Category Archives: Reviews

Morse Code, New Products, News, Portable, QRP, QRP Radios, Reviews

The (tr)uSDX QRP transceiver: My initial impressions after a CW POTA activation

42 Comments

I mentioned in a previous post that I placed an order for a (tr)uSDX kit with roWaves in February. My order was placed for a third production run kit and I assumed I would receive it sometime in March 2022.

Later that month, I discovered that DL2MAN announced AliExpress would sell both kits and fully-assembled versions of the (tr)uSDX. I used the link from DL2MAN’s website and ordered a fully-assembled unit.

My thinking was that I would receive the kit first, build it, then test the performance by comparing it with the factory-assembled unit. These units are so dang affordable I felt like I could splurge for both.

roWaves order on hold

I recently discovered that my (tr)uSDX kit had been placed on hold due to issues that popped up in the first and second kit group buys via roWaves.

Evidently–and someone can correct me if I’m wrong here–the first and second production runs kits had a component issue that equated to lower output power. In addition, Josh (KI6NAZ), reports that the early group orders had no boot loaded and the MCU was DOA.

I’ll patiently wait for roWaves to sort this out. I’m not in a huge hurry at this point because, frankly, my available time to build a kit has come and gone. The next few months, I’ve a lot of plans, travels, and projects to work through.

Fully-assembled (tr)uSDX

Much to my surprise, the assembled (tr)uSDX arrived Monday and I picked it up when I was at home on Tuesday of this week.

I was only home one night, but managed to do some quick testing.

I soldered Anderson Powerpole connectors on the supplied power cable pigtails. Next, I hooked the (tr)uSDX up to my variable power supply and a dummy load.

A quick test showed that I was getting about 3 watts of output power with about 13-13.2 volts, 3.25 watts at 13.8 volts, and 2 watts of power with 9-10 volts. This is lower than the expected 5 watts of output power @ 13.8 volts. The current consumption in receive however was about 60 mA even at 9 volts. That’s slightly below the published specs.

I honestly had no time that evening to play radio, but I took a moment to hook up the (tr)uSDX to my skyloop antenna just to check the audio quality in SSB.

As luck would have it, the first station I heard on 40 meters was a POTA activator in Ohio. He was calling CQ, so I couldn’t help but reply. I pressed the PTT button on the (tr)uSDX, spoke into the internal mic,  and he came back immediately with a 5×8 report. My meter was showing a max of 2 watts output power–the heavy lifting, of course, was done by the antenna.

This gave me a very good initial impression!

(tr)uSDX POTA Activation

The following morning, after running a few errands and carting my kids to some appointments, I left the QTH for a couple nights of travel.

I just couldn’t help but pack the (tr)uSDX and attempt a park activation en route. My goal was to see if it had enough positive receiver characteristics to be a proper POTA/SOTA portable rig–the feature set is comprehensive for a $135 radio.

I stopped by South Mountains State Park and paired the (tr)uSDX to an EFHW my buddy Steve (MW0SAW) kindly built and sent me. [Steve–I’m loving this antenna! Thanks again, OM!]

I made a video of the entire activation and will soon post the field report. I’ll push this video to the front of the line, but with my internet bandwidth, it might still be a few days before I can post it. Because of this, I thought I’d go ahead and share some of my experience with the (tr)uSDX in case you’ve been thinking of purchasing one.

(tr)uSDX pros

This little radio design has a lot going for it.

The chassis is very compact–perhaps the size of two Altoids tins stacked on top of each other. The encoder does protrude–in fact, it’s nearly as deep as the radio chassis. It’s not that the encoder is particularly tall, it’s just that the (tr)uSDX is so wee.

The radio has all of the CW adjustments you’d typically find in a compact field transceiver and even sports QSK (there’s also a semi QSK setting) with no relay noise. I assume it uses PIN diode switching.

