Sometimes, we do things for the pure nostalgia of it all!
I mentioned in a previous post that I recently acquired a circa 1995 Index Labs QRP Plus transceiver. Being transparent here, this was an impulse purchase fueled by pure, unadulterated nostalgia.
The QRP Plus was the first QRP transceiver that I’d ever laid my eyes on only a month or so before obtaining my ham radio ticket in 1997. I’ll write about this in more detail in the future–and I speak to this in my video below–but let’s just say that this little cube of a radio made a big impression on me at the very beginning of my ham radio journey.
I thought it might be fun to take it to the field and compare this 1995 state-of-the-art radio with so many of my other field radios. The QRP Plus wasn’t a perfect radio, but it was a marvel at the time it was produced. I can’t think of a smaller, more battery-efficient general coverage 160-10M QRP transceiver at the time.
I was eager to introduce this little radio to the world of POTA so on the morning of Thursday March 21, 2024, I grabbed it and hit the field!
Zebulon B. Vance Birthplace (US-6856)
I called the Vance site that morning and learned that a large school group would be arriving around noon. Since I was planning to leave around that time anyway, it was perfect timing for me.
Since I hadn’t created a field kit specifically for the QRP Plus yet, I brought my watertight stackable Husky brand box that basically contains everything I need to set up a field radio station, save the radio.
I unpacked everything I needed: a key, key cable, battery, power cord, cable assembly, antenna, logbook and pencil.
Since the QRP Plus has no internal tuner, I paired it with my MM0OPX 40M EFHW antenna which would give me 40, 20, 15, and 10 meters. Note that Index Labs used to make an external manual ATU for this radio called the QRP Companion–I’ve never seen one in person, though.
Even though the Vance staff told me that the school group would not be using the picnic shelter, thus I could have free reign, I still deployed my antenna in a way that it would not become a trip hazard–keeping it close to the shelter and as conspicuous as I could (I do wish I would have brought along my flagging tape, but I left it at home).
Setting up the QRP Plus station was quick and easy. Time to hit the air!
Gear:
Note: All Amazon, CW Morse, ABR, Chelegance, eBay, and Radioddity links are affiliate links that support QRPer.com at no cost to you.
Yesterday, I posed the following question and asked for your input:
“Which aspect of a QRP radio holds more importance for you: its ergonomics (ease of use, comfort, display, size, etc.) or its performance (receiver test data, dynamic range, etc.)?”
Thank you to everyone who participated in my recent quickie poll, which has now closed. There were so many interesting points in the feedback. Here are the results from the 252 votes cast within a 20-hour window:
In essence, a slight majority preferred ergonomics, with 57.1% of respondents indicating it as more important, while 42.9% favored performance.
As I mentioned in my previous post, I’m well aware that this question paints with broad brush strokes. There’s not a give-and-take between the two: an investment in the user interface typically doesn’t mean performance is going to suffer. Indeed, I would say most of our modern transceivers sport decent ergonomics and decent performance.
If anything, the relationship between price and performance plays a proper tug of war. Even that’s nuanced, though!
I also received a number of comments and messages from readers who pointed out that my survey was flawed because it didn’t define what I meant by ergonomics and performance carefully enough. I agree that this wasn’t a carefully considered and properly worded poll.
That said, the way I wanted to present this was more like an informal raise of hands–something I often ask for during radio club presentations.
Selection of Comments
The comments from readers were excellent and what I would expect to hear from people who’d raised their hands in a club meeting.
Here are snippets from a few of them, (for all of the comments, click here):
From Scott (KK4Z):
A tricky question. I actually prefer a balance between ergonomics and performance. If you have a good performing radio with mediocre ergonomics, it might not be used to its full potential. A radio with good ergonomics and mediocre performance might be used to its full potential which may be above a good radio with poor ergonomics.
From Mark (NA4O):
My assumption is that performance would have to be good enough for the radio to be in the running. Likewise, ergonomics would have to be good enough for it to be considered usable.
From Nick (KC0MYW):
As I consider the radios that I have and have used and which ones I like better and why, I think that the performance of the radio can almost be considered an ergonomic characteristic with regard to how comfortable and easy the radio is to operate. While a radio with poor ergonomics is not a lot of fun to operate, a lower noise floor and smoother QSK can add as much to the enjoyment level as an easy to access RIT control.
