I own an FT817nd and a K3 "dream station" (K3, KPA 500, KAT 500, P3). I am something of an Elecraft fanboy. Having said that, I did not appreciate much difference in the receive of the weak signal you pulled in between 5:00-6:00, especially given the speaker difference. Both were copyable. Price on the KX3 with the tuner and filter set is about $1,200, the 817nd is < $800 with a cw filter. These are different radios with different purposes. I think Elecraft wanted a radio with a true price point of around $1000 to compete with Yeascomwood, and give a qrp/portable option to the Elecraft fanboys like me. You can take the KX3 and build a full home station capable of 100W-plus operation, with pan-adapters, SDR filters, the whole 9 yards. It is a capable contesting rig on the receive side bettering much bigger, expensive radios in Sherwood Enginerring tests - actually I think its in the top 3 of all time on receive - but by that I mean close separation of weak signals. But, that fact of the matter is, portable QRP is not about hooking your radio up to a $10,000 Step-IR 3 element beam and tower combination and finding the weakest signal out there. It's about picking up a radio, tossing it in a bag, going outside, throwing a wire up in tree and seeing what happens. Is the KX3 better in that regard than the 817nd? Not really. UA-cam is full of 817nd's doing some spectacular QRP work then flipping over to VHF to make long range contacts for SOTA. I dont see how a KX3 would be better (with the exception of its add-on antenna tuner - which btw you can also get as a stand alone kit for the 817 from elecraft as well). If you have a base station already and want the KX3 for straight portable QRP only, you can get the 2m module for the KX3, the Antenna Tuner, the roofing filters, the microphone and make it nearly as flexible or more so than the 817nd; but then you end up with a $1400 qrp rig. At that price, I think you have become a qrp fanatic. Its not a bad thing, but that is what you are. If you're an SSB guy, you like qrp, want to hit 2m and 70cm repeaters, and already have a base station, its tough to ignore the 817nd. At $659 warts and all, 15 years old and all, there is a reason why it has been so successful for so long.
I've just acquired a Yaesu FT-817ND and I'm impressed with its reception. I have an AlexLoop antenna and I'm just waiting for the weather to improve here, so I can't take it outside. Thanks for your feedback.
@@juliocesarpereira4325 no problem. 6 years later I stand by this comment. I have the KX2, which is a better radio than the 817nd, but that’s mostly due to its antenna tuner, DSP and noise blanking features- which become much less important if you want to do portable qrp. It doesn’t do 2m cand 70cm, and the KX2 is rather fragile as well. The 817nd (and its unimpressively upgraded replacement in the 818), remains a remarkable radio that is tons of fun to operate and has some nice features like broadcast band receive (which is quite good), that give it some extra juice. It’s still serviced by Yaesu, so you can buy one used and know that it can be repaired for a very long time. A word of advice. As much as I love my own Alex loop antenna, you need to understand that the efficiency of that loop on 20 m even perfectly tuned, it’s somewhere in the range of 10%-20%. You can forget about 40 m, where the efficiency is even lower. At least for single sideband. If you don’t mind, I would suggest (actually strongly urge) for you to look at one of the portable end-fed half wave antennas (Par makes good ones, they’re owned by Vibroplex now). You can work 40, 20, 15, and 10 m without a tuner, it’s full-size, full efficiency, and that’s what you need for a 5w radio. They even make a version where are you can work 80 m, but I think that’s a bit too long for QRP or portable work. They’re also much cheaper than your Alex loop. Just throw it in a tree.
To me the FT-817 sounded better but when you consider the price differance the FT-817ND is a far better deal..The KX-3 costs twice as mutch and HF only..I own the FT-817ND and love it..Its an all purpose go any where radio for HF VHF UHF...You cant go far wrong for portable ops..
Thanks for the video. I'm an engineer and long time ham, and I like to do FD and dig out difficult to hear stations. My 817 receiver crumbles during FD when I'm near any other transmitters. The KX3 does not. And when the QRM is tough, well, you know what happens. If I like to have new features (even higher power output), I can update my firmware on the KX3 to current specs. Not so the 817. Same rig since 2002. HOWEVER, the 817 is a heckofa rig, I do NOT disparage that little thing. IF you're looking for LESS $$, stick with the 817, by all means. Its just great for that. However, when I need my batteries to last a long time (internal), might experience heavy QRM and love 50 Hz CW filtering, like not having to carry a key or tuner, blah, blah... I'll take the KX3. IF I truly need multimode VHF/UHF (never have) - the 817 kicks butt. For basic performance, the 817 is truly wonderful, I"ve had mine since 2002. It will not leave my shack!
many true statements here . I like the fact that the 817 looks like a radio ( I do not even like menu driven rigs but I gotta admit unless your going vintage a good older analog rig would be a good find for me . I also do not like one ( 1 ) switch for multi purpose use . But I have those type of rigs also . Just have fun … best 73
Thank you for doing this video. Very interesting I was contemplating purchasing a kx3 but after watching your video and owning a 817ND... think I'll hold off thanks again
Did you install TCXO and CW filter in FT-817? KX3 is around 3 years old but FT-817 is around 13 years old. So, I love FT-817 more then KX3, because, it is no impressive performance then FT-817.
the KX3 costs twice as much when optioned fully. yet it does less than the yaesu. Hell the FT817 has been around almost as long as the elecraft brand! the 817 is for me. costs half as much and does more. They seem to last too
I love the 817 as well , i have 2 right now . One set up in the shack as a fixed station on digital and my other one is for CW and phone and SOTA and trail hiking ! Wish I had the casholla for the KX3 also
Hey Jim: How about a review about these two radios on SSB Voice? I am considering the FT817ND for a QRP digital and voice radio. Looked at the KX3 but by the time I added the features I wanted, the price balooned to almost $3,500.00. OUCH! I miss seeing you at the Agawam Field Days. Would you have any suggestion for Solar panel for the FT817 running 3,000 NIMh batteries?
Be careful when using the 817 for digital modes or full duty cycle modes. They can get pretty warm without some air movement around the rear which is where the majority of heat dissipation takes place. I've fried the final in two 817s doing SSTV and PSK31.. Just sayin..
A buddy of mine has the KX3. He let me use it for a couple of CW QSO's. Gotta say, I've had the 817 (LOVE IT! ), but the receiver on the KX3 is REALLY nice!
Also the Elecraft ecosystem is more fun and expandable. I have a K3. II have had it for 5 years. Elecraft just released a new synthesizer for 200 bucks. Put the K3 at the top of the heap and it was already one of the top 5 receivers. New modular options are also available. They just released the new K3S, and if I want too, I can bring my K3 up to that spec. They never leave you hanging with product improvements. As a desktop rig, the KX3 can morph into a serious competition grade radio. Spectrum scopes auto tuners, and awesome roofing filters. Again, the 817 will become challenged with weak signal work in crowded bands and big antennas. Add to that the ability to flash new features and improvements via software updates, an autuner (which is key to portable operation), long batter life (not an option for backpacking) and the radios are apples and oranges. And I like the 817 for what it is. Just being realistic.
