Comparing vertical antenna signals

[jazzsinger]

PS Jazzsinger...its no fun when things are legal m8 ..

not sure you'd see it that way Henry if you got the same quality of shit in the netherlands we get here in the uk.one thing legallity/decriminilisation brings is better quality produce that isn't as likely to be fucked about with by retarded gangsters trying to add weight to increase profit.

plus sourcing it,is a bit easier in cafe's in the Dam than the back streets of my city, probably a bit safer too.i'd bet the prices are far more stable over your way too Henry.

 

[okiebob]

I had to think about this for a minute or so.
I feel the techs might say "Where the maximum current node is located".
But I chose "Actual electrical feed point where the coax starts to radiate".
But in my old CB'ers heart I feel it would be as most of us have done somewhere in the past.
Mount that sucker on the old mast and start calling to your friends
" CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW".

 

[CDX-007]

I'm in direct agreement with Jazzy George's posts, I believe the fair way of testing antennas is to erect them as high as the mast you can afford & guy allows, thus we see the performance of certain antennas such as the Starduster (M400) and AstroPlane (Top One) often suffer from being shorter than others such as a 1/2 wave A99, .55 Maco V5/8, 21' I-10K, 23' Penetrator, 27' Vector, etc.

- But there are always exceptions.

What if the mast/guy system is too wimpy to support the longer Vector? You might have to drop out the top 10' section. Well, now it's going to be several feet lower than will be the tip of the SGM if you're able to retain that top section of mast.

Or, what if you have a 60' tower but the local statute only allows 65' max tip height? Now the AP/Top One or the Starduster/M400 might be the best choice as it's current maxima will be as high as any, but perhaps with less wind loading, less cost, simplicity of assembly on the tower, less conspicuous appearance, etc..

I chose mast height for comparison, not because I believe they should always be compared that way, but in a majority of the applications I believe that would be the most typical experience of the average Joe CB'er.

 

[hotrod]

I'm in direct agreement with Jazzy George's posts, I believe the fair way of testing antennas is to erect them as high as the mast you can afford & guy allows, thus we see the performance of certain antennas such as the Starduster (M400) and AstroPlane (Top One) often suffer from being shorter than others such as a 1/2 wave A99, .55 Maco V5/8, 21' I-10K, 23' Penetrator, 27' Vector, etc.

- But there are always exceptions.

What if the mast/guy system is too wimpy to support the longer Vector? You might have to drop out the top 10' section. Well, now it's going to be several feet lower than will be the tip of the SGM if you're able to retain that top section of mast.

Or, what if you have a 60' tower but the local statute only allows 65' max tip height? Now the AP/Top One or the Starduster/M400 might be the best choice as it's current maxima will be as high as any, but perhaps with less wind loading, less cost, simplicity of assembly on the tower, less conspicuous appearance, etc..

I chose mast height for comparison, not because I believe they should always be compared that way, but in a majority of the applications I believe that would be the most typical experience of the average Joe CB'er.

i agree. and alot depends were ya live. if your in a trailer court with close
neighbors then maybe the topone or m-400 is all ya might be able to get up
to a decent height.but imho a 20foot plus antenna with 9ft radials will be very
hard to beat without getting a vector or a beam