(tr)uSDX Cons

Unfortunately, I did find a few negatives. The reviewer in me automatically gives the (tr)uSDX wide berth and a lot of forgiveness: we’re talking about a $135 transceiver here. I don’t think anyone is under the impression this would be a stellar performer.

In my opinion, the biggest negative is the (tr)uSDX audio. This little rig has a very high noise floor–perhaps S5 or S6.

The internal speaker is very modest and mine is incapable of producing audio at a level that is workable in the field where there are ambient noises like wind, water, conversations, birds, etc. The audio sounds decent when working a strong station, but weak stations are extremely hard to hear. If you turn up the volume on my unit beyond level 14, the audio simply squeals. I need to tinker with the volume control more.

Since the audio was so weak, I hooked up my Sony digital audio recorder to the (tr)uSDX headphone jack and made a separate audio recording for the upcoming activation video.

The headphone audio is louder, but there’s also a lot of noise in the audio amplification chain–again placing the (tr)uSDX noise floor around S5 or S6.

I was fully expecting the (tr)uSDX receiver to overload and it does. The variable filter helps and narrowing it makes the audio sound more pleasant in CW, but it doesn’t stop adjacent signals from bleeding through. Honestly, though? I could live with this and just use the filter between my ears if the audio was simply cleaner.

I also discovered that my unit needs alignment: the frequency display is off by 1.6 kHz in CW mode on 40 meters. I’ve put this on my to-do list–after all, this is a project radio meant for hands-on tweaking. I’m good with that.

One final point and minor quibble: the OLED display is very difficult to read outdoors. It’s superb indoors, but outside any sunlight or reflection simply wipes it out. To read the display I had to cover it with my hand.

The activation was a success: I worked 11 stations in 20 minutes or less, but I’m sure there were weaker signals out there I missed because they were simply buried in the (tr)uSDX’s noise floor.

I liked the (tr)uSDX keying, and I love the form factor, but I’m not sure I’ll ever use this radio again–configured as it is now–during an activation. For casual contacts, it could still be fun.

A little (tr)uSDX grace

I mean…$135 right?!?

The (tr)uSDX is an open source project and truly pushes the boundaries of what one can achieve for $135–again, even much less for the kit version. Frankly, I’m in absolute awe that any transceiver can be made below the $150 price point; especially a multiband, multimode transceiver.

The (tr)uSDX is an experimenter’s radio and I plan to dig into this little unit and see if there’s anything I can do to lower that noise floor. My hope is that the CPU or display may simply need better grounding or isolation. My time is limited at the moment, but I will open into this radio in the next few weeks.

In fact, eventually completing the kit build will give me an opportunity to explore the components and connections in much better detail.

I do know that my unit also seems to have the power output issue that some of the roWaves kits have. I can’t achieve anything better than 3.25 or 3.5 watts output at 13.8 volts. It should be about 5 watts at 13.8 V.

I would welcome your suggestions especially if you’ve built the (tr)uSDX kit or if you’ve put your assembled (tr)uSDX on the air and found that it had much better audio characteristics.

Kits, New Products, News, QRP, Reviews

Check out John’s review of the Penntek TR-35

14 Comments

If you haven’t already, hop over to John’s (AE5X) blog and read his review of the Penntek TR-35 transceiver kit.

John reviews both the build and performance. He even put the TR-35 on his workbench and measured a number of parameters.

In short, the little TR-35 does exactly what it sets out to do and packs a surprising amount of performance.

John and I actually had a TR-35 to TR-35 exchange a few days ago (if not mistaken, the photo above was taken after that exchange). I was lucky enough to catch him as he activated a POTA site in Texas. From this end, his TR-35 sounded fantastic.

Click here to read John’s report.

I’m putting together a review of the TR-35 which will likely appear in the May or June issue of The Spectrum Monitor magazine.  I’ll eventually send this little TR-35 back to WA3RNC (it was very kindly sent to me on loan) but I do plan to purchase his TR-45 Lite kit when it hits the market later this year. Why? Because I don’t have enough QRP radios, that’s why.

