Ok, any u guys running one of these antennas ?...
If so, how do you like it ?...
If not, how about one of zerofive's other antennas ?...
If so, how do you like it ?...
If not, how about one of zerofive's other antennas ?...
-
You can now help support WorldwideDX when you shop on Amazon at no additional cost to you! Simply follow this Shop on Amazon link first and a portion of any purchase is sent to WorldwideDX to help with site costs.
Colossal 5k antenna ?....
- Thread starter Oatmeal
- Start date
Hey Oatmeal. You asked a ton of questions about the I10k, now your fixed on the Colossal. To be perfectly honest, neither of those antennas are really going to outperform the Maco v5/8 .......... and you probably won't notice a difference over your Imax.
I just wouldn't waste the money on something like that.
I just wouldn't waste the money on something like that.
Got to Agree with that post, I have run the Maco, the S/P and I Now have the I-10K up...........they are so close.
The I-10 Stands out for It`s Construction and Material`s used in the Build.
I Think Eddie ( Marconi) Summed it up in a Post not long Ago About Vertical Antennas
A Little over a Year Ago, I was living up here in the Sierras , down in a little Valley.
I had a old 1/4 GP on one end of the house, and the I-10K on the other end, both at Appox 36' at the feed point.
At times the 1/4 wave out TX/RX`ed the I-10K, and other times the I-10K came out on top.
I attribute this to Take off angles and Conditions at the station location`s at both Ends of the QSO.
Too many variables.
Think about this.
A car with a Wilson 1000 running 10/15 watts in Texas.
A station in Cali running a quad 6 at 500 or so watts.
Both S9+ to each other.....
Too many thing`s for us to control.
The right Antenna is the one that works for your location, and the one that makes you feel it was money well spent.
73
Jeff
There is the correct answer to all of the antenna questions and wars.
I would rather believe the snake oil/audio gain claims by builders with no radio theory background to back up their claims.
Posted By Marconi:
As far as performance goes, all the antennas I have here and compare, my results show them to all be within 7-7.9 average sunits of each other. IMO, that is not enough difference to ever make you loose or gain an advantage with a contact.
... huh?????? am I reading that correctly?
7 to 7.9 S-units makes no difference on RX?
I'M not really sure exactly what an AVERAGE S-unit really is
7 to 7.9 Db makes a BIG difference
As far as performance goes, all the antennas I have here and compare, my results show them to all be within 7-7.9 average sunits of each other. IMO, that is not enough difference to ever make you loose or gain an advantage with a contact.
... huh?????? am I reading that correctly?
7 to 7.9 S-units makes no difference on RX?
I'M not really sure exactly what an AVERAGE S-unit really is
7 to 7.9 Db makes a BIG difference
Yes you are correct, but you will never find any 5/8 that will show that much gain difference among the models we are talking about.
I may have used the wrong passage to quote......but the general idea is the same.
That kind of gain only comes from moving to an entirely different antenna such as a Yagi or a quad.
The only reason to chose the $300+ antenna is if you need an antenna that must withstand extreme weather conditions such as a remote site on a hill top exposed to really bad weather.
For the basic 5/8 design antenna, you will not find enough gain to justify the $$ spent IMO.
73
Jeff
No, I don't think so.Posted By Marconi:
As far as performance goes, all the antennas I have here and compare, my results show them to all be within 7-7.9 average sunits of each other. IMO, that is not enough difference to ever make you loose or gain an advantage with a contact.
... huh?????? am I reading that correctly?
7 to 7.9 S-units makes no difference on RX?
I'M not really sure exactly what an AVERAGE S-unit really is
7 to 7.9 Db makes a BIG difference
Marconi takes several readings and averages them. I think what he is saying is that of the antennas he has tested, they've all been within .9 S units of one another ............ I don't see any mention of dB.
i always wince when i read someone who says the 20 foot maco v58 will keep up with a full size 22 1/2 foot 5/8. mine sure didnt. i set both with the mfj to make sure i had both low swr and low reactence and saw over a s unit drop when i went to the maco v58. it reminded me of an old clr2 which was 19 feet 6 inches and the little brother to the penetrater. back in the day everybody was switching to the penetrater to get an s unit gain compared to the popular 3 radial clr2
the colossial looks real good and is built alot like the $500 mrcoily enforcer for $200 less plus the colossial has a tunable capaciter for dialing in the reactence
im impressed
the colossial looks real good and is built alot like the $500 mrcoily enforcer for $200 less plus the colossial has a tunable capaciter for dialing in the reactence
im impressed
Last edited:
I did not take time to find the post but he is talking about Readings he was taking to stations that are around him......
There is an Approx Difference of about 1 s unit.
I will see if i can find it.
73
Jeff
http://www.worldwidedx.com/cb-antennas/108500-bbt-delivered-hy-gain-penetrator-500-today-32.html#post343000
This is the data I was talking about.
Scroll down to the image that says
" signal report recap"
Eddie Tested 9 antennas, and the readings range from 6.9 to 7.8.
This is in S units not DB.
Ok and we all know that there are a lot of variables in testing antennas, but to look at the data overall one will see that there in not a result that blows everything out of the water.
I said maybe i used the wrong post to quote, by that I should have picked eddies brain and work to narrow down just 5/8 antennas....but i still think it helps to show the some of the myth`s that get repeated in the radio world about how one 5/8 wave will out perform another by 3, 4, or 5 s-units are a bit off.
Gains can be seen, but not life changing ones, and I think ( and trust me I have been wrong before) that often these differences are more to be credited to the ground under the antenna, where it is mounted, what kind of terrain is around ones station, conditions and other factors that we have very little control over.
Soooooo
I will stick with this:
73
Jeff
This is the data I was talking about.
Scroll down to the image that says
" signal report recap"
Eddie Tested 9 antennas, and the readings range from 6.9 to 7.8.
This is in S units not DB.
Ok and we all know that there are a lot of variables in testing antennas, but to look at the data overall one will see that there in not a result that blows everything out of the water.
I said maybe i used the wrong post to quote, by that I should have picked eddies brain and work to narrow down just 5/8 antennas....but i still think it helps to show the some of the myth`s that get repeated in the radio world about how one 5/8 wave will out perform another by 3, 4, or 5 s-units are a bit off.
Gains can be seen, but not life changing ones, and I think ( and trust me I have been wrong before) that often these differences are more to be credited to the ground under the antenna, where it is mounted, what kind of terrain is around ones station, conditions and other factors that we have very little control over.
Soooooo
I will stick with this:
73
Jeff
But how do you know that Marconi's installation isn't the exception to the rule that different designs and lengths antennas will provide more widely different performance?
It almost seems like some some want the lesser designs to perform every bit as good as the superior designs.
A half wave is known to have less gain and a higher TOA then a 5/8 so isn't it logical that the probability, not the exception, is that the closer to a full 22 1/2 foot tall 5/8 the better the performance in most cases where the signal needs to go basically straight out, and when you have an 18 foot half wave or a 19 1/2 foot compromise matched semi-5/8 you are sacrificing gain and TOA in comparison to a full 22 1/2 foot 5/8?
If I wanted to make sure I bagged an elk I'm sure there are times a .243 would shoot flatter and maybe get it instead of dropping below it's chest and hitting the ground beneath it, but that doesn't mean I'm going to choose a .243 over a .300 win mag. I'm going for the known better probability of the more powerful round not the rarer exception situation where I might need something relatively less.
Yes there are exceptions to every rule but that's not the odds I bet when I go to 'Vegas.
__________________
Now Using Spell Check 01/10/2012
