Orlando hamfest. The XYL asks me which one do I want to order. I was thinking, get a decent radio, yet keep the costs reasonable. My decision was to order the K2 with some nice features. I couldn't justify ordering the K3, just because it costs so much more than the K2. That's my only reason, economics. I'm retired and the XYL still works so I hate to spend the funds she earns.

My next Elecraft radio will be a loaded K1 for portable operating. The K2 is too nice to bring outside in my opinion.

Mike
WE0H
K2 S/N 6698



John said:
Hi

I looked through the Archives and FAQ's and see the K3 is a All in one
rig with top of line features.

The K2 was the former one. With a little less features and not all in
one processor. It uses pic 18C452 instead of 18F452 etc so you can't
flash upgrade it as easily.

(I program Linux systems and PIC systems.)

But I can make a qrp rig for $770 K2 kit instead of $1400 K3 semi-kit
and I am an electrical engineer.

Is there any good reason to go to the K3?

VE3GYV John

P.S. K1's sell for more assembled on Ebay than Kits........ So the
issues of losing money on the rig appear to not be true.

[Randy Moore]

Well, this is interesting! I'm agonizing over this very issue. I have
K2 #337, built in late 1999, that has served me extremely well. I have
always watched this reflector, so I was one of the first non-field test
people to notice Wayne's announcement of the K3. Then I read every word
about it, including the manuals, and saved my pennies (and quarters and
dollars!) until I was able to order one last year, taking delivery of
K3/10 #2006 in late October. I have been delighted with it, both
performance wise and operationally. I've downloaded all the beta
firmware releases and never had any issue with them that wasn't taken
care of within about 24 hours of the beta release.

I operated SSCW and then ARRL DX CW with the K3 and that's when I began
to have some doubts about whether the K3 is for me or not. Running QRP
during these contests with simple wire antennas, I found that I couldn't
usually be heard through all the QRM by anybody who wasn't S8-9 at my
QTH. That means that the outstanding features of the K3 receiver
weren't doing me much good in those circumstances. In a more normal
situation of working a weak station with little or no QRM, I believe the
K2 does just as well as the K3 for me. So I've about decided that the
K3 is just not a cost effective solution for my style of operating. I
really love it, but I just can't justify keeping both it and my
venerable K2! I'm seriously bonded with the K2, so I'm on the verge
of offering my K3 for sale. But it hurts to even consider it :-(

73,
Randy, KS4L

[Mike-WE0H]

My opinion, keep the K3 & the K2. You may later on regret selling
anything and then the money might not be there to build another one.
Just put it on the shelf for now.

Other options are the AN762 amp that FAR circuits sells a board for and
eBay has 2SC2879 transistor's for it and they are dirt cheep. That'd be
well over 100w output just idling. Communications Concepts sells the
complete kit for it with the more expensive MRF transistors if you don't
have a stash of components for it already.

Mike
WE0H

Post by Randy Moore
Well, this is interesting! I'm agonizing over this very issue. I have
K2 #337, built in late 1999, that has served me extremely well. I have
always watched this reflector, so I was one of the first non-field test
people to notice Wayne's announcement of the K3. Then I read every word
about it, including the manuals, and saved my pennies (and quarters and
dollars!) until I was able to order one last year, taking delivery of
K3/10 #2006 in late October. I have been delighted with it, both
performance wise and operationally. I've downloaded all the beta
firmware releases and never had any issue with them that wasn't taken
care of within about 24 hours of the beta release.
I operated SSCW and then ARRL DX CW with the K3 and that's when I began
to have some doubts about whether the K3 is for me or not. Running QRP
during these contests with simple wire antennas, I found that I couldn't
usually be heard through all the QRM by anybody who wasn't S8-9 at my
QTH. That means that the outstanding features of the K3 receiver
weren't doing me much good in those circumstances. In a more normal
situation of working a weak station with little or no QRM, I believe the
K2 does just as well as the K3 for me. So I've about decided that the
K3 is just not a cost effective solution for my style of operating. I
really love it, but I just can't justify keeping both it and my
venerable K2! I'm seriously bonded with the K2, so I'm on the verge
of offering my K3 for sale. But it hurts to even consider it :-(
73,
Randy, KS4L

[Dale Putnam]

Actually Randy, all you have discovered... is that there are a lot of folks out there, that could benefit from the addition of a K3 in their shack, so they would be able to hear as well as you do. Simple, and factual. Do you need to send your K2 or K3 away because they can't hear? Likely not. Do they need to improve thier stations? Yep.