Morse Code, News, Portable, QRP, QRP Radios, Reviews, SOTA

Recap of my first SOTA activation with the Venus SW-3B

18 Comments

I made a short post yesterday morning noting that I planned to take my Venus SW-3B and new field kit out on a maiden SOTA/POTA activation.

While I will be publishing a full activation report and video, it could be a good two weeks down the road.

I’ve gotten so many inquiries about the SW-3B, I thought I’d write up a short recap with some of my initial notes using the SW-3B in the field.

This isn’t a comprehensive review; just some beginning field notes I made for a full review I’ll write for The Spectrum Monitor magazine.

Dogback Mountain (W4C/EM-066)

I decided to activate Dogback Mountain knowing that it would easily fit in my travel plans. The views (see above) were extraordinary. Thank you for the tip, Dave (W4JL)!

This was also a shake-out for my Tom Bihn HTL2 field kit which will likely be shared with the SW-3B and Elecraft KX1. It includes everything I need to deploy the SW-3B in the field–including an arborist throw line!

I confirmed that everything in the kit worked and there were no missing components.

I paired the SW-3B with my PackTenna Mini 20 meter EFHW. This limited me to the 20 meter band, but I suspected it would yield enough contacts to validate my summit (4) and park activation (10).

I fed the Venus SW-3B with a 3 Ah 12V Bioenno LiFePo4 battery pack–my output power would’ve been about 5 watts.

Results

In short? It really couldn’t have gone better.

I worked a total of 43 stations in 44 minutes on the air. Here’s what my contacts look like on a QSO Map (click image to enlarge):

Venus SW-3B Field Notes

Overall, the experience of using the SW-3B was brilliant.

Since this little rig doesn’t have an internal speaker, I recorded the audio with an in-line Sony digital recorder. Later, when I produce the activation video, hopefully I can blend the separate audio channel with the video successfully. (Any YouTuber worth their salt can do this, but keep in mind I’m not really a YouTuber!)

SW-3B Pros:

  • Excellent receiver for field activations. I noticed no overloading and it handled the pileups very well.
  • Very pleased with CW filtering.
  • I was able to successfully program the “CQ” button with the following message: “BK TU 72 DE K4SWL” This is huge. At one point, the SW-3B could only handle a simple CW + callsign message. I’m very pleased its only message memory slot can hold the end of my exchange. Also, it is very easy to program.
  • The SW-3B is incredibly compact; only slightly bulkier than the MTR-3B if you include the encoder and AF/RF gain pot protrusions.
  • I am loving the dedicated AF and RF gain pots.
  • Display is very easy to read in the field.

SW-3B Cons:

  • Changing the CW keying sped on the fly is really not an option. It’s an awkward process.
  • The sidetone isn’t adjustable without modifying an internal component. If I could, I’d lower it just a notch or two. As-is, it’s perfectly fine, but adjustable sidetone would be a nice feature.

SW-3B Quirks:

  • When switching bands, the SW-3B defaults to saved memory allocations (not the last used frequency). If you forget and switch bands, then turn the encoder, it cycles through saves memory allocations instead of up/down tuning.

Summary

Keep in mind: this is my first activation with the SW-3B. I don’t typically form strong opinions until I’ve taken a radio on at least three or four activations and used it at the QTH extensively. With that said, first impressions are great. This radio offers much more than I would ever expect for $188.

I see why it has has become so incredibly popular among CW field activators. Now that the Mountain Topper MTR-3B is no longer available, this is a viable alternative.

I’m sure some of you may be trying to decide between the MTR-4B and the SW-3B. I will be reviewing an MTR-4B soon, but based on my experience with the MTR-3B, I don’t think you could go wrong with either radio, frankly.

The MTR-4B does allow for a total of 3 CW message memories that are very easy to access and include beacon mode. You can also adjust the sidetone volume on the MTR-4B (requires opening the enclosure to make the adjustment). Obviously, the MTR-4B is a four band radio including 80 meters in addition to 40, 30, and 20.