From William (KR8L):
Difficult to say… Since my field operations are very casual affairs I suppose performance is a secondary consideration, although I don’t think I’d enjoy doing a POTA activation with my HW-8.
Ergonomics can be very important — for example, although my FT-817 performs well enough, the number of button pushes and knob twists required to change the keyer speed (or just about any other setting) can be very annoying.
The well thought out controls of my KX2 make it my favorite for field operating, but then it’s a good performer too.
From Brian (K3ES):
Tough question. I will say ergonomics, but what I really mean is easy access to the features I need. I don’t necessarily need contest grade performance, but I do rely on features like a tuner, cw speed adjustment, vfo, etc.
From Emily Clark:
I pick performance for a few reasons: I do contest QRP at times (most recently ARRL RTTY Roundup). I like the filtering, the clarity of the screen, the true FSK for RTTY, and the ability to put an IF spectrum out into N1MM+. I only have wire antennas, and with the AH-705 I virtually do entire contests on my 80m OCFD.
From Michael (N7CCD):
If taken to the extreme on both options, I think I would have to choose performance. I would rather operate a radio that can handle QRM (overloaded front end, etc.) with confusing menus, than the opposite. If not taken to the extreme, then I may choose ergonomics…
From Mark (W8EWH):
Ergonomics for me because I, like many, have many field portable radios and as I cycle between them I need to be able to use them without the need to consult a user manual or waste time fumbling around a menu system looking for a particular feature or setting.
From Shawn (WS0SWV):
Performance! As a retired design engineer, I learned that good design addresses the performance needs of the user(s) in an intuitive manner. If it is cumbersome or overly complex then users will tend to migrate away from it. Some communities have specific ergonomic requirements and for QRP field radios I would argue the primary ones are size, weight, current consumption there are others depending on mode of operation like keyer memories and narrow filters for CW but those are the big ones.
From Wlod (US7IGN):
Different people have different preferences and ideas about ergonomics and performance. It’s important to find a balance, or better yet, have different radios for different tasks.
From Andrew:
Ergonomics is nice, but without performance … it has no use, imagine a coffee mug; it may be hyperergonomical, but then it has a hole at the bottom…
From Dick (K7ULM):
Interesting question. It is interesting how the ergonomics of the KH1 over shadows the performance of the KX2 for some use cases. In some uses the KH1 is definitely the the choice due to its ergonomics. For other radios of its size it will be chosen because of performance and ergonomics. The specific use case is the controling factor IMHO. Performance slightly over ergonomics, generally for me, kind of?
My thoughts?
If there was one comment that reflected my thoughts most closely, it would be this one from John (AE5X):
There’s a lot of overlap between these two characteristics. Too little of one undoes the effectiveness of the other.
I find that most radios do have “good enough” performance (barring an outright flaw or deviation from legal requirements), therefore I pay attention to ergonomics more than to lab numbers of dynamic range and other electronic specs…if I need lab equipment to discern whether or not my radio’s performance is acceptable, it’s acceptable. I don’t like buried menus for commonly-used features.
John’s right. We’re lucky these days in that most of our modern QRP field radios have acceptable performance for our field activities like POTA, SOTA, IOTA, QRP Contests, and some even have the chops for the RF density of, say, Field Day.
If performance is acceptable, I tend to give more weight to ergonomics because it’s important to me that the radio be fun to use.
What makes this show of hands a hot mess, when we look at it under the microscope, is the fact that both ergonomics and performance are nuanced. Herein lies the challenge I find in writing radio reviews: I believe it’s important to explore those nuances so that the review can inform a potential buyer (who might not share my same point of view) in a meaningful way. Sometimes it’s difficult to do that within a print publication’s word count.
Closing thoughts…
As we often say, there is no “perfect” radio that will please everyone, so I think it’s important before we make a purchase decision that we’re realistic with ourselves and understand what we actually value.
Here’s one real-life example–outside the world of QRP transceivers–I’ll share from a friend who, sadly, is now Silent Key. Since I can’t ask for his permission, I won’t mention his name.
Back in 2010, he came to me for advice on buying an SDR (Software Defined Radio)–a PC-connected black box receiver.
Even though not that long ago, keep in mind this was still during the infancy of modern, high-performance, SDRs and most of the options were going to set you back $1,000 or much more. In other words, a substantial investment.