Now, if you want to loan your K3 off, for the time being, I'd be happy to borrow it for a bit... *G* But that way, you could have it back when you decide that you want it back...

*G*

--... ...-- Dale - WC7S in Wy





_________________________________________________________________
Windows Live?: Life without walls.
http://windowslive.com/explore?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_WL_allup_1a_explore_032009

[W5CEM]

You should get MANY interesting responses to your query! I for one have
found the K3 receiver to be far and above better than the K2, although my
time with the K2 was limited to one weekend. As well, if SSB is a mode you
enjoy, in the K2 that is an add-on and a bit dicier than the smooth, already
there features of the K3! That said, if I had the time and money, I would
build a K2 as a little brother to my K3.

I will be watching this thread with interest...

cleve

[Julian, G4ILO]

Post by John Jeffers
Hi
I looked through the Archives and FAQ's and see the K3 is a All in one
rig with top of line features.
The K2 was the former one. With a little less features and not all in
one processor. It uses pic 18C452 instead of 18F452 etc so you can't
flash upgrade it as easily.
(I program Linux systems and PIC systems.)
But I can make a qrp rig for $770 K2 kit instead of $1400 K3 semi-kit
and I am an electrical engineer.
Is there any good reason to go to the K3?
VE3GYV John
P.S. K1's sell for more assembled on Ebay than Kits........ So the
issues of losing money on the rig appear to not be true.

I have a K2, and went for the K3 because of its much improved support for
digimodes (which were really an afterthought on the K2) and FM (which isn't
catered for at all.) The fact that the currency exchange rates were
favourable at the time I ordered it, and the credit crunch hadn't happened,
had a bearing on it too.

I think the K2 and K3 are like apples and oranges. The K2 is a more basic
radio with an emphasis on portability (small size, light weight, low current
consumption, facility for internal battery.) Plus it has the unique benefit
that you get to build it. The K3 is clearly designed to be more of a high
end desktop radio for those who want the ultimate in receiver performance.
And even if you'd prefer to build it, you only get to assemble it.

If you aren't sure you need the K3 then in my opinion you probably don't. I
don't chase DX, I only contest casually, and I don't really need a high end
radio. If Elecraft had brought out a K2 Mk II with 1Hz VFO resolution and
dedicated input/outputs for digi modes it would probably have done the job
for me, even without FM. So your decision will surely depend on whether
there are things you want to do that the K2 can't do.

-----
Julian, G4ILO. K2 #392 K3 #222.
http://www.g4ilo.com/ G4ILO's Shack http://www.g4ilo.com/kcomm.html KComm
for Elecraft K2 and K3 http://www.wota.org.uk/ Wainwrights On The Air

[Darwin, Keith]

-----Original Message-----

... the K3 is a All in one rig with top of line features.

The K2 was the former one.

But I can make a qrp rig for $770 K2 kit instead of $1400 K3 semi-kit
and I am an electrical engineer.

Is there any good reason to go to the K3?

VE3GYV John

------------------------

Absolutely, yes, there are many good reasons to go K3 over K2.

I had a K2 and really liked it but wished it did some things better.
The K2 s-meter left me rather unimpressed. CW sidetone quality was good
but not great. I used an external AF filter to clean it up. The K2
display didn't give all that much information. The fan on the K2/100 is
very noisy. I used an external fan to keep the rig cool so the internal
fan would not turn on. The K2's SSB performance was good but no better.
I run CW only so I didn't care, however.

I upgraded to a K3/10 and absolutely love it. CW sidetone is very
sweet. AGC performance is better (adjustable). The S-meter is better.
Display is better. I have 2 key inputs (one for paddles one for manual
key) instead of just one. The rig feels like a real rig rather than a
very nice QRP rig.