The SW-3B, however, has an AF and RF gain control–the MTR series has no volume control at all. The SW-3B also has a rotary encoder which makes chasing contacts across the band much easier.

The MTR-4B receiver current is roughly 27 milliamps. The Venus SW-3B closer to 40 milliamps. (Yeah, splitting hairs here!)

Stay tuned!

In the coming weeks, I will be posting a number of activation reports and videos using the SW-3B. As I mentioned, I’ll also post a comprehensive review for The Spectrum Monitor magazine in the coming months.

I can say this: if you’re a CW op who is searching for a compact field radio?  The SW-3B is a no-brainer. Just grab one.

If you still can’t decide between the MTR-4B and the SW-3B, consider getting both. Why? You could easily kit out two independent fully self-contained field packs on the (relative) cheap!

This will give you two choices for grab-and-go field activations.

Thank you

As always, I’d like to send a special thanks to those of you who have been supporting the site and channel through Patreon and the Coffee Fund. While certainly not a requirement as my content will always be free, I truly appreciate the support.

Your support not only pays the bills at QRPer.com, but makes it possible for me to purchase radios like the SW-3B.

Thank you!

I hope you get an opportunity to play radio this week.  Stay healthy and safe out there!

Cheers & 72/73!

Thomas (K4SWL)

Guest Posts, News, QRP Radios, Reviews

Guest Post: Erik’s Review of the Venus SW-3B

9 Comments

Many thanks to Erik (KE8OKM) who kindly shares the following guest post:

Venus SW-3B Review from a newbie SOTA/POTA activator’s viewpoint

by Erik (KE8OKM)

My journey into amateur radio is relatively short (approaching 2 years now) in this short time I have become enamored with “in the field” QRP operating. Particularly SOTA/POTA.

SW-3B in action Bearcave Lookout PA SOTA!

When I started studying for my tech license I kept coming across CW–what the heck is that? After I learned it’s a mode using Morse Code (a highly effective one at that) I thought, “not interested” and “they still do that?”

Much to my chagrin, I find myself loving CW and obsessed with all things Morse! The CW mode is both a skill and an art. I am still drawing with crayons but hope to paint someday…at least like Bob Ross…

The Venus SW-3B is a small 3 band transceiver operating on the highly effective 20/30/40m bands: the SOTA/POTA activator’s bread and butter bands. To date I have logged over 450 QSOs with this little “black box.” I often come across some disparaging remarks since the transceiver is built in China.

The SW-3B’s design and manufacturing is overseen by Dale (BA4TB). Now having 3 of these, I can say the quality is fine across the line. Product support is reported very good in the rare event it’s needed. Continue reading Guest Post: Erik’s Review of the Venus SW-3B →

Field Reports, Morse Code, New Products, News, Portable, POTA, QRP, QRP Radios, Reviews

The new Xiegu X6100: Let’s see how well it performs CW in the field!

26 Comments

Last week, I received the new Xiegu X6100 QRP HF transceiver on loan from Xiegu distributor/retailer Radioddity. This is the exact same unit Josh (KI6NAZ) reviewed for Ham Radio Crash Course (click here to see his updated X6100 video).

Many thanks to Josh for sending me this X6100 so promptly and performing the first firmware update!

I took delivery of the X6100 last week after returning from vacation in the Outer Banks. It was bittersweet as I was so eager to check out this new radio but simply had too many projects on the table to complete before Christmas day.

That and in the morning light after our return, my daughter pointed out that one side of my horizontal delta loop antenna had fallen to the ground. Fortunately, I was able to fix the antenna in short order. It’s certainly time to push the schedule up for completely replacing this 10 year old wire antenna!