Field reports of minor drifting during PSK mode were observed recently. You can be dure that it will be fixed with temperature compensation tweeks by Elecraft. They are a superor company compared to Yaesu service and customer service. Also your test proves they have superior ergonomics . Your left hand looks right at home with the KX3, while the right fumbles a bit on the tiny buttoned 817. Congrats on your new radio Jim! You too can join the cult like following at Elecraft. Enjoy!
What I take from this video is that your antenna makes a much bigger difference than your radio. I would be happy with either of these rigs on the end of a well installed, well designed antenna. The "ancient" FT-817 was really quite a good rig "in its day", which means it still really is quite a good rig, despite others possibly having better bells and louder whistles. The Elecraft is also a fine rig. Either one will work the world on a good antenna; neither one will work the local repeater without a proper antenna. I would love to see more reviews of antenna systems and fewer reviews of radio match-ups, because nobody markets a worthless radio - Put a proper antenna on any one of them and you can work wonders. Also, it was cute of you to compare the Yaesu without the Collins filter activated to the Elecraft with its DSP active for the first half of the video. A real "honest to goodness" comparison, there! Way to go.
FT-817ND has a little better signal sensitivity than KX I was surprised initially but after understood that KX-3 is a digital baby when Yaesu is old classic superheterodyne . All this DSP and the rest of digital staff are good modern features that help to improve signal clarity but they never be over real signal sensitivity . And this video is one example . Two rigs sound equally but some time Yaesu sounds better. I was not sure what radio to buy but after this video 817 is my choice
you did a good video . Took some time to set it all up and did a pretty good A B test and your explanation of things was clear . 2 enthusiastic thumbs up !
If you do a lot of CW, the 817 is pretty harsh on the ears. No qsk, and little annoying relay clicks from tx to rx. Not a bad radio (I've had one for over 4 years now,) but my Elecraft gets much more use because it is so sweet through the headphones :) Comparable to Ten Tec, actually (which I have several of...)
I have read all the reviews I could find on the KX3 and they all show a 5 out of 5. I have a recent model FT 817ND and use it with a yo yo QRP all band dipole and both work great! I am not knocking the KX3, as I wish I had one but they cost almost twice the amount of an 817ND...I like building radios also including my Heathkit "Twoer" I built as a kid which still works....Nice video sir...
The ft 817 wipes the floor with the KX3 for less money , you can buy the ft 857D and used 5 watts QRP the KX3 sell you a amp 100 watts for 800.00 buying the ft 857D give you the best of the both worlds 5 watts for QRP and 100 watts The KX3 is melting your wallet when you can do it cheaper with the FT 857D
I priced a KX3 with a few basic options = $1504.00 with shipping! At least the FT-817 comes with a decent microphone. Most local mountain toppers/hikers I know use the small LNR xcvrs; basic but quite rugged. I think the FT-817 is a better trail/SOTA rig, more rugged, 2 meters and 440. Yes you can add 2 meters to the KX3 for another $260.00, now we're pushing $1800.00.
TRUE I HAD BOTH THE FT 817 AND KX3 THE FT817 IS A WINNER I SOLD MY KX3 I WILL LIKE TO TRY THE KX2 BUT USED NOT NEW AND COMPARE IT WITH THE FT 817 I HEAR THE KX2 IS BETTER THAN THE KX3
The FT-817 is the clear winner with much less background noise, and you get 144 and 432 MHz. as a bonus without buying the optional 2m option for the KX3. It's nice to have 2m FM to make local contacts with a small whip antenna. The high background noise on the KX3 can give you a migraine headache. Who needs that? Is the KX2 any better?
I wonder if he set the CW side tones to be the same in both radios? It didn't sound like they were. The FT-817 default is 700 hz but I set mine to 600 hz like my other rigs. That way you can get a equitable comparison of the filter and audio passband of two rigs. I think the results in the video were about even but if you didn't think so it might be because you prefer one radio's side tone setting over the other.
Good! That'll leave more KX3's for the rest of us who want a real radio. Did you miss the part where it's made in the USA, not Asia? I think we've gave Asia enough of our money don't you think. Freaking tightwads!
+ELiTE_OpTiic I would like to see the K3 operate without all it's made in China/Japan electronic chips. You sound like all those self righteous Harley riders bragging about US made while all the chrome parts, suspension and electronics come from Asia. It's a world economy buddy. BTW, when is the last time you took a picture with your "US" camera? Give me a break.
That's one of the reason when you go to a hamfest and there are selling a use KX3 you will go next years and the guy still have the KX3 for sell they know the radio is over price and nobody want to deal with a radio that it look is made in a garage now when somebody see a ft 817 it be sold for sure
@@MrAlphacallsign if it looks like a Real Rig it usally is if it looks like a kit it usally is in the CQ Phone contest i worked 5 continents in 3 hours on my FT817 LOVE IT ...
you have the kx3 af gain louder than the 817. aim not saying the 817 is better RX but give it a chance....Math in the price The Yeasu FT-817 wipes the floor with the kx3...
current price of the 817nd at Universal Radio (where I got mine) is $689. the KX3 on Elecraft Web side for the basic 160-6M is $999. the 2 meter module is $199 user installed and saw nothing about a 70cm module. so is the KX3 better than the 817. probably a little bit. is it $500+ better, not in my books.
I preferred the 817 audio, seemed quieter background hiss. Apart from that I'd say not a lot of difference. Why keep re-tuning once they were tuned in? To me KX3 not cost effective at £1099.95 for the kit or £1149.95 built, here in U.K. 817ND, still £529.95 with £45 cash back when I got mine last year. Or £699 now with Elecraft T1A auto tuner. I have 40m, 20m and 17m dipoles or for other aerials a roller coaster plus variable capacitor or an MFJ 16010 tuner so I don't need a tuner built in. 817 has 2m and 70cm built in, I use 2m for locals and never repeaters. G4GHB
this test did not show much of a difference to me, but when I tested the KX3 and compared it to my FT-817 I noticed that the receiver in the KX3 is much more quiet and it is less susceptible to nearby strong signals.
That KX3 is certainly a beautiful piece of kit. Having said that, at the price I can definitely see the law of diminishing returns at play. This is a real David and Goliath battle in a way... so once you've factored in the huge price difference I'd say the FT817 is by far the real success story here. I'm assuming that the KX3 already has the appropriate CW filters fitted, whereas at a quarter of the price the 817 doesn't... so It'd be interesting to hear a comparison against a tweaked out 817 to see if that improves things a little. I've not looked at yaesus optional filter modules yet so I'm not sure what's available or how they perform. Also, let's not forget that the 817 has 2m/70cm crammed in there too - definitely placing it firmly in the General Purpose bracket. Personally I went with the 857 and it's been a great little first radio but a little too thirsty for fieldwork. I may go with the 817 for portable QRP and maybe an LNR Precision's CW MountainTopper... y'know... just for the sheer joy of it : ) Thanks for taking the time to make this video, perhaps one day I'll be in a position to add a KX3S to my bag'o'tricks. M6UDS
Kx3 has a very nice form factor and the rx section may be a bit hotter than the 817 but look at the size of the 817.. All those bands and a not too shabby rx section. Even though old by today's standards its still a marvel of engineering today!
"I'll try and edit this video - but I can't say that's ever going to happen" Classic quote - love the honesty... we are all the same, falsely optimistic but maybe not so honest :)
Thanks Dave, appreciate the comment. I sold the FT-817 in the video, it left for its new owner the following morning. The KX3 brings a lot to the table, I've been having fun with it.
