I have been using the Xiegu G90 for most of my activations and have been really happy. On easy access summits with its 20w it is a no brainer. However for longer hikes I have been looking for something much lighter. I tried a (tr)uSDX which was fun but too much of a compromise and also a Xiegu X6100. The X6100 has lots of bells and whistles but isnt as good as the G90 for DX. Having been out of the hobby for a year (I am building a narrowboat), I noticed that Xiegu have introduced the g160. Does anyone have experience with it, how does it compare with the X6100? the majority of my work is SSB.
i cant compare them, but i love my G106! its an excellent piece of kit… my only advice (and this goes for any of the more budget SDR based HF radios) is buy a broadcast filter, Radio-stuff do an excellent one, that I use…
Hi Martin,
I don’t have the X6100, however, I do have the G90, G106 and X6200. Of the three, the G90 is my “go to” radio for portable use.
It’s extra power, ATU and speech compressor put it ahead of the other Xiegu radios and in terms of practical usage in rough environments, also ahead of the ICOM Elecraft and Yaesu options, which, while being lovely radios from what I have seen, I would be afraid to drop or get wet. (Those points you may wish to address by adding a protective carry case of some kind of course)
The G106 specifically is still a sturdy radio; however, it is a budget-priced, limited-feature radio whose audio on SSB is lacking unless you change the stock microphone and add an external speech compressor. It has no ATU so you will either have to use resonant antennas or add an external ATU.
As always, your choice will depend upon your specific use case. A CW operator would probably look at other radios than an SSB operator would. If weight is a critical factor for you, the G90 is relatively heavy.
Despite its weight, I still tend to choose the G90 with its larger, heavier battery even on longer activations.
73 Ed.
There is already a specific thread (possibly more than one) on the G106 radio on this forum that might be of interest - it is here: The Xiegu G106 thread
Thanks for getting back to me
Like you I love the G90. I have used one for the past three years. It is definitely my go-to radio for SOTA. However I have a few trips planned where I need to carry camping equipment, so I have been looking for something much lighter to carry. I have an X6100, which is nice to use, but not substantially lighter than the G90 and not as good for DX. So I was intrigued by the G106. The issue is if I need to add other peripherals like a compressor and ATU the weight advantage is lost. I will keep researching!
you are, of course, quite correct! I use a little kit built ATU with mine, works great, and a 40M band EFHW that is resonant on 40, 20 and 15… i only use the ATU if im going elsewhere! while the audio isnt the greatest granted, it can be heard and will make a contact (surely the most important part)… I also like the plug and play “box” that does the FT4/8 connectivity, with full CAT control! I love my little G106
Very definitely - unbelievably small and light for a 5 band radio.
Mine is on 200+ QSOs and counting. Another 3 s2s yesterday from G/WB-014 - only 12 QSOs on 7 and 14 MHz with the mid-band version and HWEF. Conditions were a bit up-and-down. 12V version running on tiny 3S LiPo 950mAh.
BUT needs great care with SWR and supply power.
Good luck, 73,
Rod
Hi Martin,
Well, you don’t “have” to add a speech processor to the G106 - it’s a case of my configuration is “tricked out” to get the maximum. What I would recommend however is to change the speaker microphone for a cheap after market one for a Baofeng or similar Chinese HT as the microphone with the G106 (for me) is low output. Of course those HT microphones usually come with the “Kenwood connector” (2.5 and 3.5mm jacks) on them and you will need to do some work changing that to an RJ10 plug lead.
If you use a resonant antenna, you wont need an ATU. Indeed this little radio can stand a fairly bad VSWR for a short time as the output transistor is well over-rated for a 5w radio.
There is no guarantee to power output but if someone says they have a G106 with 5w PEP output on SSB, they haven’t had it on a good PEP reading power meter. On some bands mine records 14 watts PEP output when driven hard. So at least 7 or 8 watts PEP is certainly normal across all the bands it covers.
It’s a basic radio though and as has been said its sensitive receiver can be easily overloaded by strong in band or out-of-band signals. But if you are looking for a small light radio, that is solid and simple to use. it may fit your needs. I use mine with a 2Ah LifePO4 battery and it lasts a good 90 minutes to 2 hours operation depending upon how much is Rx and how much Tx.
73 Ed.
From talking to Hans at Friedrichshafen, adding SSB to the QMX took more time than the complete development of the radio without SSB up to that point.
Important to note is that he uses polar modulation (where SSB is created by splitting the signal into phase and amplitude components and then re-combining them in the final amplifier stages) which allows the finals to be a lot more efficient as they don’t have to be linear. So for say 5w output you don’t need 10w input to the final (and need to get rid of 5 watts of heat) probably closer to 7 watts - so battery consumption, for the same output, drops drastically.
He also employs controlled envelope SSB (CESSB) which effectively provides more “punch” from the same output signal. Similar to RF-audio-clipping processors you get an “effective increase” of around 100% on readability.
So in the end your 5w radio takes perhaps 8w from your battery as opposed to 12w and the SSB signal is as readable to the listener as if you were putting out 10-12w of RF.
Don’t quote me on this but there’s a rumour that there may be a new model to cover all bands 80-10m on the drawing board.
How long the waiting list is at the moment after the demonstrations in Friedrichshafen, I’m not sure.
73 Ed.
+1 for the QMX. VK3JBL and I did an activation recently only using the QMX. We had to carry a light load and had a ways to hike, so QMX it was. The QMX went surprisingly well on a loaded EFHW and we qualified quickly on SSB. Great value radio, but as always it depends on your use case.
Glenn VK3YY.
Ah, yes, that could be. Indeed, it was the QMX+ that was being demonstrated at Friedrichshafen, probably - so it will most likely be the one with more band and the Polar SSB and CESSB. Sorry for the confusion. Even in the “larger” box, it’s still very small!
73 Ed.
Sorry Martin, I don’t have a QMX (or QMX+) - I just saw it being demoed at Friedrichshafen - others on this thread appear to have used the QMX, perhaps they can comment on robustness of build and usability/readability of the LCD in sunlight? Size and weight should not be an issue for you.
Ed.
The rig is very robust, although I suppose it could be argued that the knobs are vulnerable. The knobs aren’t any more vulnerable than say with an FT857 or FT817. Hans is now selling side rails for the QCX mini / QMX (same product will fit either radio), so the knobs will be afforded some protection with those.
The display is of the most readable out there - the backlight is arguably too bright but you can turn that off. In sunlight the contrast of the LCD characters is very good.