X6100: Known issues

I had gotten a few messages from X6100 early adopters like Scott (KN3A) and Rich (KQ9L) noting that the current firmware version (the December 7, 2021 release) had taken care of a few initial bugs, but there were still a few outstanding points that specifically affect CW operators. Most notably:

  • Noise reduction (or DNR) in CW mode severely distorts audio
  • CW message memories can be stored and saved but cannot yet be played back on the air (SSB message memories are fully functional, however)
  • Fine tuning is limited to 10 Hz steps at the moment

Someone had also noted possible CW keyer timing issues.

At the same time, I had read mostly positive comments about SSB operation from QRPer readers and subscribers.

Frankly, knowing Xiegu’s history of pushing the production and distribution timeline ahead of a radio being fully-functional and properly tested, I expected a few bugs and issues that would need to be sorted out in firmware updates.

To be very clear: I’m not a fan of the “early adopters are the Beta testers” philosophy. I wish Xiegu would thoroughly Beta test their products so that they were more polished and fully-functional right out the door much like we expect from the likes of Elecraft, Icom, Yaesu, and Kenwood. There are almost always minor post-production bugs to sort out even with these legacy manufacturers, but issues should be of the variety that somehow slips past a team of Beta testers who actually use the radio.

Okay, I’ll get off my soapbox! 🙂

X6100: In the shack

Over Christmas weekend, I did have some time to hook the X6100 up to my (repaired) sky loop and casually work a number of park and summit activators. Of course, I formed a few initial impressions about the X6100 and I speak to those in the video below. Continue reading The new Xiegu X6100: Let’s see how well it performs CW in the field! →

News, Portable, QRP, QRP Radios, Reviews

I’ve sent the Chinese uSDX QRP SDR Transceiver back…

34 Comments

A couple weeks ago, I posted my initial thoughts about the Chinese uSDX/uSDR QRP transceiver.

In short, it wasn’t exactly a glowing review.

I’ve now tested the uSDX at home for a couple weeks and decided to send it back to the eBay distributor.

I made a short video detailing the reasons why I’m sending it back (see blow), but in short there are two main reasons:

1.) The receiver and audio

I understand that quality control varies greatly with the various versions of the uSDX being manufactured in China.

With that in mind, I have to assume mine is one with an incredibly inadequate receiver.

My uSDX receiver overloaded when in the presence of pretty much any strong-ish signal.

As an example, one of the first signals I tuned to on the CW portion of the 20M band–K4NYM activating a park in Florida–had FT8 audio bleeding in from over 20 or 30 kHz away. K4NYM had an S9 signal, but he was very much a portable operator, not a blowtorch contest station. The uSDX should have easily been able to handle this situation.

On my unit, if you tuned to a strong CW signal (or worse yet, a pileup) it opened the receiver window so wide that signals across the band bled through. There was essentially no selectivity. Continue reading I’ve sent the Chinese uSDX QRP SDR Transceiver back… →

News, Portable, Reviews

Spec-Ops Brand T.H.E. Pack EDC might become my Holy Grail SOTA pack

8 Comments

This year, I got an early Christmas present: a Spec-Ops Brand T.H.E. Pack E.D.C.

If you’ve been reading QRPer.com for long, you’ll know that there’s no cure for my pack addiction, so in a sense, there could be no better gift!

Spec-Ops Brand

I’ve been a long-time customer of Texas-based Spec-Ops Brand.

I first discovered their gear at the Wright Patterson AFB Air Force base Military Clothing Store with my buddy Eric (WD8RIF) in 2013. I purchased their Pack-Rat pouch and reviewed it on the SWLing Post.

The Pack-Rat Pouch
Pack-Rat Interior Organization

Since then I’ve purchased numerous products from Spec-Ops Brand.

I’ve owned the Spec-Ops T.H.E. Pack Tactical backpack since 2013 as well. You don’t see that pack in my field reports because, frankly, it’s just too big for most of my field radio applications. It’s designed for armed forces deployments and has a lot of capacity. I primarily use it for camping and extended travels.

