Sirio Gainmaster

[Marconi]

--Have you tested the antenna in the 12 meter band (24.890-24.990)? I know it's not rated down that low, but was just curious. Too bad they didn't make the antenna to xmit from 24.890-29.700, but I guess that's just nit-picky, as it could probably be tuned with little problem by the radios internal antenna tuner (assuming your radio has one built in)

Ahh, here is a bandwidth curve for my Gain Master

View attachment Gain Master Bandwidth.pdf

 

[Highlander_821]

So here's some bitter irony for you---this morning I glanced up at said GM antenna to see that it has snapped over at the first junction betweeen sections. Ouch.

So yeah, that happened.

 

[gamegetter]

So here's some bitter irony for you---this morning I glanced up at said GM antenna to see that it has snapped over at the first junction betweeen sections. Ouch.

So yeah, that happened.

that's a shame, sorry for your loss...wondering if you might start a new thread on this, to see how it goes.

will you repair or try and get warranty replacement?

 

[hookedon6]

So here's some bitter irony for you---this morning I glanced up at said GM antenna to see that it has snapped over at the first junction betweeen sections. Ouch.

So yeah, that happened.

ouch,............ I've never even looked at that antenna 'till now,
read the stuff on their website ^can not stand it^............... $190 ?????????????,
.......... are they stoned or just stupid^^ ab v c^^^^ ab v c^^^^ ab v c^^

 

[DXman]

No, but increasing the gain will reduce the bandwidth. You do not set out to reduce the bandwidth of an antenna. If you design an antenna for a wider bandwidth it will have a lower gain than if it were designed for higher gain which would result in it also having a narrower bandwidth. Good examples of this are yagis. Look at the REAL specs of yagis and you will see that the higher gain models have much narrower bandwidths.

 

[ahh]

Ahh, here is a bandwidth curve for my Gain Master

View attachment 6745

--Marconi, very nice results. If I am indeed reading your results correctly, you get a 2.0 SWR at 24.420Mhz, all the way up to 29.750Mhz? I guess I should have typed 2.0 MAXimum at the low end. I've put my MFJ-269 on MACO V58, IMAX2000 and A99 antennas and NONE of them have continuous 10-12 meters coverage like so many people say. Probably just problems with the antennas themselves that "I" tested, but they do however work where they are supposed to! I might just sell a few things and get this antenna since it for sure covers 10, CB, and 12 meters.

--Marconi, if you had to do it over again, after comparing it with other vertical 5/8 wave antennas, would you buy it again? The price is what gets me. If it was about $50 cheaper, I would jump on it.

 

[hookedon6]

--Marconi, very nice results... you get a 2.0 SWR at 24.420Mhz, all the way up to 29.750Mhz?..

just how well do you think it will radiate over more than 5.5Mhz?

heck , if you want to effectively cover some band width, a trapped BTV WILL work better

bottom line, there are better antennas for a lot less money

 

[Highlander_821]

A friend came over and helped me get my GM down, repair it, and reinstall it. Happy.

 

[flea49]

I use a gm on cb and it works great. I have it attached to my radio with 50ft of times microwave lmr 400 coax. The antenna is up about 45ft with no obstructions. The mast is grounded to a home depot ground rod buried with just 1ft showing. My swr is extremely low in that it barely moves the needle. I am pleased with it so far. My .02

Could you show a pic of how you have the GM set up on the line,Thanks in advance.

 

[hotrod]

-- I've put my MFJ-269 on MACO V58, IMAX2000 and A99 antennas and NONE of them have continuous 10-12 meters coverage like so many people say. Probably just problems with the antennas themselves that "I" tested, but they do however work where they are supposed to! I might just sell a few things and get this antenna since it for sure covers 10, CB, and 12 meters.

what ive been told many years ago having bandwith is nice but comes at the expense of gaiin
when u did ur test what antenna had the lowest x=? imho the one that had x-0 0r x=1
should be the best performer reguardless of bandwith. this is what ive been taught
way back in early 90s by a few hard core cbers from the 70s. i gotta a dummy load
that will probaly cover 10,11,12 meters but also radiates very little..lol

 

[Marconi]

HotRod, I think you'll find that the old wisdom you mention is probably correct, but only in a purely technical sense...which would likely take some high dollar equipment to determine.

It is true that the value of X=0, is best, but in operating your radio you'll probably also find that the magnitude of the reactance is what determines, if or how much it will ill-affect your performance or not.

If you scan one of your antennas with the best match using your 269, I think you'll find there will be some modest reactance at some points between channels 1 and 40...even if the antenna shows to be purely resonant at some frequency within that range, and that range will often be pretty narrow.

That being the case, I doubt you can tell or measure any affects from the difference between zero reactance and plus or minus 20 ohms, and maybe even more...while just operating the radio. So, not to worry about trying to get it perfect.

We're lucky that Mother Nature doesn't require our antenna systems to be perfect in order to operate our radios.

 

[NeoHam]

Where can I buy this GainMaster?

 

[binrat]

Where can I buy this GainMaster?

Sirio from Italy