Antenna Opinions Please

[office888]

office888

Thanks for pointing that out. I can see the pic that I provided was questionable as it was early in the install and had not been adjusted. Marconi is correct (per instructions) on the 1” spacing and I did adjust it accordingly. Thanks guys for all the good info.

Well I stand corrected.

Get that antenna higher, it'll give you nice local performance. Mine, the base is at about ~32 feet or so off the ground.

130w SSB, I get about 50 miles of local range, and the longest skip I've worked so far is Florida (890 miles). I regularly work ~500 mile contacts when the band is open.

 

[Shockwave]

i am afraid i have to disagree and i am not sure how you came to that conclusion?i did by swapping antennas and testing to locations 50-70 miles away the maco is 19 1/2 feet long on cb band my imax with 102 in whip is 24 1/2 feet that is 5 feet difference and i dont see how all ground planes 5/8 would be bunched together seeing how all different ground planes have different lengths.that extra 5 feet alone is added height and capture area i dont think that response was well thought out. my 2 cents.

It's OK to disagree but I assure you that what I've said is based on fact. I am not suggesting you are not being truthful. I'm suggesting that other variables have distorted your test results. First of all the difference between the two antennas would be less the 1 db. The best 5/8 wave antennas can provide about 1.2 db. An S unit is 6 db. Most likely reason for this is S meter calibration.

Both antennas are 5/8 wave long radiators. The extra length in the Imax is mostly to accommodate the internal matching transformer in the base and the bottom metal mounting tube. Electrically, this type of antenna cannot deviate from the 5/8 to .64 wavelength range by several feet and still be resonant. What is important to understand is the 5/8 wave antenna is more dependent on a large groundplane to increase it's gain on the horizon then other antennas.

The Imax was designed to work without radials and this puts the antenna at a disadvantage when compared to the V58. By compromising the design of the Imax to work without radials it lowers the radiation efficiency and increases RFI levels. No CB groundplane can produce a noticeable signal increase over the Maco V58 other then the Vector 4000.

My field of work is broadcast antenna design. I'm also a ham and a CBer who has experimented with nearly every antenna made for HF and VHF. I have no vested interest in what CB antenna you buy and only share the information so you know what you're buying before you buy it.

It should also be noted that what one often thinks is a good method to compare two antennas usually overlooks at least one of many variables. If you're asking for signal reports from anyone, forget it. You need to do the comparison on the receive end against a distant stable carrier. With a digital volt meter connected to your S meter.

Unless you are comparing a beam to a groundplane, the difference you are looking for is often less then 1/6 of an S unit. To gain a real S unit over a Maco V58 would require a 2 element quad or 3 element yagi. Another thing to consider is any metal objects over several feet long and within 60 feet of your test antenna can skew test results.

 

[radiodawg259]

You can also go with the 827 by Siro antennas.Two thumbs up in my book,have tried the maco was ok,tried the 2000 imax ok,the 827 seems to stand alone unless you whant the real high $ antennas but for the money in my book the 827 gets the job done.That is just in my book,and it might be a little book too.Welcom back to the wonderful world of RADIO good luck...

 

[Mr Clean]

Thanks to nat19, Robb, Shockwave, and BOOTY MONSTER for your quick and informative replies. It is very much appreciated. I haven’t completely made up my mind between the Maco Alpha 5/8 or the I-MAX 2000. Is TVI a problem with the I-Max without a radial kit? I would be using a 1:1 balun. Sorry for all the questions, but it’s been 30 years since I have been in the hobby.

I’m getting ready to order some antenna project supplies:

(Arrived UPS today)
Heavy Duty Tripod Mount - #RON-1011 (use with 10’ mast pipe) Total height to antenna feed will be about 27 feet.
Heavy Duty 5 ft Tripod Mount

(Arrived UPS today)
PolyPhaser Lightning Protector, UHF Female Connectors, Flange Mount, 2 kW at HF, 1.5-400MHz -
# PPC-IS-50UX-C0 (will be grounded to a separate 8’ copper rod) PolyPhaser Lightning Protector Arrestor UHF Female Connectors Flange Mount 2 kW at HF 1.5-400MHz

120’ of Belden 9913F7 (where to buy?????) It will be running via overhead service drop line from separate garage to the house into my shack. I have to do it this way because I just had new pavement put down in parking area so “no” digging now!

Balun Designs 1:1 Balun (1.5 - 54MHz) 5kw - #1115
1:1 Balun 1.5 - 54MHz 5kw - #1115

I’m planning (please correct me if I’m wrong) to use a grounding wire from the tripod mast to an 8’ copper rod. Again… if anyone has anything to add, expound upon, or just generally throw out… I would love to hear it. Thanks.