Spec-Ops introduced an EDC (Everyday Carry) version of the T.H.E. Pack Tactical in 2015 or after so many customers asked for it. The EDC version is identical to the larger T.H.E. pack in every respect, just smaller in every dimension.

Looking good

It’s very early days, but I suspect this pack will become my choice Summits On The Air (SOTA) pack.

In terms of size/capacity, it’s ideal for summit day hikes and the thing is just covered in Molle (Modular Lightweight Load-Carrying Equipment) straps, so very adaptable if I need to attach extendable masts, hiking poles, water bottles, or basically a Molle pouch or accessory.

The best part, though, is that it sports the same two ports/openings Spec-Ops puts into the larger T.H.E. packs for field antennas and hydration. Continue reading Spec-Ops Brand T.H.E. Pack EDC might become my Holy Grail SOTA pack →

New Products, News, QRP, QRP Radios, Reviews

Xiegu X6100: Josh reviews the final retail production unit

8 Comments

If you’re interested in the new Xiegu X6100 QRP transceiver, I’d strongly encourage you to check out Josh’s latest view on the Ham Radio Crash Course YouTube channel:

Click here to view on the HRCC YouTube Channel.

I’m very pleased to see that Xiegu has addressed some of the issues found in their pre-production model. Most encourgaing!

I look forward to checking out the X6100 soon and putting it through the paces in the field. Although I say this with some apprehension, the X6100 does look promising.

I know that Scott (KN3A) will have his X6100 soon and also will share his thoughts and field experience.  [Update] Scott comments with some unfortunate news:

“Sadly, I received mine on Monday morning, and I had to return it to HRO last evening. Intermittent problems with transmit/receive on all bands except 40 meters. Did a couple of videos to document the issues before returning it last night. Hopefully it was just a fluke and there will be a replacement. There are a lot of things I liked about the radio in the short time I used it on Monday. It certainly does have potential.“]

Stay tuned!

New Products, News, QRP, Reviews, Software Defined Radio

Early days with the Chinese uSDR / uSDX reveals weaknesses

49 Comments

A couple days ago I finally took delivery of the uSDX/uSDR transceiver I ordered in late October from this seller on eBay. I’ve been tinkering with it in the shack since then and have started to form some initial impressions.

The uSDX is a super cheap transceiver and, to be clear, my expectations were (spoiler: thankfully) very low.

If you’ve been here for long, you’ll know that I don’t normally test or review super cheap transceiver varieties found on eBay, AliExpress, etc. So many people asked me to check out the uSDX, however, that I decided I would try to give it a shake out.

I’ve yet to take this little radio to the field, but I have made a couple dozen contacts from the shack, all in CW and I’ve done a lot of listening. Yesterday afternoon, I even hooked it up to an oscilloscope.

It’s still early days and I’m sharing the following observations and notes with the hope that uSDX owners might be able to guide me if I need to make menu adjustments to sort out a few issues.

More specifically, there are two big cons with my uSDX:

Con #1: The Audio

Trying to be diplomatic and kind with my words here, but let’s just say the uSDX audio leaves much to be desired.

I think it’s great this little transceiver has a built-in top-mounted speaker, but it produces some of the harshest, most spluttery audio I’ve ever heard in a radio.

On top of this, the volume control (which requires going into an embedded menu item to adjust) is just…strange. It’s hard to explain, but the audio feedback isn’t what I would expect from a volume control or AF gain. It seems like each volume control step (starting at “-1” and going up to “+16”) is a mix of both AF and RF gain values. It doesn’t have a fluid amplification progression like I would normally expect.

In fact, I can’t really turn the volume up to +16 because on many bands around level +14 or +15, it starts to emit a really loud squeal.

Although very minor compared with the issues above, the audio amplification chain also has an ever-present hiss.

In addition, even with the volume turned to “-1” I can still hear splattering and even garbled whispers of CW signals if connected to an antenna.

I hope I’m missing something here and the audio can be tailored for better listening. Perhaps there’s a combination of adjustments I can make in the menu options to help?