Thanks for the A/B comparison. However, to be totally fair, you should have adjusted the frequency on both radios to produce the same exact CW pitch. At times, I noticed the KX3 was adjusted to a higher pitch than the FT-817. Higher pitches are easier to hear than lower pitches in all that hash. I'd say overall the FT-817 held it's own quite well. The KX3 is a very nice radio and does have a better receiver, but for my needs and budget, I'll stick with my highly versatile FT-817nd.
KB0KDX Ham Radio Thanks for the comment. I still have the KX3, the major reasons for me are bigger display, more power and built in tuner. I use it mainly for SOTA activations. That being said things like form factor, ruggedness and VHF/UHF still make the 817 (and the new 818) a decent radio too.
Hi Jim ! As I see both radios are identical in sensitivity. KX3 has more emphasis in 1000-1500 hz sound. That is all -;) The easy way to see the sensitivity is to compare the natural sound of the band noise... KX3 is exellent Radio.. But what makes Me down to this radio is half vertical -half horizontal construction... It is not "handy"
Thanks for the video. I have FT817ND with the Yaesu CW filter (In my opinion a must for CW use). I hardly ever use SSB but the FT817 2 meter and 440 is nice to have. The ergonomics of the KX3 sure wins! I need a spinner knobs for the 817 to make it easier! I think they are both fine rigs with the receiver edge going to elecraft and the price and band support going to Yaesu. The Yaesu needs an update but the big suppliers seem to be focusing on rigs for the high end of the market. AA6RE
YOu are seeing a subjective test with examiner bias. The examiner should have used a variable attenuator ahead of the two way switch and increased attenuation on signal A until signal was about s5 on a strong signal. Then switch to radio B and note the S reading. Of course AGC should be off, and voltage reading then made on an oscilloscope for accuracy. That becomes a valid and useful comparison.
My 75A4, BC-342, R390A or Drake 2B would sound better than either of these. Sensitivity below 20 mhz has not been an issue since about 1922 when Armstrong invented the regen rx. The rest is all ergonomics, stability, selectivity, audio fidelity, features and lots of hype. The real difference in these 2 radios would show up during a cw contest where signals are only a few 100 hz apart and very strong. The KX3 should easily beat the 817 when it comes to IMD but just listening to weak signals on a quiet band reveals very little.
Steve Ellington "The real difference in these 2 radios would show up during a cw contest where signals are only a few 100 hz apart and very strong." Thats right this close spaced high dynamic range the elecraft fanboys are so focused on is way over hyped. Very rarely does close spaced dynamic range become an issue for 99 percent of hams, The fact is anything over about 60db of close spaced dynamic range is more than adequate for the vast majority of ham radio operators. Remember the difference between an S1 signal and an S9 signal is only -73 db that's why anything over 60db of close spaced CW dynamic range is more than adequate for the vast majority of of users and why a 101db of close spaced CW dynamic range is over kill and wasted on the vast majority of users One of the issues is that very few hams live in a low enough RF noise environment or have the station setup to take advantage of a high dynamic range CW receiver. If you live in a remote area of the world and see an S0 noise floor and have stacked mono band yagis on 120 foot towers then it might become a slightly more important consideration. For the rest of us sure its something to take into consideration but its not the holy grail as there is a lot more to a transceiver than close spaced dynamic range. Again all things being equal the the truth is you would need laboratory grade test equipment to measure the RX performance difference between these two radios The difference in close spaced CW dynamic range between the two radios only comes into play when you are connected to high gain directional antennas and are lucky enough to have a very low atmospheric noise where you can take advantage of the receivers low noise floors, you are using mono band yagis at 120 feet and there is enough atmospheric noise to move the meter then the advantages of the KX3's dynamic range quickly diminishes.. For example the difference in close spaced CW dynamic range means it would take a 40 over S9 CW signal 2khz away to increase the KX3's noise floor by 3db , On the other hand it would take a 20 over S9 CW signal on the FT817 to do the same thing.. And remember the higher the local noise floor the less advantage the KX3 has for example if you have an S2 noise floor it would take a 52db over S9 CW signal 2khz away to increase the KX3's noise floor by 3db and a 32db over S9 signal to increase the Ft817s noise floor 3db and how many of us are lucky enough to have an S2 noise floor or unlucky enough to deal with 52db over S9 CW QRM 2 khz away from band edge to band edge.. I personally find that in pass band QRM to be far more problematic than 53db over S9 signals 2khz away are and that's something only a lid filter can correct. Again there is a very narrow and rare set of circumstances that give a high dynamic range receiver a slight advantage. A set of circumstances that is highly unlikely to be an issue encountered often by those using compromised portable antenna system or for that matter even a tri-band yagi at 40 feet in the suburbs. Also don't forget this only applies to CW as the wide spaced dynamic range of these radios for phone aka SSB operation is nearly identical. In other words if you are a phone aka SSB operator and have bought this radio because you bought into the dynamic range hype than I'm sorry to say that you've been grossly misled. On the other hand if you're an Elecraft fan boy using close spaced dynamic range to justify purchasing a more expensive toy by engaging in specmanship then you have other issues to contend with that only a mental professional can help you with.
WOW, I think that the 817 wins here ( in popularity for sure ) . I am a Yaesu lover but I also own Ten Tec and Hendricks also when referring to QRP rigs . I would Love to have one ( or a few ) of Each , Kinda like WB6ACU . I like different aspects of different radios , so I love em all . Heathkit , Collins , all of em . Would I like to own a KX3 ? You betcha but cant $wing it right now ...
Hi so at first its clear that volume was not set to the same...kx3 was much louder. Finally for me the 817 was in test definitely more quiet and noise more comfortable. Sri Elecraft... Michael
For my ears, I prefer the FT-817. No doubt the KX3 is a cool radio with a lot of features, but the tried and true Yaesu is more like a radio in looks and feel and it's the one I would grab to go portable.Just my opinion.....
good video Jim. Keep 'em coming... I'm lovin' my KX3. The speaker IS the worst thing about it. However, I will be using cans most of the time with mine. ~73
I own both and the KX3 is better receiver hands down all day every day. In this video he is using the KX3 stripped of all it's tools like dual variable filters and peak AF which is what makes this radio so incredible. He's doing it because the 817 simply does not have these features. When the 817does sound better on the video it's because the speaker on the KX3 is simply tiny, under valued, lacking of any fidelity and is simply horrendous. Virtually ANYTHING is better than what Elecraft put in that box as a speaker. That said, use a small set of headphones and the sound is absolutely awesome!
You keep moving off every time you tune to the Yaesu you keep moving it off when you can hear it why are you doing that every time you hear the CW signal with the Yaesu youtune off of it I mean everybody could see what you're doing I just don't understand why you want to do that
The argo is a great radio but it's way to strip down. It's not cheap either. And the difference between Tentec and Ellecraft customer service is night and day. This is coming from a huge Tentec fan in the past Sent from my iPhone
WB7TLK I've had both. I know the KX3 is more expensive. I find that the KX3 is much quieter on receive. It also has dual VFO's. The VFO is much easier to tune. Battery life is a lot better. Internal batteries are pretty much worthless on both. With the FT-817 I had to carry a antenna tuner which cost the same as the internal unit in the KX-3 and two more things to carry with the cables. The KX-3 allows me to vary the bandwidth from 2.8 khz to .05 khz. The best part is I can see the display. I carry a HT for VHF UHF.
