Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'CB Antennas' started by boxcar112, May 12, 2010.
Yes I too would like to hear his reasoning for that comment.
I sent Norm a money order for a rebuilt Alliant U-100 a couple of weeks ago. Still waiting for it, but I think for a new rotor the G-450 would be a better choice than the HyGain rotors-- bear in mind that if you want to use 1 1/4" mast with that rotor you have to use Yaesu's adapter plates to keep everything concentric.
Electrical Data - Type:
SY 27-3: 3 element Yagi antenna
SY 27-4: 4 element Yagi antenna -Frequency range:
SY 27-3: 26.1-27.7 MHz @ SWR ≤ 2
SY 27-4: 26.9-27.5 MHz @ SWR ≤ 2 -Impedance: 50Ω -Radiation (H-plane): directional -Polarization: linear horizontal -Gain:
SY 27-3: 8.5 dBd, 10.65 dBi
SY 27-4: 11 dBd, 13.15 dBi -Bandwidth @ SWR ≤ 2:
SY 27-3: ≥ 1800 KHz (160 channel)
SY 27-4: ≥ 600 KHz (55 channel) -SWR @ res. freq.: ≤ 1.2 -Max. power:
1000 Watts (CW) continuous
3000 Watts (CW) short time -Feed system / position: Gamma match / center -Connector: UHF-female
That's exactly what it means, there are those who will come here and make one liner comments with the mindset that their 6 or 7 element setup is far superior compared to the 4 element not taking the time to mention that is what they based their one liner comment on.
If the bandwidth is lower on the 4 element compared to the 3 element that means that it is more efficient for the bandwidth it is capable of good impedance at.
Sure you can get better performance with more elements but there has to be a cut off at how much bandwidth you're willing to do without.
So that maybe the way you want to approach it when making your selection.
"And in the end, the love you take, is equal to the love you make"
Sirio is not known for erroneous claims, remember they have been in the antenna business for mucho years.
one additional yagi director adding nearly 3 dBd forward gain sounds suspect to me. That doesn't even happen going from 2 elements to 3.
(And a 2 element yagi is a very underrated antenna for HF, though I doubt many would use them at 27 MHz.)
Not saying their 4 element is not a good antenna, but it would be interesting to see their test data. 11 dBd at what angle, for example. Anyway, that's what I meant when I said not a huge difference, I won't try to speak for anyone else.
I'm curious-- what about the Maco 103 in the original post made it "junk"- quality of the tubing/boom, hardware, etc., or the performance? I don't have a dog in this fight, just asking. I came close to buying one and modifying it and decided to do something else instead.