• You can now help support WorldwideDX when you shop on Amazon at no additional cost to you! Simply follow this Shop on Amazon link first and a portion of any purchase is sent to WorldwideDX to help with site costs.

Avanti Sigma4: An alternative view point

Dr. DX, I think you misunderstood what I meant. I didn't say full wavelength, I said full length antennas as opposed to the two receiving antennas I mentioned that are completely loaded. All CB antennas have the same gain in TX as RX. Things like a lower noise floor may give the effect of better reception or a poor match can make the antenna perform poorly on TX. My point was the gain is the same in both modes with a correctly matched antenna.

With respect to the trombone versus the gamma match, it really just depends on what the matching requirements of the antenna are to determine what one to use. The 5/8 wave has a high end fed impedance and needs some inductance to match it to 50 ohms. The Sigma is longer and needs capacitance to cancel it's inductive component. One isn't more efficient then the other here, it just has different uses.

From an electrical and gain standpoint there are no differences between the V-58 or the I-10K. The only real difference is the shape and size of the inductor used. This makes a difference in terms of how much power the antenna can handle however, I would argue even the smallest coil matching network used on the Penetrator does not have enough loss to show less gain then the expensive I-10K. All well designed 5/8 waves have about 1.2 dbd.

CDX is showing more gain on the Penetrator then the I-10K. I'm not sure how this much difference is possible because we are talking as much as 12 db. By having the other station broadside to your antennas you may have minimized any directional effects of the two antennas but having them in the same plane at 1/2 wave separation will cause them to interact even as a parasitic element not driven.

It would be interesting to see what happened if the Penetrator were removed. Would the weaker I-10K improve it's signal in the absence of the second antenna? Another way to test for this interaction would be to look for a station in the opposite direction to determine if the I-10K is benefiting in that direction from the Penetrator being there.

If I were you and had the two of these up like that I would be driving them both and experimenting with different phasing sections of coax to steer the signal in the desired direction. AM stations do this and I think it's possible to do much more then just a co phased broadside pattern by feeding one antenna at a different phase angle through different lengths of cable.
 
"My Daddy's Penetrator"?!?!? HAH! - No, I bought this new in 1975 when I was 15 and kept it while selling off all the other popular antennas I tried at the time, Astro Plane, Starduster, SigmaII-5/8, Wilson V-5/8, Taylor GLR4 Grandslammer, Super Scanner, Shakespeare Super Big Stick, etc...

OK, first, this I-10K came from ebay. With several inches cut off including the threaded top hat bolt insert nut, I had to extend the fully vertical radiator to ~265" for X=0 on the 259B.

The I-10K went together very nicely and is certainly worthy of the term, Industrial Strength regarding it's construction.

Both antennas are <1.2:1 on L38, 1:1 on 27.725, ~1.9:1 on 28.5mHz.

In the opposite direction I haven't yet found anyone on SSB, but I have checked with one gentleman on Ch.28 AM who's about 40 miles away, and the I-10K was down from the Penetrator about 2-3dB over S-9, both on receive and on transmit. It seems to be reciprocal from RX to TX.

I am only guessing, but I suppose it's the Penetrator's slightly longer .64 design, coupled with the claimed current splitting elevated radials (supposedly providing a lower take-off angle than a non-elevated radial .64) which may be keeping the RF energy staying closer to the earth and maybe causing an ever greater difference the farther out I compare them...?

[For the life of me I do not understand why Jay would engineer the I-10K a .625 instead of a .64. It may not supposedly be a major difference but a .64 is a proven gain over a .625, and even if it's only .3dB why not choose the better, even if only slightly better, better is better!?!]

I was quite surprised by the performance difference favoring the Penetrator, more surprised than pleased actually, as I was expecting basically near-identical performance, and I rechecked everything I could think of to make certain I wasn't skewing the comparison somehow.

As far as inter-reactance, I would expect that to work both ways and one to mimic the other, and that goes for the removal of BOTH antennas top hats as well, keeping this a fair and even playing field.

I also noticed that stations in the direction of the I-10K side are a little stronger on the I-10K but only 2-3dB whereas to the other direction typically 4-6dB stronger on the Penetrator side.

They are installed E-W of each other, and earlier today when DX was rolling from both the East ie: North Carolina, and the West, ie: Hawaii, I could hear 1212 in Hawaii better on the Penetrator, hit the switch, then I heard the Carolinas coming over 1212, Ch.38 Lsb.