Please comment if you own a uSDX and can provide some feedback.

Con #2: The Receiver

Again, unless there’s a magic combination of adjustments I can make in menu items, I find the receiver of the uSDX to be incredibly anemic.

I took the uSDX to my buddy Vlado (N3CZ) yesterday and we hooked it up to an analog oscilloscope and signal generator.

We concluded that the uSDX is very sensitive, but the front end seems to be as wide open as a barn door.

This confirmed my on-the-air observations made over the past two days: even with the 500 Hz DSP filter engaged, CW signals as far away as +1.7 kHz could easily bleed through. In fact, quite often when I tune to a POTA or SOTA station operating CW, I could even hear FT8/FT4 stations bleeding through from far across the band.

I couldn’t help but think if I had taken the uSDX on my recent Mt Mitchell SOTA activation instead of the QRP Labs QCX-Mini, there’s no possible way I could have handled the pileup. The uSDX receiver would have completely fallen apart because it shows no ability to handle tightly spaced signals.

Again, if you’re a uSDX owner and can provide some insight here, I would very much appreciate it.

Still testing the uSDX TX

One of my main goals with purchasing the uSDX was to test the transmit signal to see how clean it might be and if there were spurs in any harmonics.

Vlado hooked up the uSDX to his oscilloscope and we discovered that it did produce spurious emissions in harmonics of the 40M band. The spurs were negligible and we both assume it might possibly be within FCC guidelines.

With that said, Vlado didn’t completely trust this particular analog oscilloscope because there appeared to be a slight fault in its BNC input port. We ran enough tests–and even compared the uSDX to my KX2–to know that there are definitely faint spurious emissions and that the CW transmit signal isn’t nearly as clean as the KX2.

Here’s a 2 second video clip showing the uSDX transmitting CW on 7 MHz into the scope:

Click here to view on Vimeo.

I plan to hook the uSDX to a digital oscilloscope to get more accurate results in the near future.

Not all cons

The uSDX does have some positive attributes.

For example, the QSK is quiet and even full break-in. This little radio is also chock-full of features. I’ve even found that though it’s advertised as an 8 band radio, mine will transmit on 10 bands; everything from 160-10 meters.

I think if I planned to operate the uSDX on SSB when the bands were relatively quiet, it might do quite well for casual contacts.

Time will tell…

To be clear, though, the issues above can be deal-killers for me.

I want my transmitted signal to be clean enough to at least meet FCC requirements–I like being a good neighbor on the bands.  This might require some modifications on the output, but let’s see what a digital oscilloscope might reveal.

Of course, if the uSDX can’t handle multiple CW signals being thrown at me at once, I can’t see how this would possibly work as a SOTA or POTA field radio.

I can already tell that the ergonomics of the particular uSDX model I purchased will likely lead to–as Spock put it in Star Trek IV–some “colorful metaphors.”  Especially when I reach for the volume control buried behind a menu item. (I mean, seriously?)

Again, if you own a similar uSDX, I’d love to hear your comments and suggestions!

Comparisons, News, Portable, QRP, QRP Radios, Reviews

Which should you purchase: the Xiegu X5105 or the Elecraft KX2?

25 Comments

This year I’ve been trying to make dedicated posts and videos to address questions I’m asked most often by QRPer.com readers and my YouTube channel subscribers. The idea is to have a link I can send in a reply instead of trying to give a comprehensive answer in an email.

One question that’s been surfacing a lot lately is a variation of:

“Which should I buy, Thomas? The Xiegu X5105 or the Elecraft KX2?”

I’m sure the reason I’ve been getting this question is because I reviewed and purchased the Xiegu X5105 earlier this year and have used it on a number of activations.

I’ve owned the Elecraft KX2 since 2016 so have a lot of experience with this little field radio as well.

Why the choice between these two particular models? Continue reading Which should you purchase: the Xiegu X5105 or the Elecraft KX2? →