FLEX 6600M Receiver Test Data

  • 1
  • Question
  • Updated 3 months ago
WHY FlexRadio posted thith --https://www.flexradio.com/flex-6600/

>155 dB Dynamic Range
115 dB 2kHz RMDR

BUT  i see
http://www.sherweng.com/table
Dynamic Range = 99 dB





Photo of Валерий Смирнов

Валерий Смирнов

  • 1 Post
  • 0 Reply Likes

Posted 3 months ago

  • 1
Photo of Craig Williams

Craig Williams

  • 89 Posts
  • 35 Reply Likes
To much testing not enough using.

Photo of Neal Pollack, N6YFM

Neal Pollack, N6YFM

  • 178 Posts
  • 81 Reply Likes
Craig :-)   While I may agree with your statement (yes, it IS an amazing radio), it does not provide
an answer to the original poster.
It is a fair question he asks; why Flex's data and Sherwood's data do not agree, and the likely
answer is testing methodology differences.  But until (and if) Flex employees answer, you and me
do not know the answer he is looking for, and we are only speculating.

Cheers.    (no harm intended)

Neal
Photo of Joe N3HEE

Joe N3HEE

  • 189 Posts
  • 29 Reply Likes

I suspect the >155 db number is referring to blocking dynamic range which would be about right compared to the Flex RMDR claim.  The 115 db 2khz RMDR number is 16 db better than Sherwood's test.  I've read that there can be a pretty wide variation in this number between ADC chips that are used in the radio.  This might answer that question ?  Maybe Gerald can weigh in on this ?
Photo of Steve K9ZW

Steve K9ZW, Elmer

  • 1321 Posts
  • 668 Reply Likes
Why presume Sherwood has it right?

Complete nonsense to treat any single guy as the benchmark setting standard.

This has been covered before in the community and Gerald has spoken to it before on the community.

Personally I’m less interested in arguing which lab does it technically correct and is less free of economic bias knowing that some of these independent labs have asked to be compensated. They all have skin in the game somehow.

More interested in certification labs who professionalism requires best practices.

73

Steve
K9ZW