++++++++++++++++ From: "Eddy Avila" To: elecraft at mailman.qth.net Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Auto tuners compared? Date: Mon, 01 Apr 2002 17:35:15 +0000 Paul, I only have experience using the LDG autotuner on my ICOM 751A and Ten Tec Corsair II....it works, but nothing magical about it. The closer your antenna is to 50 ohms the easier and quicker the tuner will find a working match. The crazier the SWR gets, the more the LDG labors to find the match...up to a point where you have to intervene and use the manual mode to "walk in" the match! Good luck.......73/ ed >From: pjhend at ameritech.net >To: elecraft at mailman.qth.net >Subject: [Elecraft] Auto tuners compared? >Date: Mon, 01 Apr 2002 12:22:27 +0100 > >I'd like to hear everyone's views on the various remote >autocouplers/autotuners commercially available for use with my K2 when >th KPA100 becomes available. Good/Bad reviews on SGC, LDG, etc. I'm >especially interested in those who use their autocoupler with single >wire loop antennas and G5RV anennas. Also, can they be interfaced with >the k2's "tune" function or is that not necessary. Also, power will be >supplied from the shack so the need for low pwr drain is minimized. >Thanks! > >73 >Paul +++++++++++++++ From: "Dan Barker" To: "Elecraft" Subject: [Elecraft] Auto tuners compared? Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2002 12:37:04 -0500 I SO LOVE the KAT2, that I won't consider the KPA100 until the KAT100 is = available. It just makes sense to have the rig logic and the tuner logic = communicate. Of course, I'm quite happy at 5 watts, so it may all be = moot. Dan / WG4S / K2 #2456 ... everyone's views on the various remote = autocouplers/autotuners... +++++++++++++++ Date: Mon, 01 Apr 2002 13:06:47 -0500 To: pjhend at ameritech.net From: Charles Greene Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Auto tuners compared? Cc: elecraft at mailman.qth.net At 12:22 PM 4/1/2002 +0100, pjhend at ameritech.net wrote: I have one of each. They all work. The K2AT of course, is just good for the K2. The Z11 is supposed to have more tuning settings, and it has more more bells and whistles but I didn't find it worked any better or worse than the K2AT. It's rated at 60 watts, but I run it at 100 watts on SSB, up to 100 watts but usually only up to 80 watts on CW, and up to 40 watts on PSK31. The SGC is good for 150 watts and is large. The SGC doesn't latch and requires power all the time you are operating, while the K2AT and Z11 both latch and don't use any power while not tuning. I don't have the watertight model of the SGC and the K2AT and Z11 are not watertight. >I'd like to hear everyone's views on the various remote -- snip -- >Paul > 73, Chas, W1CG ++++++++++++++++ Date: Mon, 01 Apr 2002 13:10:41 -0800 From: Vic Rosenthal Organization: Transparent Software To: pjhend at ameritech.net Cc: elecraft at mailman.qth.net Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Auto tuners compared? pjhend at ameritech.net wrote: > > I'd like to hear everyone's views on the various remote > autocouplers/autotuners commercially available for use with my K2 when > th KPA100 becomes available. I had an SGC 230. It was quite good at matching almost any antenna I tried including whips, long wires, and loops from 1.8-30 MHz. It failed to match a 1/2 wave wire on its exact resonant frequency, but changing the length of the wire a few feet fixed this. It is in a waterproof box and so can be mounted at the feedpoint. It's very well-built and relatively expensive, but it is available discounted (and of course second-hand) at more reasonable prices. I haven't compared it to the LDG remote model, but I believe it has a wider range of impedances that it will match. I would buy one again if I needed this functionality. 73, Vic, K2VCO Fresno CA ++++++++++++++++ Date: Thu, 04 Apr 2002 15:58:18 -0500 From: Charles Mabbott Subject: RE: [Elecraft] Auto tuners compared? To: Vic Rosenthal , pjhend at ameritech.net Cc: elecraft at mailman.qth.net Here is a spread sheet I put together for two SGC and 2 LDG tuners http://peleus.dhs.org:81/aa8vs/antennastudy.xls Not related or business oriented and comments are just what I dug out from on line documentation. 73 oo ======================= Chuck Mabbott AA8VS 42 19' 52" N 83 28' 32" W Grid Square EN82gh Home Page: http://aa8vs.dhs.org:81/aa8vs FP-113 MI-QRP#1212 Firebirds #2117 SOC #445 ++++++++++++++++++ Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2003 19:54:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Could the KAT100 be autonomous ? From: "Martin AC6RM" To: Cc: Reply-To: elecraft at ac6rm.net Thanks for the tip, John. I was going to depend on the SWR reading on the K2. I really do like the idea of incrementing/decrementing the capacitance on the output a step or two, however, and then being able to save those settings for that frequency, because the tuner's algorythm will get you to 2:1 by the looks of the manual. Have you utilized this feature at all? 73, Martin AC6RM > If you should decide to go with the SGC-239, I highly recommend that you > either buy or build SGC's SMARTLOCK. It is a very small remote control > box for the 239. I built mine for just a few dollars. Without the > SMARTLOCK I was never sure of the 239's current status. Did it tune, > did it tune properly, was it even powered on? My tuner is mounted > outside under the roof overhang and can not be seen or heard from the > shack. The SMARTLOCK's schematic is in the 239's manual. > > John K7SVV > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Martin AC6RM" > To: > Cc: > Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2003 3:29 PM > Subject: [Elecraft] Could the KAT100 be autonomous ? > > >> http://www.sgcworld.com/shopsite_sc/store/html/store.htm >> >> I haven't used this product, but I'm seriously considering one. It >> seems to have more sensorial perception than the LDG product (actually >> detects frequency and phase as well as SWR). Plus it's cheaper. In >> the mean time I dash out to the MFJ941E after I hit the tune button. >> >> 73, Martin AC6RM (k2#3021) >> >> -snip- >> Could KAT100 be used without the I/O cable ? >> -snip- +++++++++++++++++++++++