Larry -
I owned a pair of Kenwood TS-940 rigs for about 12 years, and was
generally very happy with them. I sold them a couple of years ago and
replaced them with a pair of Yaesu FT-1000 MK V sets (the 200 W version)
, with which I am also quite content. I put the Inrad front-end kit in
the Mark 5's, along with a selection of Inrad filters for various modes
and bandwidths.
The K2 I have has the KDSP2, KNB2, KSB2, KBT2, KIO2, and the 160 meter
kit, but not the 100W amplifier.
The Mark 5 is a lot like the K2 (I only have one of those, HI) in that
the front end is a lot more resistant to overload than was the
'940's. A few operating sessions at the KL7Y contest station
convinced me of the superior performance of the MK 5 over the 940 when
the bands are very crowded and signal levels are high to very high. I
think I like the DSP in the K2 better than the MK 5, mostly because the
K2 DSP can be tweaked and fine tuned, whereas the MK 5 DSP is pretty
much what you see is what you get. The MK 5 DSP works well enough, but
I am sure there are lots of advances in noise reduction algorithms yet
to be discovered.
I generally prefer the K2 when band conditions permit the use of low
power, but the Mark 5 has several operating features that the K2 does
not, and I prefer the MK 5 for day to day use on SSB. I like the K2
better for CW, and it's receiver does have a more "open" sound than the
MK 5. Either rig performs well, and I am sure the differences are
simply a matter of personal preference.
I did like the 940's implementation of passband tuning MUCH more than
the MK 5 version. The 940 "high cut / low cut" selectivity control was
and is much more intuitive, whereas the shift and width controls on the
MK 5 are much harder to figure out. If Elecraft ever considers putting
variable selectivity into a future "K3", then I hope they do it the way
Kenwood did.
The noise blanker for the K2 is adequate. The one in the MK 6 is
better, but the one in the 940 is the best I have seen, even better
than the old Drake R4C I had before I switched to the 940's.
Don't know if this helps, but then again, it was free <grin>
What's wrong with the 940? One of it's huge advantages is that it was
built with discrete parts (mostly) and was very easy to service. Great
for areas that don't have a well stocked parts house in the same town.
The 940 is still a great 2nd rig, and I certainly wouldn't toss it out
if it can be repaired at a reasonable cost.
I have not looked at the Kenwood 2000 or the ICOM 756 series , so cannot
offer anything there.
- Jim, KL7CC
Post by Larry - WA2DGDHello all,
Like most others on this list, I absolutely love my K2, and I also
have a second rig, kenwood ts-940sat.
The ts940 has been waiting for parts for over 3mos. and I was
considering replacing it.
I would like to know of other list members personal experiences
comparing the K2 receiver to either the Icom 756 pro series, the Knwd
TS2000 or most specifically, the Yaesu FT1000MP MKV Field.
If anyone has any personal experiences comparing the TS940s to the
above mentioned rigs, I'd like to hear if you think its even worth
replacing the 940s.
Happy and Healthy New Year to all.