When you do your price comparison, make sure you're comparing equivalent
rigs. The K3 comes with built-in DSP and does not need AF filtering.
With the K2 you have to add the DSP or AF as an option. K3 covers 160
meters - optional in the K2.

- Keith N1AS -
- K3 711 -

[Stephen W. Kercel]

John and other Elecrafters:

I am an extremely happy K2 owner. I have operated a K3 and I intend to
get one someday, but I am not in a particular hurry. In the interest of
full disclosure, I am strictly a CW guy, and any voice quality
advantages that K3 might have over the K2 are lost on me.

As other posters have mentioned, the K3 has many features that all work
somewhat better than the K2.

To the question of whether or not there is any good reason to go to the
K3, there is one good basic engineering reason. It has better dynamic
range. On the weak signal end, the K3 local oscillator has lower phase
noise than the K2. That means that in low ambient noise situations such
as 10 or 6 meters, the K3 will hear weak signals that the K2 does not
hear. On the strong signal end, the K3 has a saturation level as good as
(or marginally better than) the rigs that sell for $10K+. That is
significant in low band DXing and contesting; when you're trying to hear
that weak signal on 80 meters for that rare multiplier and "W5 Texas
Kilowatt" fires up the "big rig" a few 10s of KHz down the band from
where you're listening, the K3 is much less likely than the K2 to be
"desensed" (meaning that your ability to copy the rare multiplier
suddenly vanishes whether or not you can actually hear the interfering
signal) by his (somehow, very few of these honking big signals are
transmitted by women) booming signal.

Anyway, what you're paying the big bucks for is dynamic range. If you're
interested in copying extremely weak signals (in the presence of large
but undesired signals) in either the high bands or low bands, then the
added dynamic range of the K3 is well worth the $3400 (or so) for a
fully tricked out K3. If you mostly operate in a less demanding setting
the added dynamic range might not be worth the extra cost.

Some posters have noted that the K3 is designed to be the ultimate
contest rig. Compare it to car racing. Race cars cost more than cars for
highway driving. Unless you actually plan to race it, do you need to buy
one?

73,

Steve Kercel
AA4AK

Post by John Jeffers
The K2 was the former one.
But I can make a qrp rig for $770 K2 kit instead of $1400 K3 semi-kit
and I am an electrical engineer.
Is there any good reason to go to the K3?
VE3GYV John

[WILLIS COOKE]

Another thing you need to watch is that many features that
are standard on the K3 are options on the K2. You can
double the price of the basic kit really quick with the
options, so be sure to think about the options that you want
or need before you decide.

Willis 'Cookie' Cooke
K5EWJ

--- On Thu, 3/12/09, Darwin, Keith

From: Darwin, Keith <Keith.Darwin at goodrich.com>
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K2 vs K3 ?
To: elecraft at mailman.qth.net
Date: Thursday, March 12, 2009, 11:03 AM
-----Original Message-----
... the K3 is a All in one rig with top of line

features.

The K2 was the former one.
But I can make a qrp rig for $770 K2 kit instead of

$1400

K3 semi-kit
and I am an electrical engineer.
Is there any good reason to go to the K3?
VE3GYV John

i

[Michael van Hauten]

yes guys,
the K3 is a great rigg, with all the features we knew from oher great riggs.
But the K2 is classic and puristic. It is the same when you compare
motorbikes: the K3 is like a Honda Goldwing and the K2 is like a older
Harley. I for myself prefer riding a old Harley. I built 4 K2's and sold
them all to get a K3. Now i have a K3 but i missed adjusting and playing
with the K2. So i bought a used K2 and i'am happy now that a K2 is back in
my home.
Michael, DC0ZO

[Darwin, Keith]

As much as I love my K3, I'll admit that the K2 sounded better. The
difference wasn't big and I may be off-base, having not done a direct
A/B comparison, but I think the K2, with its simpler RX architecture,
has a smoother sound than the K3. Not enough for me to stay with the
K2, but enough that it can be noticed.

- Keith N1AS -
- K3 711 -

[Bill Johnson]

Keith,

I can make my K3 sound just the way I want buy adjusting the equalizer. I
use the same outboard speaker for both K's.


