I’m trying to work out the difference between SR3001 and SR300 receivers.
The only thing i have seen is the SR3001 is 1.3ms faster.
Is there anything else as an advantage over the other.
Seems to be a big difference in price between them.

The SR300 uses a bind plug instead of having a button like the 3001 and a shorter antenna. The 300 is closer in performance to the 3000 and a third less expensive.

+1 these are the very 2 receivers that I have and in my experience the 300 seems to perform better than the newer 3001pro. The pro seems alot more glitchy and less range. I can't figure out why it is. I would like to hear some more members chime in on their experience with these 2 receivers!!!

i only had the sr300.. never had a problem with glitch and range...

I have several of the following: SR300, SR3000, SR3001, SR3500, SR3100 and SR3520.

I can honestly say that I can not tell the difference in performance between any of them. All are faster than I can blink an eye and all are glitch free. Some are about seven years old and still function like new. The only problem I have had and none were the RX's fault was when using a high draw servo and that would brown out the RX, a capacitor plugged into the RX solved those glitches.

I personally like the SR3500 and the new DSM2 ones for their size, small enough to fit any tight chassis.

Like the previous poster said, some don't like a heavy voltage hit like others, but I have found the SR300 good, the SR3520 in my mind is damn near epic, just cause it's tiny and never seems to do a thing wrong.

I have seen issues happen with the SR3001, and maybe the odd glitch with the SR3500, but then both are older models.

I remember now. The first run of the SR3000 receivers had a static electricity problem when used on carpet tracks in the winter. The static would build up and cause the RX to shut down. This was fixed in the subsequent batch (about seven years ago). There was a work around that you could route the antenna in between the circuit boards to minimize the static.

There a firmware flash for the SR3000's that corrected this on those first runs. At least that's what tech support told me when I sent mine in for service a long time ago.