I see all the comments here and actually no test of what makes a receiver superior. The 817 is a versatile do everything radio but it is dwarfed by the KX3 in robustness of the receiver. It's not anecdotal, and I am not basing this on the perceptions like nice audio and such. The 817 will melt with a 20-30 over signal 500 HZ away, and the KX3 will make it go away. You cannot compare a DC to light receiver with an up conversion design to the Elecraft. I believe there is only one filter option for the Yeasu and the blocking dynamic range is vastly superior. I would propose adding a test to your series. Find a pileup. Find an S3 signal amongst strong signals. Lock the filtering down and see what happens. The signal on the Yaesu will go noisy or go away due to blocking. The KX3 will be crystal clear. Also an Elecraft need to be adjusted for your preferences, and with a little tweaking, you can make it sound exactly the way you want. In internal speaker is meant for portable operation, so it obviously will not perform as well. The 817 is great for what people do with it, with small compromise antennas. But it will simply melt into a puddle of goo in a difficult environment. Both are good tools but it's like comparing a camera phone to a DSLR.
+Erin Taylor Again: Ten (10) years separation in design philosophy. Again: $500 vs. $1000. Heavens above man. Please tell me you don't blow a gasket when you can't find tomatoes in the apple orchard.
The big plus is that the Yaesu is a HF, and VHF and UHF radio. The Electraft is a nice radio, but the Yaesu does so much more. I like HF, but some times 2 meters nets are calling. If you are just starting out, get the FT-897, the big brother. But if portable is your thing, the FT-817 is it. The Elecraft is a touch on the expensive side.
Anything that Elecraft has in its lineup performs better on HF than an 817. Comparing the KX3 to an 817 is hard as they are in slightly different classes. The 817 does a lot of things adequately. For a ham that wants an all around radio on a budget within the low power market, the 817 has been the way to go for years. If you are primarily an HF operator than there should not even be a thought of an 817 on your list of transceivers to consider. If your after refinement than Elecraft is the way to lean. If you are on a budget than an 817 could potentially be an alright choice, but with the new KX2 out I find it hard for any QRP oriented operator to consider buying a new FT-817nd.
I'm with you completely, Derek. I just sold my ft-817nd and ordered a KX2 last week. The 817 got the job done as a QRP radio that I bought for the purpose of portable work. 4 years ago was a different time for me interest wise in radio. I learned that I am a CW only operator, rarely on voice. The KX2 fit every piece of criteria that I wanted in a QRP radio. I do not need a 2m+440 rig as I don't partake in any local chatter, which at the time I purchased the 817 I did a lot of repeater listening. Now I find myself zeroing in on a CW conversation and listening to that instead. Whether you're a new or seasoned operator, an 817 is not a bad choice if you understand the capabilities as equally as its limitations. It is a versatile, do it all radio. With the KX2 being recently released, the price point is perfect, as well as the versatility and refinement that a lot of portable operators are looking for. I will have a hard time missing my FT-817nd while on the air.
A much better test would have been to use a signal generator... Every heard of QSB? I would expect the KX3 to win. It's 10 years newer. Think how much mobile phones have moved on in 10 years... The FT817 should have always had an internal ATU instead of those batteries. They're hopeless, even at 5 watts! Interesting... de M1GEO.
I like the internal batteries it allows me to run a 60watt solar panel with just a small charge controller right into the radio and not have to cary anything else. if fully charged it will give me about 1 hour from before sun rise to 1 hour after sunset with no other batter to carry, and my solar panel weighs less then the radio and folds up to being only slightly bigger
There is no difference except , the ND has 3 colors for the display, has the 60 meter and Alaska emergency freq. in memory slots, and has a more robust PA stage, ( which I tested at 15w through the hidden menu). It's the same radio, no real difference, and I use it nearly every weekend from National Forests. Lee, WA8QFE
It seems like your right hand has lower turning dexterity than your left. Hmm. Also, you never seem to be able to tune both rigs exactly at the same pitch. The receive audio levels are not matched either. Nobody wins in this subjective test. They both sound the same to me based on the way the test was conducted. Nice attempt but hardly scientific. The 817 does not drift on PSK... the KX3 does!
A slightly unfair comparison between a ten year old design (FT-817) and a modern software defigned radio of brand new design...besides that, the SDR doesn't have to deal with the VHF and UHF of the Yaesu radio. Its like comparing a 2003 Ford with it's contemporary model. They cannot be compared as they are so different...chalk and cheese!
I like these comparisons, they help people decide if they want to spend the extra money on this upgrade. because all you hear is people that don't use the 817nd complain how bad it is but when you see its not all that terrible you can decide to spend your money on better things. I just wish someone would do this one a really noisy frequency
I own both. The KX3 is the most overpraised and overpriced rig I know. It's nothing exceptional in overall review but Elecraft legend made by Elecraft fanboys is working big time.
I own an FT817nd and a K3 "dream station" (K3, KPA 500, KAT 500, P3). I am something of an Elecraft fanboy. Having said that, I did not appreciate much difference in the receive of the weak signal you pulled in between 5:00-6:00, especially given the speaker difference. Both were copyable. Price on the KX3 with the tuner and filter set is about $1,200, the 817nd is < $800 with a cw filter.
These are different radios with different purposes. I think Elecraft wanted a radio with a true price point of around $1000 to compete with Yeascomwood, and give a qrp/portable option to the Elecraft fanboys like me.
You can take the KX3 and build a full home station capable of 100W-plus operation, with pan-adapters, SDR filters, the whole 9 yards. It is a capable contesting rig on the receive side bettering much bigger, expensive radios in Sherwood Enginerring tests - actually I think its in the top 3 of all time on receive - but by that I mean close separation of weak signals.
But, that fact of the matter is, portable QRP is not about hooking your radio up to a $10,000 Step-IR 3 element beam and tower combination and finding the weakest signal out there. It's about picking up a radio, tossing it in a bag, going outside, throwing a wire up in tree and seeing what happens. Is the KX3 better in that regard than the 817nd? Not really. UA-cam is full of 817nd's doing some spectacular QRP work then flipping over to VHF to make long range contacts for SOTA. I dont see how a KX3 would be better (with the exception of its add-on antenna tuner - which btw you can also get as a stand alone kit for the 817 from elecraft as well).
If you have a base station already and want the KX3 for straight portable QRP only, you can get the 2m module for the KX3, the Antenna Tuner, the roofing filters, the microphone and make it nearly as flexible or more so than the 817nd; but then you end up with a $1400 qrp rig. At that price, I think you have become a qrp fanatic. Its not a bad thing, but that is what you are.
If you're an SSB guy, you like qrp, want to hit 2m and 70cm repeaters, and already have a base station, its tough to ignore the 817nd. At $659 warts and all, 15 years old and all, there is a reason why it has been so successful for so long.
I've just acquired a Yaesu FT-817ND and I'm impressed with its reception. I have an AlexLoop antenna and I'm just waiting for the weather to improve here, so I can't take it outside. Thanks for your feedback.