This friend was an avid SWL DXer and was considering an SDR that, at the time, had a slight performance edge over popular SDR models from manufacturers like Microtelecom, RF Space, and WinRadio. I’m not going to call out this SDR by name either, but I’m sure some of you can guess which one I’m referencing.
This particular SDR had fabulous receiver characteristics on paper, but it was well known that the proprietary PC application that controlled it was a bit of a nightmare to use.
My friend purchased it. I tried to help him set this SDR up and learn how to use some of the basic functions and features, but we both found it a struggle. The GUI (graphic user interface), one could tell, was likely designed by the hardware engineer, not someone with experience creating usable software applications, also, unlikely someone who was a DXer or SWL.
He ended up selling this SDR after having owned it for less than a month. He agreed that the performance was brilliant, but hated using the app that controlled it. In the end, he purchased the venerable Microtelecom Perseus and absolutely loved it.
Rob’s advice
This topic of our personal preferences is such a deep one; I think I might put together a club presentation, exploring some of the nuances.
Speaking of presentations, if you’ve never seen Rob Sherwood’s excellent presentation exploring transceiver performance, I highly recommend you check this one out. Rob will be the first to tell you that modern transceivers tend to perform so well that the operator should give weight to ergonomics and usability.
I’m in the midst of writing several radio reviews, and this process always brings up a few inherent dichotomies.
For example—and the point of this quickie poll—some operators seek, first and foremost, a radio with brilliant performance specs. This is especially the case when we’re talking about contest-grade, pricey transceivers. Dynamic range, sensitivity, filtering, and blocking? Yeah, those are looked at very carefully by contesters and DXers.
On the other hand, for some, a radio’s performance is less important than how enjoyable the radio is to actually operate. Are the ergonomics well thought through so that common tasks are easy to perform? Is the display easy to read? Is the encoder weighted correctly? Is the radio compact but useable, etc.?
Even though field radios are typically not thought of as “contest-grade,” many of them have superb contest chops and receivers that can handle RF-dense environments with ease (I’m thinking about my KX3 with roofing filter here).
However, some radios might lack precision filtering and a contest-grade receiver architecture but are designed with field use in mind interface-wise. The Elecraft KX1 and Penntek TR-45L come to mind, although there are many more. Both have great receivers, actually, but the designers obviously placed an emphasis on user a user interface that is field-friendly. I find both such a pleasure to use.
What’s your opinion?
I recognize fully that I’m painting with broad brush strokes here—there are so many other variables in evaluating a radio. I’m sure most of us want a good balance of both performance and ergonomics.
But if pressed for an answer, where do you fall? What do you give higher priority: performance or ergonomics?
If you’d like to cast your vote, please consider participating in the poll below:
I recently acquired an Index Labs QRP Plus transceiver (more on that in a future post!).
This little rig was produced in the mid to late nineties and, to my knowledge, was one of the first 160-10 meter, field-portable, general coverage QRP transceivers on the market. The only other one I can think of was the Ten-Tec Argonaut II, but please correct me if I’m wrong on this point.
QST ad from 1995 courtesy of WD8RIF.
I’m just curious if anyone here ever owned one and what they thought of it? Please comment!
From Elecraft: something BIG, in an incredibly small package…!
Just this morning, Elecraft introduced the new Elecraft KH1.
In brief, the KH1 is a five-band (40, 30, 20, 17, and 15 meter) handheld QRP CW transceiver with options for an internal battery, internal ATU, whip antenna, and fold-out logging pad.
Exciting! And if you’d like to get the scoop on this new handheld radio–– along with photos––we’ve got it here.
Q: What is the Elecraft KH1?
WG0AT with the KH1 making contacts pedestrian mobile.
A: The Elecraft KH1 is a compact, five-band CW QRP transceiver designed for both handheld and tabletop operation. Indeed, the “H” in the model number signifies “Handheld.”
To be clear, although it is quite small, the KH1 isn’t just a tiny radio: it’s ergonomically purpose-designed, to be a pedestrian-mobile CW station. It’s lightweight, easy to hold and use, and will fit both right and left-handed operators. With the optional “Edgewood Package,” it also includes a fold-out logging pad.
Q: How much does the Elecraft KH1 weigh?
A: With all options (ATU, Antenna, Battery, and logging pad) the KH1 weighs in at a featherweight 13 oz.
Q: What features does the Elecraft KH1 offer?
