Mark Conrad wrote:


If one rig stands out head and shoulders above others for CW work,
then I would be strongly tempted to favor that rig.

dave wrote:

That would be the K3.

http://www.sherweng.com/table.html

Maybe forehead above, but certainly not head and shoulders. One receiver test
does not make a radio and many people prefer the Ten-Tec to the K3.

It's a matter of taste, ergonomics and what you want to do with the radio.
If you like full QSK, the older Ten-Tec and Drake rigs with their almost
noiseless receviers, exact PTO tuning, and "good sound" are more
comfortable in a relatively empty band.

Being able to extract that one weak signal in a pile-up is a different matter,
but many people don't care to. I would not want to spend an entire afternoon
listening to a 250Hz filter, no matter what it was made of (crystal, mechaincal,
digital, etc). Someone else might.

Geoff.

--
Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jerusalem, Israel N3OWJ/4X1GM
New word I coined 12/13/09, "Sub-Wikipedia" adj, describing knowledge or
understanding, as in he has a sub-wikipedia understanding of the situation.
i.e possessing less facts or information than can be found in the Wikipedia.