Rodney
flatsideDX
CV105

Davis RF. I just got two runs of 9914f and it works great!.

 

[flatsideDX]

MACO 5/8 UPDATE:

Well… “A Funny Thing Happened on the Way” to setting up my base station. I had the Maco 5/8 on a temporary 20’ pole in the backyard for weeks and it was doing well, both locally and with sporadic DX contacts. Before I mounted it permanently, I wanted to fine tune the SWR; so the adventure began… and ended when (shall we say I… inadvertently) dropped the antenna across my backyard storage building. The results were predictable; a slightly bent antenna and two very bent radials. I straightened the radials and stuck her back up in the air. She ain’t pretty but she talks just fine. What now?

Decision Time:

This is the second Maco 5/8 that I have owned and it is a fine antenna, but I would have to give it about a 7-8 on the quality scale and overall frustration rating. I decided I would try something else this time so I asked myself what would do as good a job, be broad banded, and be much easier to erect? That is how I ended up with my new Solarcon MAX 2000 with the radial kit. I have it sitting in my yard on the same temporary 20’ foot pole and so far the results have been very good. My local contacts report a fine signal, as strong (some report stronger) than my Maco 5/8. I was apprehensive in buying this antenna because of the fear of diminishing returns but that has not happened. So far I am very pleased with the antenna. I am having no RFI problems (I do have a balun near the feed point) and I honestly feel that it has slightly better ears than the Maco. Now… these are all very unscientific results and I am making NO such claims that the MAX 2000 is better than the Maco 5/8 at all. I’m just stating that in my individual situation that I have lost nothing by swapping out these antennas and I am happy with my decision at this point. That feeling is (as always) subject to change, but right now I am a happy camper with the MAX 2000. Remember, my primary goal for this antenna is local chatter and I have a mountain between me and most of the locals in the tri-city area. I hope to later install a tower and a beam for DX (my favorite).

Question:

I have a 102’ stainless steel whip; is there any advantages to using it to replace the MAX 2000 end section. I have read that others have done this but I’m unclear as to any apparent advantages.

I have also read about using the Maco radials on the MAX 2000 but I’m giving that antenna to a friend.

Thanks.

 

[1342]

MACO 5/8 UPDATE:

Well… “A Funny Thing Happened on the Way” to setting up my base station. I had the Maco 5/8 on a temporary 20’ pole in the backyard for weeks and it was doing well, both locally and with sporadic DX contacts. Before I mounted it permanently, I wanted to fine tune the SWR; so the adventure began… and ended when (shall we say I… inadvertently) dropped the antenna across my backyard storage building. The results were predictable; a slightly bent antenna and two very bent radials. I straightened the radials and stuck her back up in the air. She ain’t pretty but she talks just fine. What now?

Decision Time:

This is the second Maco 5/8 that I have owned and it is a fine antenna, but I would have to give it about a 7-8 on the quality scale and overall frustration rating. I decided I would try something else this time so I asked myself what would do as good a job, be broad banded, and be much easier to erect? That is how I ended up with my new Solarcon MAX 2000 with the radial kit. I have it sitting in my yard on the same temporary 20’ foot pole and so far the results have been very good. My local contacts report a fine signal, as strong (some report stronger) than my Maco 5/8. I was apprehensive in buying this antenna because of the fear of diminishing returns but that has not happened. So far I am very pleased with the antenna. I am having no RFI problems (I do have a balun near the feed point) and I honestly feel that it has slightly better ears than the Maco. Now… these are all very unscientific results and I am making NO such claims that the MAX 2000 is better than the Maco 5/8 at all. I’m just stating that in my individual situation that I have lost nothing by swapping out these antennas and I am happy with my decision at this point. That feeling is (as always) subject to change, but right now I am a happy camper with the MAX 2000. Remember, my primary goal for this antenna is local chatter and I have a mountain between me and most of the locals in the tri-city area. I hope to later install a tower and a beam for DX (my favorite).

Question:

I have a 102’ stainless steel whip; is there any advantages to using it to replace the MAX 2000 end section. I have read that others have done this but I’m unclear as to any apparent advantages.

I have also read about using the Maco radials on the MAX 2000 but I’m giving that antenna to a friend.

Thanks.

nice fishing pole flatside!what the 24 foot antenna may work better than the 19 foot one dont tell the professionals with college education!lol on your question i think you answered your own question do you think the extra 6 inches of capture area and wave length would have any disadvantage?