A: Here’s a feature list from the Elecraft brochure:
KH1 features:
40-15 meter ham bands
6-22 MHz for shortwave broadcast band listening
CW mode; 5 watts, all bands
ATU includes whip & high-Q inductor for 20/17/15 m
2.5 AH Li-Ion battery & internal charger
CW decode & 32K TX log
Scan/mini-pan feature
RTC [Real-Time Clock]
Full remote control
Speaker
RIT, XIT, & VFO lock
Light gray case stays cool even in bright sunlight
Three CW message memories with chain and repeat functions
Like nothing else on the market…
The KH1 design is all Elecraft and built on several years worth of design iterations. It is, no doubt, fueled by Wayne’s passion for handheld portable HF.
Again, the KH1 focuses on ergonomics that would make handheld operation not only easy, but enjoyable.
The two main multi-function controls (the AF Gain and Encoder), for example, are located on the bottom of the radio. This gives the operator easy and ergonomic access to the controls while the radio is in-hand.
The four buttons on the top of the radio default to the most useful functions one would need while operating portable. Using them to dig deeper into the menu levels, however, is also intuitive and well thought-through.
While the KH1 menus and features are naturally not as deep as those of the KX2 and KX3, it’s impressively well-equipped for a radio this size. At the end of the day, it’s a much more simple field radio––by design––than its KX2 and KX3 predecessors. If anything, it’s more akin to the venerable KX1!
(Source: Elecraft)
The KH1’s paddles (KHPD1) are located at the bottom of the radio––they flip down for transport, and up during use, so your fingers are well away from the AF and Encoder knobs.
The KH1 has an optional internal ATU that is not as wide-range as that of the KX3, KX2, or T1, but is much better than that of the KX1. I understand that it’ll match most of what you throw at it.
Wayne told me that one of the most complicated parts of the KH1 design was the fold-out logging pad. He wanted the logging pad to be functional for one-handed operation. The indents around the loose-leaf logging sheets allow you to pull out a completed sheet and slip it behind the others in the stack.
The logging sheets are available as a PDF download; simply print and cut. No doubt, the format would be easy to modify.
Whipped!
This is the part I love: the KH1 is designed to operate with a telescoping whip antenna.
Basically, you unclip the whip from the side of the radio (assuming you have the ATU/whip option) and screw it on the top of the top. The ATU will match the whip antenna––there’s a mechanical slide switch that selects 15/17 m or 20 m high-Q inductance for whip––or an external antenna on the BNC port.
If you’ve been reading my field reports and watching my videos, you know I’m a huge fan of the Elecraft AX1 antenna. The KH1 basically has the option of a built-in AX1 antenna…Just take my money!
Speed…and stealth
If the counterpoise is already attached and wrapped around the body of the KH1, you will be able to deploy the station and be on the air in about 20 seconds.
As many of you know, I’ve always said that the secret power of the AX1 and AX2 antennas is speed of deployment. The KH1 allows for an even speedier deployment.
This will be most especially appreciated when activating summits in the winter where exposure to the elements from simply setting up the antenna and station will often make your hands go numb.
Also, the KH1 is so low-impact and low-profile, you’ll be able to activate parks that might otherwise be off limits to an HF field installation. I know of one urban park that, with permission, I’ll definitely use the KH1 to activate; it has no park benches and no trees, just a strip of grass around a historic building in the middle of a city. Perfect for the KH1!
KH1 versus KX2?
The KH1 and KX2 are very different animals. Elecraft actually produced this comparison chart to help potential customers make a purchase decision.
My advice? If you have a KX2 on order, don’t cancel it.
The KH1 is not a KX2 replacement. The KX2 is a much more capable radio. The KH1, however, is a radio focused on ultra lightweight, low-profile, pedestrian-portable, CW HF field operation.
A KH1 review?
Yes, it’s coming! I will purchase and review the KH1 “Edgewood” package. My unit should ship next week, so look for updates and photos, and I will push those field reports and videos to the front of the line.
To be completely transparent: I have been in a volunteer group of testers for the KH1. Other than this, the only real affiliation I have with Elecraft––besides knowing Wayne, Eric, and some of their staff––is being a long-time customer. I own, or have owned, every radio they’ve ever made, save the K3 and K4 lines. And it’s Elecraft that makes my favorite field radios.
In the early fall and spring, I go over my QRP radios and give serious thought to how I’ll build compact field kits around them.
Why? I’m pretty sure it’s the pending change in weather that’s the catalyst. The temptation to get back out there and make some contacts.