@@juliocesarpereira4325 no problem. 6 years later I stand by this comment. I have the KX2, which is a better radio than the 817nd, but that’s mostly due to its antenna tuner, DSP and noise blanking features- which become much less important if you want to do portable qrp. It doesn’t do 2m cand 70cm, and the KX2 is rather fragile as well. The 817nd (and its unimpressively upgraded replacement in the 818), remains a remarkable radio that is tons of fun to operate and has some nice features like broadcast band receive (which is quite good), that give it some extra juice. It’s still serviced by Yaesu, so you can buy one used and know that it can be repaired for a very long time. A word of advice. As much as I love my own Alex loop antenna, you need to understand that the efficiency of that loop on 20 m even perfectly tuned, it’s somewhere in the range of 10%-20%. You can forget about 40 m, where the efficiency is even lower. At least for single sideband. If you don’t mind, I would suggest (actually strongly urge) for you to look at one of the portable end-fed half wave antennas (Par makes good ones, they’re owned by Vibroplex now). You can work 40, 20, 15, and 10 m without a tuner, it’s full-size, full efficiency, and that’s what you need for a 5w radio. They even make a version where are you can work 80 m, but I think that’s a bit too long for QRP or portable work. They’re also much cheaper than your Alex loop. Just throw it in a tree.
To me the FT-817 sounded better but when you consider the price differance the FT-817ND is a far better deal..The KX-3 costs twice as mutch and HF only..I own the FT-817ND and love it..Its an all purpose go any where radio for HF VHF UHF...You cant go far wrong for portable ops..
Thanks for the video. I'm an engineer and long time ham, and I like to do FD and dig out difficult to hear stations. My 817 receiver crumbles during FD when I'm near any other transmitters. The KX3 does not. And when the QRM is tough, well, you know what happens. If I like to have new features (even higher power output), I can update my firmware on the KX3 to current specs. Not so the 817. Same rig since 2002. HOWEVER, the 817 is a heckofa rig, I do NOT disparage that little thing. IF you're looking for LESS $$, stick with the 817, by all means. Its just great for that. However, when I need my batteries to last a long time (internal), might experience heavy QRM and love 50 Hz CW filtering, like not having to carry a key or tuner, blah, blah... I'll take the KX3. IF I truly need multimode VHF/UHF (never have) - the 817 kicks butt. For basic performance, the 817 is truly wonderful, I"ve had mine since 2002. It will not leave my shack!
817 is a mountain top radio not a fd radio so cant fault it for that. I would like to see an IC-703 vs 817
+Clark Turner - You are indeed the voice of reason here and stated the differences in these two radios perfectly! Thank you!
many true statements here . I like the fact that the 817 looks like a radio ( I do not even like menu driven rigs but I gotta admit unless your going vintage a good older analog rig would be a good find for me . I also do not like one ( 1 ) switch for multi purpose use . But I have those type of rigs also . Just have fun … best 73
Thank you for doing this video. Very interesting I was contemplating purchasing a kx3 but after watching your video and owning a 817ND... think I'll hold off
thanks again
Did you install TCXO and CW filter in FT-817? KX3 is around 3 years old but FT-817 is around 13 years old.
So, I love FT-817 more then KX3, because, it is no impressive performance then FT-817.
the KX3 costs twice as much when optioned fully. yet it does less than the yaesu. Hell the FT817 has been around almost as long as the elecraft brand! the 817 is for me. costs half as much and does more. They seem to last too
I love the 817 as well , i have 2 right now . One set up in the shack as a fixed station on digital and my other one is for CW and phone and SOTA and trail hiking ! Wish I had the casholla for the KX3 also
Hey Jim: How about a review about these two radios on SSB Voice? I am considering the FT817ND for a QRP digital and voice radio. Looked at the KX3 but by the time I added the features I wanted, the price balooned to almost $3,500.00. OUCH! I miss seeing you at the Agawam Field Days. Would you have any suggestion for Solar panel for the FT817 running 3,000 NIMh batteries?
Be careful when using the 817 for digital modes or full duty cycle modes. They can get pretty warm without some air movement around the rear which is where the majority of heat dissipation takes place. I've fried the final in two 817s doing SSTV and PSK31.. Just sayin..
A buddy of mine has the KX3. He let me use it for a couple of CW QSO's. Gotta say, I've had the 817 (LOVE IT! ), but the receiver on the KX3 is REALLY nice!
Lovely high pitched whistle on the video....made watching as fun as dental work...
Sorry, 817 to my surprise works 817 much better. Lets try 2 meter and 70 cm SSB now.
Also the Elecraft ecosystem is more fun and expandable. I have a K3. II have had it for 5 years. Elecraft just released a new synthesizer for 200 bucks. Put the K3 at the top of the heap and it was already one of the top 5 receivers. New modular options are also available. They just released the new K3S, and if I want too, I can bring my K3 up to that spec. They never leave you hanging with product improvements. As a desktop rig, the KX3 can morph into a serious competition grade radio. Spectrum scopes auto tuners, and awesome roofing filters. Again, the 817 will become challenged with weak signal work in crowded bands and big antennas. Add to that the ability to flash new features and improvements via software updates, an autuner (which is key to portable operation), long batter life (not an option for backpacking) and the radios are apples and oranges. And I like the 817 for what it is. Just being realistic.
Field reports of minor drifting during PSK mode were observed recently. You can be dure that it will be fixed with temperature compensation tweeks by Elecraft. They are a superor company compared to Yaesu service and customer service. Also your test proves they have superior ergonomics . Your left hand looks right at home with the KX3, while the right fumbles a bit on the tiny buttoned 817. Congrats on your new radio Jim! You too can join the cult like following at Elecraft. Enjoy!
What I take from this video is that your antenna makes a much bigger difference than your radio. I would be happy with either of these rigs on the end of a well installed, well designed antenna. The "ancient" FT-817 was really quite a good rig "in its day", which means it still really is quite a good rig, despite others possibly having better bells and louder whistles. The Elecraft is also a fine rig. Either one will work the world on a good antenna; neither one will work the local repeater without a proper antenna.
I would love to see more reviews of antenna systems and fewer reviews of radio match-ups, because nobody markets a worthless radio - Put a proper antenna on any one of them and you can work wonders.
Also, it was cute of you to compare the Yaesu without the Collins filter activated to the Elecraft with its DSP active for the first half of the video. A real "honest to goodness" comparison, there! Way to go.
Hey, what was that audio alert from another radio (or computer) around 5 minutes in? Uzbec CW station alert. Where did that come from? Thanks.
FT-817ND has a little better signal sensitivity than KX I was surprised initially but after understood that KX-3 is a digital baby when Yaesu is old classic superheterodyne . All this DSP and the rest of digital staff are good modern features that help to improve signal clarity but they never be over real signal sensitivity . And this video is one example . Two rigs sound equally but some time Yaesu sounds better. I was not sure what radio to buy but after this video 817 is my choice
you did a good video . Took some time to set it all up and did a pretty good A B test and your explanation of things was clear . 2 enthusiastic thumbs up !
