gizmotchy vs. maco

[Captain Kilowatt]

Re: Gizmotchy/ maco

I have spent a considerable part of the last 30 years, studying and testing , assembling and using antennas. Then you want to tell me why it just can't be. And suggest you are the only informed opinions that count.
Except that it isn't just me!!

I also learn from other people, and am not so arrogant as to think I may know everything on a subject. I have an extensive library on antennas, and I also read antenna reviews. Not just from the manufacter, but very educated people.............


I've also run several antennas in my time, and I prefer my Gizmo. I make no bones about it, and I'll never say they are the only antennas to choose from. I'm not noticing the same attitude from most of you though.


marven :roll:

And yet with all that antenna knowledge garnered over the last 30 years you never heard of a Gizmotchy antenna until September of 2006 when you had to ask this forum just what is was that you obtained?? :roll:

forum.worldwidedx.com/viewtopic.php?p=81931&highlight=#81931

 

[freecell]

and 4 months later he's a Gizmotchy Guru!

 

[CDX-007]

OK, It's taken me 3 days to get that old Gizmotchy assembled after eleven years in a box, WHEW!

Well, it may not be scientific, but after testing it against my omni I have to agree with that 19dB gain figure.

I saw an honest 6 S-units gain going from my omni to the Gizmotchy.
SIX S-UNITS!! Now, I know there's around 3dB per S-unit so do the math and that's 3 x 6 = 18, which is a needle's width from 19.

Now I'd like to go into a little more detail about my test which PROVED the Gizm to have a true 18-19dBtemmo gain rating but the wind is picking up and I want to get the Gizmotchy back up and get that Radio Shack 30" telescoping emergency mag-mount omni down cuz I doubt it can take the wind.

 

[Master Chief]

:lol

 

[DXman]

What MC said..

Quote: CDX007 Well, it may not be scientific, but after testing it against my omni I have to agree with that 19dB gain figure.

Any beam will usually out do most omni antenna's, but if the Giz beam does truly have a 19 gain, then I would surely think that there would be lots more people using them...what ya think?

 

[freecell]

"I know there's around 3dB per S-unit so do the math and that's 3 x 6 = 18, which is a needle's width from 19.

you don't know anything. what you "SAW" on your S-Meter is meaningless. we've been through this before and 6 S-Units (if accurate, NOT) would indicate 36 db. of gain, not 19. both conclusions based on your radio S-Meter reading are inaccurate. the standard is 6db. per S-Unit. below S9 most readings are 3 - 4.5 db. per S-Units less than what they should be with most coming no where close to the standard unless readings are taken around the S9 mark and above, and then only if the S-Meter is properly calibrated. none of them are and that includes cb/10 meter equipment as well as expensive hf gear.

and furthermore, if you had bothered to calculate the multiplier factor: 36db gain = 10log[10]4000 there's no way in hell a 5el anything has a multiplier factor of 4000X. the 80X figure for 19db. was whack but 4000X is just insanely stupid, both are right up there with believing in santa claus and the tooth fairy.

based on the required correction factor to provide any accuracy from the common s-meter (below S9 most readings are 3 - 4.5 db. per S-Units less than what they should be) would indicate an antenna gain anywhere from 6 - 12 db. @ 1.5 - 3 db. true per S-Unit with a figure based on real radiation patterns of a 5el. yagi on a 25 foot boom coming in at around 10 - 10.5 db.. that works out to an error corrected figure of 1.75 db. per S-Unit @ 10.5 db..

S-Meter Blues

 

[Captain Kilowatt]

Yes,as stated a PROPERLY CALIBRATED S-meter has 6dB per S-unit,not 3.One thing I wish folks would learn is that a CB's S-meter is far from meeting that spec. Hell,most ham rigs don't meet that spec over the lower range of the meter and that is talking about an analog meter.The little digital bar types are really out of whack.The S-meter is a RELATIVE indicator of what is stronger or weaker.That's all.Nothing more.Nothing less.Even if one attempted to calibrate the meter to a referance of S-9 it would not respond properly over the meter's range without the proper associated circuitry built in.Been there.Tried that before. :?

 

[DRM1983]

Yes,as stated a PROPERLY CALIBRATED S-meter has 6dB per S-unit,not 3.One thing I wish folks would learn is that a CB's S-meter is far from meeting that spec. Hell,most ham rigs don't meet that spec over the lower range of the meter and that is talking about an analog meter.The little digital bar types are really out of whack.The S-meter is a RELATIVE indicator of what is stronger or weaker.That's all.Nothing more.Nothing less.Even if one attempted to calibrate the meter to a referance of S-9 it would not respond properly over the meter's range without the proper associated circuitry built in.Been there.Tried that before. :?

good stuff.....i/or anyone for that matter that has owned or could hook up many different 11m radios would know or should be able to tell the difference......mostly all will show significant or slight variation is s-unit readings when recieving the same tramsit signal thru the same antenna....

to much variation to solidify or validate any signal readings,IMO

 

[freecell]

your first clue would be when you start seeing 1 and 2 S-Unit differences between omni antennas of various makes and models.