Then again, any excuse: I absolutely love building field kits, and fortunately it never gets old.
The radios I’m considering at present are my MTR-3B (named Threepence) and KX1, now named Audrey. (Yep, I chose “Audrey”…thank you for all of the amazing suggestions!)
Both of these are ideal little radios for kitting out because they’re so compact and truly made to be taken to the field.
One of these two radios––and I haven’t decided which one yet––is going to live in my EDC bag.
The Tom Bihn Stowaway in black has been my EDC bag for many years. I’ll need to pay attention to the weight and bulk of this field kit, because I’ll be lugging it pretty much everywhere.
I’ve got some ideas and a couple of pouches in mind, so this will all start coming together soon.
But first…
Care to share your portable radio kit?
One of the things I enjoy doing when I’m putting together a new field kit is to check out what others have done. It’s a great way to get some fresh ideas…and besides, it’s just plain fun to compare notes.
If you would like to showcase your field radio kit on QRPer.com, please send a short write-up with photos detailing how/why you built your kit as you did, and list all of the components with links to the manufacturers.
We only ask that you send your own original ideas––and not just a link to another website article or video––as we’d like this content to become part of the QRPer archive. That way, if an external link is removed, it’ll still be safe and sound here. (We take our archiving seriously on this site.) Of course, we welcome links to blog articles and videos in your post.
Simply send your information via email to my callsign K4SWL at QRPer.com.
Update: Also, please note that the G106 is on sale at Radioddity at time of posting. With our affiliate link pricing is only $264 US (see note at end of review). Please read this review prior to making a purchase decision!
An in-depth review of the Xiegu G106 QRP HF transceiver
by Thomas (K4SWL)
Last year––in May of 2022, that is––Xiegu announced a new compact field radio that would be added to their line of transceivers: the Xiegu G106.
Xiegu has really made a name for themselves over the past few years with several transceiver offerings, many of which have become very popular. Among these:
The Xiegu G90 is a 20-watt transceiver with an excellent built-in ATU. The G90 has become a very popular field radio over the past few years.
The Xiegu X5101 is a five-watt shack-in-a-box HF transceiver covering 160-6 meters. The X5105 has become a go-to QRP portable due to its fine built-in ATU and built-in rechargeable battery pack.
The Xiegu X6100 is much like the X5105, in that it’s also a shack-in-a-box QRP transceiver, but it leverages SDR technology to provide a beautiful color spectrum display and a host of features not found on its predecessors. Many have adopted the X6100 because its operating system is Linux-based and many enthusiasts have created their own X6100 interface that promised direct digital mode operation.
Because we’re seeing more products like these from Xiegu, the up-and-coming Xiegu G106 stirred interest.
Moreover, Xiegu has become a low-cost leader among HF transceiver manufacturers. In each of the reviews I’ve published about Xiegu radios, my summary statement is that each unit offers a lot of performance for the price. Xiegu transceivers don’t have the most robust receiver front-ends, and the audio is unrefined, but their rigs get the job done and have some serious “fun factor.”
So when I first learned about the new Xiegu G106, I was curious where it would fit into their product line.
I did watch, however, K8MRD’s initial and updated review of the G106 on YouTube. While it was less than stellar––understatement alert––more relevant to me was that Mike shipped his second evaluation unit to me on behalf of Radioddity.
I connected that G106 to a dummy load, checked the transmitted signal on my SDRplay RSPdx spectrum display, and it simply didn’t look very clean. In fact, it looked worse than it did when Mike checked it only a couple of weeks prior.
I shared my results with Radioddity and told them I didn’t feel comfortable putting the G106 on the air; they asked that the unit be returned and checked out.
Fast-forward to January 2023, when I was once again contacted by Radioddity to see if I would like to field test an updated G106? I answered that I was happy to do so, because I was curious whether the G106 experience had improved.
In the spirit of full disclosure, keep in mind that Radioddity is a Xiegu retailer/distributor––the company is not the manufacturer, nor is it owned by Xiegu. They sent this G106 to me on an extended loan for an honest evaluation.
So where does the G106 fit into the Xiegu product line? It’s being marketed as a low-cost, entry level, multi-mode QRP HF transceiver that leverages 16-bit CODEC sampling to provide the user with a lot of radio for the price. It’s basic, and meant to be so, in that it’s only a transceiver; there is no built-in ATU or battery. The G106 is marketed as a bare-bones portable HF transceiver.