If you do a lot of CW, the 817 is pretty harsh on the ears. No qsk, and little annoying relay clicks from tx to rx. Not a bad radio (I've had one for over 4 years now,) but my Elecraft gets much more use because it is so sweet through the headphones :) Comparable to Ten Tec, actually (which I have several of...)
Good stuff, but nothing was mentioned about the CW filter between the ears! That's where the true difference lies.........k6sdw
tru dat yo !
I have read all the reviews I could find on the KX3 and they all show a 5 out of 5. I have a recent model FT 817ND and use it with a yo yo QRP all band dipole and both work great! I am not knocking the KX3, as I wish I had one but they cost almost twice the amount of an 817ND...I like building radios also including my Heathkit "Twoer" I built as a kid which still works....Nice video sir...
The ft 817 wipes the floor with the KX3 for less money , you can buy the ft 857D and used 5 watts QRP the KX3 sell you a amp 100 watts for 800.00 buying the ft 857D give you the best of the both worlds 5 watts for QRP and 100 watts The KX3 is melting your wallet when you can do it cheaper with the FT 857D
I priced a KX3 with a few basic options = $1504.00 with shipping! At least the FT-817 comes with a decent microphone. Most local mountain toppers/hikers I know use the small LNR xcvrs; basic but quite rugged. I think the FT-817 is a better trail/SOTA rig, more rugged, 2 meters and 440. Yes you can add 2 meters to the KX3 for another $260.00, now we're pushing $1800.00.
w8mpx amen brother!😎
Amen to you Sandra 73'
Lol
TRUE I HAD BOTH THE FT 817 AND KX3 THE FT817 IS A WINNER I SOLD MY KX3 I WILL LIKE TO TRY THE KX2 BUT USED NOT NEW AND COMPARE IT WITH THE FT 817 I HEAR THE KX2 IS BETTER THAN THE KX3
The FT-817 is the clear winner with much less background noise, and you get 144 and 432 MHz. as a bonus without buying the optional 2m option for the KX3. It's nice to have 2m FM to make local contacts with a small whip antenna. The high background noise on the KX3 can give you a migraine headache. Who needs that? Is the KX2 any better?
I wonder if he set the CW side tones to be the same in both radios? It didn't sound like they were. The FT-817 default is 700 hz but I set mine to 600 hz like my other rigs. That way you can get a equitable comparison of the filter and audio passband of two rigs. I think the results in the video were about even but if you didn't think so it might be because you prefer one radio's side tone setting over the other.
You're selling a lot of 817's here... ;)
Good! That'll leave more KX3's for the rest of us who want a real radio. Did you miss the part where it's made in the USA, not Asia? I think we've gave Asia enough of our money don't you think. Freaking tightwads!
+ELiTE_OpTiic I would like to see the K3 operate without all it's made in China/Japan electronic chips. You sound like all those self righteous Harley riders bragging about US made while all the chrome parts, suspension and electronics come from Asia. It's a world economy buddy. BTW, when is the last time you took a picture with your "US" camera? Give me a break.
That's one of the reason when you go to a hamfest and there are selling a use KX3 you will go next years and the guy still have the KX3 for sell they know the radio is over price and nobody want to deal with a radio that it look is made in a garage now when somebody see a ft 817 it be sold for sure
@@MrAlphacallsign if it looks like a Real Rig it usally is if it looks like a kit it usally is in the CQ Phone contest i worked 5 continents in 3 hours on my FT817 LOVE IT ...
you have the kx3 af gain louder than the 817. aim not saying the 817 is better RX but give it a chance....Math in the price The Yeasu FT-817 wipes the floor with the kx3...
I noticed the same thing..The KX3's AF gain was up a bunch more. Trying to adjust for that on my 'puter....I actually liked the Yaesu's receive!!
current price of the 817nd at Universal Radio (where I got mine) is $689. the KX3 on Elecraft Web side for the basic 160-6M is $999. the 2 meter module is $199 user installed and saw nothing about a 70cm module. so is the KX3 better than the 817. probably a little bit. is it $500+ better, not in my books.
Looks like the 817 is using the rear port so will loose some signal, best re-do the comparison using the front port?
how so ?
Nicely done. I've now subscribed and look forward to your future videos.
I preferred the 817 audio, seemed quieter background hiss. Apart from that I'd say not a lot of difference. Why keep re-tuning once they were tuned in? To me KX3 not cost effective at £1099.95 for the kit or £1149.95 built, here in U.K. 817ND, still £529.95 with £45 cash back when I got mine last year. Or £699 now with Elecraft T1A auto tuner. I have 40m, 20m and 17m dipoles or for other aerials a roller coaster plus variable capacitor or an MFJ 16010 tuner so I don't need a tuner built in. 817 has 2m and 70cm built in, I use 2m for locals and never repeaters.
G4GHB
I love my 818, even though I need glasses to see the display!
this test did not show much of a difference to me, but when I tested the KX3 and compared it to my FT-817 I noticed that the receiver in the KX3 is much more quiet and it is less susceptible to nearby strong signals.
although the 817 is a lower signal, the QRN is also lower, I would certainly prefer the 817 for CW copy
That KX3 is certainly a beautiful piece of kit. Having said that, at the price I can definitely see the law of diminishing returns at play.
This is a real David and Goliath battle in a way... so once you've factored in the huge price difference I'd say the FT817 is by far the real success story here. I'm assuming that the KX3 already has the appropriate CW filters fitted, whereas at a quarter of the price the 817 doesn't... so It'd be interesting to hear a comparison against a tweaked out 817 to see if that improves things a little.
I've not looked at yaesus optional filter modules yet so I'm not sure what's available or how they perform.
Also, let's not forget that the 817 has 2m/70cm crammed in there too - definitely placing it firmly in the General Purpose bracket.
Personally I went with the 857 and it's been a great little first radio but a little too thirsty for fieldwork. I may go with the 817 for portable QRP and maybe an LNR Precision's CW MountainTopper... y'know... just for the sheer joy of it : )
Thanks for taking the time to make this video, perhaps one day I'll be in a position to add a KX3S to my bag'o'tricks.
M6UDS
The 817 does just fine. if your fortunate to afford both, more power to you!
Kx3 has a very nice form factor and the rx section may be a bit hotter than the 817 but look at the size of the 817.. All those bands and a not too shabby rx section. Even though old by today's standards its still a marvel of engineering today!
"I'll try and edit this video - but I can't say that's ever going to happen"
Classic quote - love the honesty... we are all the same, falsely optimistic but maybe not so honest :)
Thanks Dave, appreciate the comment. I sold the FT-817 in the video, it left for its new owner the following morning. The KX3 brings a lot to the table, I've been having fun with it.
Thanks for the A/B comparison. However, to be totally fair, you should have adjusted the frequency on both radios to produce the same exact CW pitch. At times, I noticed the KX3 was adjusted to a higher pitch than the FT-817. Higher pitches are easier to hear than lower pitches in all that hash. I'd say overall the FT-817 held it's own quite well. The KX3 is a very nice radio and does have a better receiver, but for my needs and budget, I'll stick with my highly versatile FT-817nd.
KB0KDX Ham Radio Thanks for the comment. I still have the KX3, the major reasons for me are bigger display, more power and built in tuner. I use it mainly for SOTA activations. That being said things like form factor, ruggedness and VHF/UHF still make the 817 (and the new 818) a decent radio too.
