KAM+ or PK-232
Ralph Phelps
Any comments pro or con? To keep the cost down, I'm not
considering the new DSP controllers. I just want a good,
dependable CW/RTTY/AMTOR unit.
73,
Ralph
WA9JST
James W. Lynch
: I'm considering buying either KAM+ or the latest PK-232.
: 73,
: Ralph
: WA9JST
I have to put in my 2 cents worth. I have used the KAM+ and still
prefer my PK-232. I think it receives weak signals better. The manual
for the PK-232 is far superior. In fact I think you could say
there isn't a manual for the KAM. Just a few scraps of paper with
little intelligence written on them. If you will be running software
that does all of your thinking for you, then that doesn't matter,
but if you would like to interface with your hardware, buying a KAM
will be frustrating.
Jim.
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jim Lynch, Sales Analyst, Cray Research, Inc. / ARS: K4GVO
Southeast District, Phone: (770) 631-2254, Email: j...@cray.com
Suite 270, 200 Westpark Drive, Peachtree City, GA 30269
Jim Nuytens
Lynch) writes:
:>
:>Ralph Phelps (rph...@asic.sc.ti.com) wrote:
:>: I'm considering buying either KAM+ or the latest PK-232.
:>: Any comments pro or con? To keep the cost down, I'm not
:>: considering the new DSP controllers. I just want a good,
:>: dependable CW/RTTY/AMTOR unit.
:>
:>
:>: 73,
:>: Ralph
:>: WA9JST
:>
:>I have to put in my 2 cents worth. I have used the KAM+ and still
:>prefer my PK-232. I think it receives weak signals better. The manual
:>for the PK-232 is far superior. In fact I think you could say
:>there isn't a manual for the KAM. Just a few scraps of paper with
:>little intelligence written on them. If you will be running software
:>that does all of your thinking for you, then that doesn't matter,
:>but if you would like to interface with your hardware, buying a KAM
:>will be frustrating.
:>
:>Jim.
Well, to put it quite bluntly, you must have had a bad day. I can't imagine
ANYONE who can't get a KAM+ working on the first try. I've used the original
KAM and the KAM+ for years and I had NO problems with either of them. The 232,
however, was a lesson in frustration on the 2 occasions that I've attempted
to get them working for fellow hams. They simply don't lend themselves to
working with generic comm programs, while I've used modem comm programs of
many sorts to interface with a KAM+.
I also don't agree with your comments about manuals. I had no problem
understanding anything in a Kantronics manual. Fairly concise and to the
point. Plenty of intelligence for me, but your mileage certainly seems to
have varied.
Given a choice, I'd still pick the KAM over the 232 any day. Full dual port
functionality for the same (if not lower) price of a 232. I'm much more
interested in being able to switch radios/ports at the slightest whim, right
from the keyboard with just a couple of strokes. Couple that with the
built-in node function (which, the last time I've heard the 232 still
doesn't have) that lets stations cross-band from HF to VHF or VHF to HF, and
you have a very nice TNC that proves more functionality (especially from a
packet standpoint) and versatility , IMHO, than a 232.
Just an opinion from a satisfied KAM owner.
Jim Nuytens N3JJA/Delaware Email:
V.P., Delaware Repeater Association 73700.12 @ compuserve.com
Seitz Technical Products Jim @ Seitz.com
Delaware Ham Shack BBS 302-798-2002
All opinions stated above are my own, which probably accounts
for their unpopularity.
John Wilcox/NS1Z
BB!). They all work well, for the average guy. You get into the hard core
contest type and many that I have spoken with prefer the PK-232. The
software probably makes more difference than the MMU to most users. Get
good software and there is little difference in them. ymmv, of course!
--
John Wilcox / NS1Z
INTERNET :204.117.6.48
ns...@agate.net
Work :501...@mcimail.com
TCP/IP :44.118.6.4
ns...@ns1z.ampr.org
AX-25 :ns...@kb1bsc.fn44rn.me.usa.noam
Ian Brothwell
at HF (non-packet) modes and the PK-232 is better at packet.
Remember that the PK-232 can't operate both ports at once (and I understand
that AEA's DSP-2232 was supposed to have this simultaneous operation built-in
but actually got it sometime after launch, according to info I've received here
in G-land) whereas the Kam can do this because it has two modems within it.
This difference in modem design might also mean that the Kam can operate a true
170Hz shift for RTTY whereas the PK-232 might (might - I can't remember this
one 100%) use a 200Hz shift. Okay, both shifts should work but I'd personally
prefer to use as close to 170Hz as I can get.
My Kam is c1987 but the manuals were certainly more than just scraps of paper;
I have found them to be excellent guides to both data comms and the Kam itself.
I wonder if the person who made the "scraps of paper" comment bought
second-hand and didn't receive the full manual set?
One other factor in favour of the Kam is that most are user-upgradable simply
by replacing the EPROM. The KamPlus can partially be implemented in the old Kam
though there are limitations on RAM that prevent full implementation.
I bought a Kam second-hand; I've also had a PK-232 for review and you'd
certainly notice a difference in size - the PK-232 is at least twice as big as
the Kam. I've heard of fellow UK hams trading in PK-232s for Kams but I've not
heard of anyone going the other way.
CI can't comment about the PK-900 because I've not used one - have you
considered what that has to offer?
73 from a snowy-white Nottingham in central England.
Ian, G4EAN
Glenn Mead
|> In article <4fr670$g...@spock.asic.sc.ti.com>, rph...@asic.sc.ti.com wrote:
|>
|> > I'm considering buying either KAM+ or the latest PK-232.
|> > Any comments pro or con? To keep the cost down, I'm not
|> > considering the new DSP controllers. I just want a good,
|> > dependable CW/RTTY/AMTOR unit.
|>
|> small size and better Mac software. All of my internet email from the
|> South Pacific was handled via the Kam over AMTOR and PACTOR. I also like
|> playing with GTOR, which really smokes.
|>
|> If I could have just one unit, I think it would be the Kam Plus.
|>
|> YMMV!
|>
|> Charles
|> n7bpt
KAM+ gets my vote also. I have owned both. In addition to the reasons
stated above, the KAM+ has enough audio drive to allow me to use the
9600 baud packet jack on the back of my radio and not have to mess
with the mic cord. It also allows you to operate with an open squelch
by setting CD to 'software'. I have been able to pick up weaker signals
this way than when using squelch control.
Glenn
ke4zea
Bob Dashoff
state of the art, runs cooler and has the selectable switch cap
filtering. It has worked flawlessly on all modes. The only thing that I
wish it had is the ability to be upgraded to 9600 baud packet. I sold my
232 after retrofiting it with about everything that T.A.P.R. has to offer
including a 9600 baud upgrade kit. The DCD State machine is in the Kam
and not in the 232. This lets you run with the squeltch open and
deciphers noise for data. I saw a Kam+ in the swap area of this group
for $200.00. Take care, Bob.... Sun evening 11:00pm