 

[Captain Kilowatt]

DRM, I was not talking about the differance between differant radios,I was talking about the differance between S-2 and S-4 versus the differance between S7 and S-9 on the same radio. The same change in S-units but requiring a differant change in levels for the same change in meter reading.Most S-meters are no where near linear over their range.It would be nice if the meters really were calibrated at 6 dB/S-unit but sadly they are not.Where is a good old Collins when you want one? Anybody have a spare R-390 kicking around?

 

[freecell]

when you add a 3db. padding attenuator inline and see the s-meter drop 2 - 3 S-Units instead of the expected 1/2 an S-Unit then you start to get the idea.

 

[marven]

Gismotchy/ Maco

I'm actually deeply saddened, by several of the responses here. I suppose I expect too much in this day and age.

If you reread the first dozen posts to this page, you may see what I'm refering to. If not, I'll unhappily explain.

I NEVER said the 19 db was anything but what it is, a manufacturers claim and listed as CB Magazine did. Except for using one, for a short while and reading about it, I DON'T know much about them. NEVER claimed otherwise.
Simply by making obvious observations, ( hoping for some honest information on them), several of you took the opportunity to attack my knowledge or lack of it. I can handle that.

My complaint is this;

1. I think several of you have learned enough, that you have forgotten how to talk to people. ( Except down to them.) If it were just me, I probably wouldn't say anything.
The attitude is what I'm discussing.
Maybe you think there is a reason for it.
I see NO good reason for it, and have seen several people besides myself comment on it.

For the info you provide and the thought provoking conversations. Great!!!


The biggest thing I was actually hoping to address, was the base line testing criteria for antennas. Some companies use an Isotropic radiator and some use a Dipole antenna, some don't even stipulate the base. Not the same base reference.
Then we can also get into the measuring equiptment and various testing differences.
Which was the " fruit" I was refering to, ( comparing apples to oranges). This was partially addressed, abet mathematically, Not very conversationally.

I believe that until all the testing results are standardized, which they aren't, we can't use them for comparison. At least, the way the companys post them. You stated as much!!! Thank You!!!
********************************************
Unfortunately, I'm still not seeing an explanation for something the average customer is going to comprehend.

That is my complaint!!!
Your math may work for a technogeek, if he can follow it, but it does nothing for a customer who isn't math inclined. Unfortunately, I've seen ham radio license holders, read your posts and say " I'll probably not get my upgrade. What is he saying?". The math can be found 1000's of places, the conversational ability to explain it, is lacking.
******************************************
How about a standardized test rating posted on here, for the individual antennas commonly sold?

I've not seen one.

Some of you have the software. Even a modeling listing would beat nothing.
*********************************************
I realise the want to show the world how smart we are, was instilled as a small child. I'm just hoping some of you can get beyond it and actually communicate better. After all is said and done, "communication" is what we are supposed to be doing.
I understand I need improvement, and I'm working on it!!
I also attempt to be polite and not deliberately antagonistic.

Just my opinion.
marven :roll:

 

[freecell]

"The math can be found 1000's of places, the conversational ability to explain it, is lacking."

and it will continue to be lacking as long as electromagnetic concepts and principles are couched in and can only be understood and comprehended in the context and the language of mathematics.

 

[AudioShockwav]

And with that folks, I will Lock the Thread. There has been more than enough info posted for the reader to see what is happening.
The Facts have been stated, with links to back up that info.
To allow this to go any futher.....would start going down the tube so to speak.
If someone can send me something of merit that will add to the thread, I will unlock it.

73
Jeff

 

[Captain Kilowatt]

Re: Gismotchy/ Maco

[quote="marven"} The biggest thing I was actually hoping to address, was the base line testing criteria for antennas. Some companies use an Isotropic radiator and some use a Dipole antenna, some don't even stipulate the base. Not the same base reference.[/quote]

It does not matter WHAT the referance is as long as it is stated.An antenna referanced to a dipole will have 2.14 dB less gain than one referanced to an isotropic radiator.That is FACT. Even if the 5 element Giz was referanced to isotropic at 19 dB it would then have 16.86 dB over a dipole or 16.84 dBd.Either way it ain't gonna happen. You say that we are not listening and somewhat pig headed (my choice of words) but it is YOU that is not listening to the real world facts. Charles Gizmotchy and Jo Gunn have not discovered some magical way of achieving antenna gains that no one else can.Do you know that certain ham radio magazines will not allow antenna gain figures to be published in their ads because of the wild claims some have made? Most if not all those claims do not include what referance was used to model that gain figure thereby rendering them useless dribble.Some antenna manufacturers state gain in the same way that amplifier manufacturers state the power output of their amps. THEY JUST PLAIN LIE.It is a fact. Get over it.The biggest lie has got to be Jo Gunn.Since when did an antenna have the ability to exhibit "audio gain"?Ever see the old TV antennas that were "made especially for the new color TV's". Another lie. Ever hear how you can increase the gain of an Antron 99 to nearly 15 dB simply by replacing the top whip section with a Francis mobile whip? Another lie.What about the four wire reflector kits for the Moonraker and Shooting Star type antennas? Another lie. Antenna manufacturers have been telling the people whatever they want to hear for decades.The bottom line is the Giz antenna is certainly a very good antenna,however not as good as one is lead to believe from reading the specs.