Hi Jim !
As I see both radios are identical in sensitivity. KX3 has more emphasis in 1000-1500 hz sound. That is all -;)
The easy way to see the sensitivity is to compare the natural sound of the band noise...
KX3 is exellent Radio.. But what makes Me down to this radio is half vertical -half horizontal construction... It is not "handy"
Thanks for the video.
I have FT817ND with the Yaesu CW filter (In my opinion a must for CW use). I hardly ever use SSB but the FT817 2 meter and 440 is nice to have. The ergonomics of the KX3 sure wins! I need a spinner knobs for the 817 to make it easier!
I think they are both fine rigs with the receiver edge going to elecraft and the price and band support going to Yaesu. The Yaesu needs an update but the big suppliers seem to be focusing on rigs for the high end of the market.
AA6RE
Jim, I am sure you are missing FT-817 now . After playing KX3 any ham operator would need something more classic and pleasant .
Actually , I think they are both the same on your vid,,,
Lee, WA8QFE
YOu are seeing a subjective test with examiner bias. The examiner should have used a variable attenuator ahead of the two way switch and increased attenuation on signal A until signal was about s5 on a strong signal. Then switch to radio B and note the S reading. Of course AGC should be off, and voltage reading then made on an oscilloscope for accuracy. That becomes a valid and useful comparison.
The Yaesu has a lower muffled sound probably has to to with speaker it is larger in diameter so it will sound lower in tone.
At one time there was a German replacement speaker that was better...but I can't find it now...
WA8QFE
My 75A4, BC-342, R390A or Drake 2B would sound better than either of these. Sensitivity below 20 mhz has not been an issue since about 1922 when Armstrong invented the regen rx. The rest is all ergonomics, stability, selectivity, audio fidelity, features and lots of hype. The real difference in these 2 radios would show up during a cw contest where signals are only a few 100 hz apart and very strong. The KX3 should easily beat the 817 when it comes to IMD but just listening to weak signals on a quiet band reveals very little.
Steve Ellington "The real difference in these 2 radios would show up during a cw contest where signals are only a few 100 hz apart and very strong."
Thats right this close spaced high dynamic range the elecraft fanboys are so focused on is way over hyped.
Very rarely does close spaced dynamic range become an issue for 99 percent of hams, The fact is anything over about 60db of close spaced dynamic range is more than adequate for the vast majority of ham radio operators. Remember the difference between an S1 signal and an S9 signal is only -73 db that's why anything over 60db of close spaced CW dynamic range is more than adequate for the vast majority of of users and why a 101db of close spaced CW dynamic range is over kill and wasted on the vast majority of users
One of the issues is that very few hams live in a low enough RF noise environment or have the station setup to take advantage of a high dynamic range CW receiver. If you live in a remote area of the world and see an S0 noise floor and have stacked mono band yagis on 120 foot towers then it might become a slightly more important consideration.
For the rest of us sure its something to take into consideration but its not the holy grail as there is a lot more to a transceiver than close spaced dynamic range. Again all things being equal the the truth is you would need laboratory grade test equipment to measure the RX performance difference between these two radios
The difference in close spaced CW dynamic range between the two radios only comes into play when you are connected to high gain directional antennas and are lucky enough to have a very low atmospheric noise where you can take advantage of the receivers low noise floors, you are using mono band yagis at 120 feet and there is enough atmospheric noise to move the meter then the advantages of the KX3's dynamic range quickly diminishes..
For example the difference in close spaced CW dynamic range means it would take a 40 over S9 CW signal 2khz away to increase the KX3's noise floor by 3db ,
On the other hand it would take a 20 over S9 CW signal on the FT817 to do the same thing.. And remember the higher the local noise floor the less advantage the KX3 has for example if you have an S2 noise floor it would take a 52db over S9 CW signal 2khz away to increase the KX3's noise floor by 3db and a 32db over S9 signal to increase the Ft817s noise floor 3db and how many of us are lucky enough to have an S2 noise floor or unlucky enough to deal with 52db over S9 CW QRM 2 khz away from band edge to band edge.. I personally find that in pass band QRM to be far more problematic than 53db over S9 signals 2khz away are and that's something only a lid filter can correct.
Again there is a very narrow and rare set of circumstances that give a high dynamic range receiver a slight advantage. A set of circumstances that is highly unlikely to be an issue encountered often by those using compromised portable antenna system or for that matter even a tri-band yagi at 40 feet in the suburbs.
Also don't forget this only applies to CW as the wide spaced dynamic range of these radios for phone aka SSB operation is nearly identical. In other words if you are a phone aka SSB operator and have bought this radio because you bought into the dynamic range hype than I'm sorry to say that you've been grossly misled.
On the other hand if you're an Elecraft fan boy using close spaced dynamic range to justify purchasing a more expensive toy by engaging in specmanship then you have other issues to contend with that only a mental professional can help you with.
As you appear to know the specs well-and might not have to look it all up, does your analysis here also apply to the K2? Thanks 73
By the way , KX-3 should cost less because of technology .
WOW, I think that the 817 wins here ( in popularity for sure ) . I am a Yaesu lover but I also own Ten Tec and Hendricks also when referring to QRP rigs . I would Love to have one ( or a few ) of Each , Kinda like WB6ACU . I like different aspects of different radios , so I love em all . Heathkit , Collins , all of em . Would I like to own a KX3 ? You betcha but cant $wing it right now ...
Hi so at first its clear that volume was not set to the same...kx3 was much louder. Finally for me the 817 was in test definitely more quiet and noise more comfortable. Sri Elecraft... Michael
For my ears, I prefer the FT-817. No doubt the KX3 is a cool radio with a lot of features, but the tried and true Yaesu is more like a radio in looks and feel and it's the one I would grab to go portable.Just my opinion.....
the test is not very valid since the radios were not on the same frequency. To do this correctly the radios should be on the same exact frequency.
good video Jim. Keep 'em coming... I'm lovin' my KX3. The speaker IS the worst thing about it. However, I will be using cans most of the time with mine. ~73
I own both and the KX3 is better receiver hands down all day every day. In this video he is using the KX3 stripped of all it's tools like dual variable filters and peak AF which is what makes this radio so incredible. He's doing it because the 817 simply does not have these features. When the 817does sound better on the video it's because the speaker on the KX3 is simply tiny, under valued, lacking of any fidelity and is simply horrendous. Virtually ANYTHING is better than what Elecraft put in that box as a speaker. That said, use a small set of headphones and the sound is absolutely awesome!
You keep moving off every time you tune to the Yaesu you keep moving it off when you can hear it why are you doing that every time you hear the CW signal with the Yaesu youtune off of it I mean everybody could see what you're doing I just don't understand why you want to do that
I still have both !
Lee, WA8QFE
Actually I expect much more difference between the two for instance on S/N department.
Good job! 73! Adi
817 for me,Elecraft overated.
I love my 817ND; never had KX3 but it looks cool though.
Nice Video Jim, Recently sold my FT-817ND Perhaps a KX3 Next!
73, de Dave 2W0DAA
Unconvincing to me. Not a great test.
sure the KX3 wins
it costs a nearly twice as much
and does not do as much
the FT-817 is like a Swiss Army Knife
The 817 is wide as a barn door and can be overloaded by a cricket farting. Apples and oranges. Not in the same class at all.