I feel like it hits this mark.
The G106 doesn’t have a lot of features or controls one might expect in other Xiegu radios, but it has more features than any other modern HF radio I know of in its price class (see features list below). Indeed, I can’t think of any other 80-10 meter general coverage QRP transceiver that retails for $320 or less. The G106 has this market niche to itself for the moment.
Overview
When I first received the G106, I was a little surprised: it was even more compact than I had imagined.
The sides of the G106 are rounded and the chassis extends beyond the encoder and front controls of the radio, thus the interior is quite well protected in the event the radio is dropped. This is one of the few QRP field radios on the market that doesn’t need an aftermarket cage. I’ve been transporting the G106 in an old hard shell headphone case a friend gave me. The case isn’t large, but it easily holds the G106 and a power cord with a bit of room to spare.
The G106 sports a small monochrome backlit display that’s very easy to read in the shack or in the field with full sunlight.
Besides the weighted encoder (which has soft detents), the volume control, and microphone port, there are also four multi-function buttons located under the small display on the front panel. On top of the radio, there is a power/backlight button, mode/pre-amp button, and two band buttons that also can be pressed and held to change the frequency cursor position. The internal speaker is also mounted on the bottom of the top cover, just behind the top panel buttons.
On the back of the G106, you’ll find a BNC antenna port, ground/earth lug, key port, COM port, 8 pin ACC port, and a DC input port.
The most conspicuous omission is a headphone or external speaker port. I would have expected this in a QRP field radio because operators often prefer using headphones in the field rather than a speaker. I know that some G106 owners have built their own RJ9 audio plug to port out the audio to headphones. There is a headphone port on the supplied speaker mic, but CW-only operators might prefer a more direct way to connect earphones in order to keep the bulk of their field kit to a minimum.
What is surprising is that the G106 has a very basic spectrum display that is actually quite useful!
Ergonomics
The ergonomics of the G106 are overall pretty good…but a bit quirky. To be honest, giving the user access to numerous functions and features on a radio this small is always going to affect ergonomics; there’s only so much control-surface real estate. Continue reading An in-depth review of the Xiegu G106 QRP HF transceiver→
“If you could only have one QRP radio for all of your ham radio activities, which one would it be?”
The responses started flowing in immediately and, once again, within the first day we had already accumulated over 400 votes.
I turned off the survey at 8:00 EDT on Tuesday, May 16, 2023, with a total of 618 responses. Due to my travel schedule this week, I didn’t leave the survey open for responses as long as I did for Survey #1.
Survey Results
Here’s a pie chart showing the top 14 results in the survey. To see detail, you will need to click on the image below (or click this link) to enlarge it in a new window:
The top choice was the Icom IC-705 which accounted for 28.8% of the 618 votes.
I’m not at all surprised the IC-705 was the most popular choice.
This survey focused on the one single QRP radio you’d pick to accommodate all of your ham radio activities, modes, etc. Frankly? The IC-705 does it all: HF/VHF/UHF multimode operation, DV voice (D-Star), built-in GPS, wireless connectivity for digital modes, built-in sound card, built-in Bluetooth and WiFi hotspot, built-in recording, broadcast band reception, high-performance receiver, color spectrum display and waterfall, and so much more. Heck, you can even charge its battery pack with a common Micro USB charger. Read my review if you want a more comprehensive view of the IC-705.
The only real con anyone mentioned was a lack of an ATU which, frankly, is something that’s so easy to remedy with an external ATU or by using resonant antennas.
Your second choice was the Elecraft KX2 which accounted for 20.1% of the votes.
The KX2 is such a versatile portable HF transceiver that it was the most popular choice in our first QRP radio survey. No doubt, those who chose the KX2 love playing radio in the field as their primary activity because it’s such an adept and versatile radio to take outdoors.
Your third choice was the Elecraft KX3 with 18.7% of the votes.
I actually thought the KX3 would take second place since it’s one of the highest-performance HF radios on the market and covers 160-6 meters with a 2 meter option. It’s an HF Swiss Army Knife of a radio.
In fact, during the first day of voting, the KX3 held the number two spot with as much as a 2% lead over the KX2, but as more votes rolled in, that lead narrowed and the KX2 displaced the KX3 for runner-up.
Your fourth choice was the Yaesu FT-817/818 which accounted for 10.5% of the votes.
It’s also the most affordable among these top contenders!