Bill

-----Original Message-----
From: elecraft-bounces at mailman.qth.net
[mailto:elecraft-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Darwin, Keith
Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2009 3:03 PM
To: elecraft at mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K2 vs K3 ?

As much as I love my K3, I'll admit that the K2 sounded better. The
difference wasn't big and I may be off-base, having not done a direct
A/B comparison, but I think the K2, with its simpler RX architecture,
has a smoother sound than the K3. Not enough for me to stay with the
K2, but enough that it can be noticed.

- Keith N1AS -
- K3 711 -

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft at mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

[Gary D Krause]

I'm wondering if we took a ham into a room, blindfolded, sat him or her down
if front of a K2 and K3, didn't let them touch either one, if he or she could
tell which is the K2 and K3? I would have to be someone that doesn't have any
experience with either one. I wonder which one would win based on sound
alone. Also, they would have to use headphones rather than the internal
speakers.

Gary, N7HTS


On Thu, 12 Mar 2009 13:03:21 -0700

Post by Darwin, Keith
As much as I love my K3, I'll admit that the K2 sounded better. The
difference wasn't big and I may be off-base, having not done a direct
A/B comparison, but I think the K2, with its simpler RX architecture,
has a smoother sound than the K3. Not enough for me to stay with the
K2, but enough that it can be noticed.
- Keith N1AS -
- K3 711 -
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft at mailman.qth.net
This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

[David Yarnes]

Gary and All,

Well, interesting conjecture, but nowhere close to a valid
test of either rig.

Dave W7AQK


----- Original Message -----
From: "Gary D Krause" <n7hts at bresnan.net>
To: "Elecraft" <elecraft at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Friday, March 13, 2009 8:27 AM
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K2 vs K3 ?

Post by Gary D Krause
I'm wondering if we took a ham into a room, blindfolded,
sat him or her down
if front of a K2 and K3, didn't let them touch either one,
if he or she could
tell which is the K2 and K3? I would have to be someone
that doesn't have any
experience with either one. I wonder which one would win
based on sound
alone. Also, they would have to use headphones rather
than the internal
speakers.
Gary, N7HTS
On Thu, 12 Mar 2009 13:03:21 -0700

Post by Darwin, Keith
As much as I love my K3, I'll admit that the K2 sounded
better. The
difference wasn't big and I may be off-base, having not
done a direct
A/B comparison, but I think the K2, with its simpler RX
architecture,
has a smoother sound than the K3. Not enough for me to
stay with the
K2, but enough that it can be noticed.
- Keith N1AS -
- K3 711 -
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft at mailman.qth.net
This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft at mailman.qth.net
This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

[Kevin Rock]

I think my K2 is more like a Spanish trials bike. Well balanced, nimble, and plenty of torque!
Kevin. KD5ONS

Bultaco, Montessa, or Ossa.



-----Original Message-----

From: Michael van Hauten <vanhauten at t-online.de>
Sent: Mar 12, 2009 3:09 PM
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] K2 vs K3 ?
yes guys,
the K3 is a great rigg, with all the features we knew from oher great riggs.
But the K2 is classic and puristic. It is the same when you compare
motorbikes: the K3 is like a Honda Goldwing and the K2 is like a older
Harley. I for myself prefer riding a old Harley. I built 4 K2's and sold
them all to get a K3. Now i have a K3 but i missed adjusting and playing
with the K2. So i bought a used K2 and i'am happy now that a K2 is back in
my home.
Michael, DC0ZO

[James Duffey]

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

[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

Post by James Duffey
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

[David Heinsohn]

Post by 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.

While I have NO argument with this reasoning, I chose to build the K2
because I could afford it as a basic kit. And I have every reason to
think that I'll be able to afford to add about one of the listed options
a month. This I will be able to do without putting anything on my
already overstressed credit cards. Were I to try to buy a K3 it would
be many months before the cash would be in hand. [ The budget
committee, KB4WYR, is fully behind this project as well. And would
lament having to wait for a K3.]
The K2 is expected to be one of the building blocks for our VHF/UHF
station, with a K3 coming along as it can. I'm thinking that this
combination will give us a good high end weak signal station for 50 mhz
and up.

73
de
KD0R
#6708 in build