Swiss army knife with dull blades :0)
Erin Taylor
not at all, its a fine little radio
note how many are on the air
a better comparison would be KX-3 vs Argo VI
The argo is a great radio but it's way to strip down. It's not cheap either. And the difference between Tentec and Ellecraft customer service is night and day. This is coming from a huge Tentec fan in the past
Sent from my iPhone
Erin Taylor The FT-817 works fantastic for those who are educated enough to use it properly.....
WB7TLK I've had both. I know the KX3 is more expensive. I find that the KX3 is much quieter on receive. It also has
dual VFO's. The VFO is much easier to tune. Battery life is a lot better. Internal batteries are pretty much worthless on both.
With the FT-817 I had to carry a antenna tuner which cost the same as the internal unit in the KX-3 and two more things to carry with the cables. The KX-3 allows me to vary the bandwidth from 2.8 khz to .05 khz. The best part is I can see the display.
I carry a HT for VHF UHF.
Absolutely Mark! Especially the ATU and readable display. The only thing I miss about the FT817 is the audio which is way better than the KX3.
I see all the comments here and actually no test of what makes a receiver superior. The 817 is a versatile do everything radio but it is dwarfed by the KX3 in robustness of the receiver. It's not anecdotal, and I am not basing this on the perceptions like nice audio and such. The 817 will melt with a 20-30 over signal 500 HZ away, and the KX3 will make it go away. You cannot compare a DC to light receiver with an up conversion design to the Elecraft. I believe there is only one filter option for the Yeasu and the blocking dynamic range is vastly superior. I would propose adding a test to your series. Find a pileup. Find an S3 signal amongst strong signals. Lock the filtering down and see what happens. The signal on the Yaesu will go noisy or go away due to blocking. The KX3 will be crystal clear. Also an Elecraft need to be adjusted for your preferences, and with a little tweaking, you can make it sound exactly the way you want. In internal speaker is meant for portable operation, so it obviously will not perform as well. The 817 is great for what people do with it, with small compromise antennas. But it will simply melt into a puddle of goo in a difficult environment. Both are good tools but it's like comparing a camera phone to a DSLR.
+Erin Taylor Again: Ten (10) years separation in design philosophy. Again: $500 vs. $1000.
Heavens above man. Please tell me you don't blow a gasket when you can't find tomatoes in the apple orchard.
Nigel Holmes Go Fuck yourself!
ELiTE_OpTiic Wow a triggered confused alt-left troll.
The big plus is that the Yaesu is a HF, and VHF and UHF radio.
The Electraft is a nice radio, but the Yaesu does so much more.
I like HF, but some times 2 meters nets are calling.
If you are just starting out, get the FT-897, the big brother.
But if portable is your thing, the FT-817 is it.
The Elecraft is a touch on the expensive side.
The Elecraft had ringing whereas the Yaesu FT-817 did not. The Yaesu is also half the price and has more bands than the Elecraft.
Obviously the yaesu ft-817 is best
I have 2 :-)
Anything that Elecraft has in its lineup performs better on HF than an 817. Comparing the KX3 to an 817 is hard as they are in slightly different classes. The 817 does a lot of things adequately. For a ham that wants an all around radio on a budget within the low power market, the 817 has been the way to go for years. If you are primarily an HF operator than there should not even be a thought of an 817 on your list of transceivers to consider. If your after refinement than Elecraft is the way to lean. If you are on a budget than an 817 could potentially be an alright choice, but with the new KX2 out I find it hard for any QRP oriented operator to consider buying a new FT-817nd.
But the KX2 starts at not a lot more than an 817ND, and you get 10 watts.
I'm with you completely, Derek. I just sold my ft-817nd and ordered a KX2 last week. The 817 got the job done as a QRP radio that I bought for the purpose of portable work. 4 years ago was a different time for me interest wise in radio. I learned that I am a CW only operator, rarely on voice. The KX2 fit every piece of criteria that I wanted in a QRP radio. I do not need a 2m+440 rig as I don't partake in any local chatter, which at the time I purchased the 817 I did a lot of repeater listening. Now I find myself zeroing in on a CW conversation and listening to that instead. Whether you're a new or seasoned operator, an 817 is not a bad choice if you understand the capabilities as equally as its limitations. It is a versatile, do it all radio. With the KX2 being recently released, the price point is perfect, as well as the versatility and refinement that a lot of portable operators are looking for. I will have a hard time missing my FT-817nd while on the air.
Enjoy! I'm envious!
Brandon Bagley Hahaha, Ya ok....
A much better test would have been to use a signal generator... Every heard of QSB? I would expect the KX3 to win. It's 10 years newer. Think how much mobile phones have moved on in 10 years... The FT817 should have always had an internal ATU instead of those batteries. They're hopeless, even at 5 watts! Interesting... de M1GEO.
I like the internal batteries it allows me to run a 60watt solar panel with just a small charge controller right into the radio and not have to cary anything else. if fully charged it will give me about 1 hour from before sun rise to 1 hour after sunset with no other batter to carry, and my solar panel weighs less then the radio and folds up to being only slightly bigger
FT-817ND is a much better product than the older FT-817 , cost is also very different.
There is no difference except , the ND has 3 colors for the display, has the 60 meter and Alaska emergency freq. in memory slots, and has a more robust PA stage, ( which I tested at 15w through the hidden menu).
It's the same radio, no real difference, and I use it nearly every weekend from National Forests.
Lee, WA8QFE
I saved a whole bunch of money on my car insurance by switching to Jiveco. And with that money, I bought me a FT -870😂
It seems like your right hand has lower turning dexterity than your left. Hmm.
Also, you never seem to be able to tune both rigs exactly at the same pitch.
The receive audio levels are not matched either. Nobody wins in this subjective test.
They both sound the same to me based on the way the test was conducted. Nice attempt but hardly scientific. The 817 does not drift on PSK... the KX3 does!
PS KX3 is made in USA from mostly us parts =]
A slightly unfair comparison between a ten year old design (FT-817) and a modern software defigned radio of brand new design...besides that, the SDR doesn't have to deal with the VHF and UHF of the Yaesu radio. Its like comparing a 2003 Ford with it's contemporary model. They cannot be compared as they are so different...chalk and cheese!
I like these comparisons, they help people decide if they want to spend the extra money on this upgrade. because all you hear is people that don't use the 817nd complain how bad it is but when you see its not all that terrible you can decide to spend your money on better things. I just wish someone would do this one a really noisy frequency
I don't see and hear to vins someone, I believe they are the same, not significant different among them.
73 I8TSL
На этой полосе 817-й звучит мягче.
ft817nd is so much better
Really!? Compare the KX2 to the 817 not the KX3. Won't even watch this.
After discovering the IC-7300, these all look like toys! ua-cam.com/video/lEtu9gTHrf8/v-deo.html
kx3 wins i what one so bad but they cost to much i what to get one so me and my grandpa jim N0IAA can go mountain topping 73s
I own both. The KX3 is the most overpraised and overpriced rig I know. It's nothing exceptional in overall review but Elecraft legend made by Elecraft fanboys is working big time.