Like the IC-705, the FT-817/818 has multimode capabilities from 160-6 meters, VHF, and UHF. It also sports both SO-239 and BNC antenna ports which makes it very unique among QRP radios!
The lab599 Discovery TX-500 took fifth place with 3.9% of the votes among this set of distinguished radios.
Those who chose the TX-500 appreciate it for its 160-6 meter coverage, its unique form-factor and weight, overall performance, weather-proofing, and superb RX/TX current numbers for battery conservation. For those who like to play radio outdoors (sometimes in the rain) for hours at a time with a modest battery? Yeah, the TX-500 is made for that stuff!
I’m asked a variation of this question several times a month (no kidding!):
“Thomas, if you could only own one QRP radio, which one would you choose?”
If you’ve asked me this question, you’ll know I have a pretty canned response because I feel it’s a very subjective question–one that’s all about one’s own personal preferences–thus the radio I choose may not be the radio you would choose. Since others’ might use this choice to make a purchase decision, I’m uncomfortable providing a simple answer.
I need to better understand the operator before making a suggestion.
Survey #2
The last survey we conducted was so much fun and quite insightful! I’ve a number of surveys in store for the next few weeks. As with the previous, Survey #2 also focuses on HF QRP transceivers.
In this survey, I’d like to explore the topic above. In fact, another future survey will as well, but the case use will be more specific, so please read this survey question carefully:
Imagine, for a moment, that money is no object and that you could own any QRP transceiver in the world. Which one would you choose for all of your various radio activities?
In other words, you can own any QRP radio in the world, but you must use it for all of your radio activities (POTA, SOTA, QTH, Field Day, travel, etc.). Some of you may need a radio that can do all of these things. Some of you may only use it for Field Day, or travel.
In addition, some of you may only use one mode, while others use SSB, AM, CW, and various digital modes!
It’s all about you and how/where/when you might operate!
Please use the form below to make your selection. It’s okay to add a radio that isn’t listed in the “Other” selection, but make sure it’s a QRP (20 watts or less) transceiver, else the entry will be removed because this particular survey is all about QRP radios.
Because I receive so many tips from readers here on QRPer, I wanted way to share them in a concise newsletter format. To that end, welcome to QRPer Notes, a collection of links to interesting stories and tips making waves in the world of radio!
Field Antenna Survey
Many thanks to Phil (KA4KOE) who shares the results from an informal survey he conducted on the POTA Facebook group. Phil writes:
Tom
I’ve let the survey run for about 3 days on the POTA Facebook group. Sample size was 658 votes. I opted to do a “type” survey and not by manufacturer.
Something tossed in tree and just hoped it would work: 2%
Total: 93%.
Remaining obscure types cut-off below 2% accounted for 7%.
Again, like the poll I conducted previously on radio types, not surprised by the No. 1 spot.
What DID surprise me was #7: I put that selection in the poll types as a joke but 2% of hams throw a wire up in a tree or other support with no forethought and hope it works.
The Palm Pico: Getting a grip!
Many thanks to Terry (N7TB) who shares the following tip:
I have both the single and double Pico paddle and the KX3 mount. After watching you hand hold your paddles, I came up with a way to make small paddles easier to hold. I have attached a photo. It is a small piece of 3/8 ID pipe insulation to make holding the Pico paddle easier.
Have a great trip to Hamvention.
73,
Terry
N7TB
QRP Radios from the 70s and 80s
Many thanks to Ron (W6AZ) who shares the following video from Mikrowave1 on YouTube:
You asked for it! Here is the birth of QRP and a whack at revealing the top 10 QRP Homebrew Projects and Commercial Radios that started it all. What is all the fuss about low power?
QRP radios, product announcements, reviews, news and more. Low power amateur radio fun!
Please support QRPer by adding us to your whitelist in your ad blocker. Ads are what helps us stay online. All of our ads are ham radio related--no junk, we promise! Thank you!
I called the Vance site that morning and learned that a large school group would be arriving around noon. Since I was planning to leave around that time anyway, it was perfect timing for me.
Note: All Amazon, CW Morse, ABR, Chelegance, eBay, and Radioddity links are affiliate links that support QRPer.com at no cost to you.
I started calling CQ POTA on the 40 meter band, hoping it would be a little productive while we were still in the latter part of the morning. Continue reading My first POTA Activation with the Index Labs QRP Plus Field Transceiver 