Locally, there is one station who can't tell a difference between them. He does have an analog meter but he's only about 2.5 miles away and almost directly broadside, perpendicular to the line running directly between the antennas.

BTW, the Penetrator uses no coil for matching, it is I believe, a linear loaded Beta match with a ground shunt, and is 23' tall tuned for Ch.20 (without incorporating a top hat) whereas the MacoV-5/8 is only ~19' 10" when tuned for Ch.20.

Serge, (who owns the I-10K) wants me to re-engineer it into a .64, so I am planning to lengthen it out to .64, manufacturer a match for feeding and incorporate a ground shunt for static bleed-off & reactance cancellation. Probably something similar to the Penetrator Beta match.

I hope to have it finished by tomorrow and will be running the tests again. - I'll post the results.

Oh, and to keep the post relevant, Serge also has a Vector and I'll be doing the .82 mod to it for him and testing similarly. I can't wait!
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the info guys! And thanks for the welcome to the site! (y)

I have been doing a little research here locally and have discovered that probibly 75% of the people around here are running an IMAX 2000 with the groundplane kit... I haven't thumbed through the threads to see about this antenna yet but, is this one compairable in performance to the Sigma4???

Also what kind of tuner would you guys recommend for around the $100 range (if there is one LOL)

The Imax I had was noisier than my all-metal .64 Penetrator and allowed me to hear static instead of signal, whereas the Penetrator hears people the Imax couldn't due to it's higher static level.

Tuner-wise, if you aren't running more than ~200w I'd grab a Dentron Jr Monitor off of fleaPay for ~$60.

They are an incredibly versatile tuner and outclass a similarly sized MFJ by several million light years.

Her's a picture of it & info / reviews: http://www.eham.net/reviews/detail/4574
 
Alright... I couldn't make up my mind... First a Sigma4 style antenna, then an IMAX now I actually have an antenna and I will be installing it within the next couple weeks, I gotta get the man cave drywalled... I went down to my grandparents house and was talking to grandpa, he looks at me when I told him I was getting back into the CB stuff and he asked me if I had bought an antenna yet. My reply "Nope, I can't make up my mind on what to get" he looked at me and said wait just a minute. He went into his radio room, rooted through the stuff in the corner for about 5 minutes and low an behold he walks out with a brand new, never been opened Starduster. So my antenna is going to be a starduster. Hey I can't complain for free!

He said it was his "spare" but never had to replace it. He said all he has done with his starduster (that's been up since 1982) is replace the coax because it dry rotted. So thanks for all the input guys! Looks like I have myself an origional starduster.
 
That's a great little center-fed 1/2 wave dipole and it will serve you well unless the wind takes it apart.

I wonder if it would also benefit from replacing the top 1/4 wave with a 7' Firestik as did my old Shakespeare Super Big Stick?

I saw a dramatic improvement on the Big Stick.

If I had an original NIB Straduster I believe I would ebay it for big bucks, still unopened, and find a good old metal 5/8 or .64.

Remember, the Starduster has just under 9' of active antenna, a .64 has 23'!

Better ears, more gain.
 
saliut mod lw 150 design

good day to all:
the thread u guys are writing is better than reading an antenna book. i learned alot in layman terms than a tech book. Im new to this as well as with a computer even thou ive been in and out of cb, and still have my equipment for the duration of 30 yrs. Ive bought my 1st base antenna and its still in the box. the antenna is the saliut mod. lw 150 back in 1988. the instruction sheet was very bold in building it. i never built it and used a radio shack crossbow, never liked it! ive been reading the threads saying the lw 150 is not as strong. My question is how to improve its structure. should i put a pipe inside to strenghten it so it wouldnt bend or like a bambo stick because its non conductive or painters stick? I also read there is a measurement for the top piece as well a the gama match. Im a illiterate with the metric convertion inches or feet, ex:(MM. ,mm, & cm,) in the instruction sheet given. BOy i wished i could be up there like you guys so i could tell something intrusting. Help is appreaciated .


thanks to all sanman :confused:
 
saliut mod lw 150 design

good day to all:
the thread u guys are writing is better than reading an antenna book. i learned alot in layman terms than a tech book. Im new to this as well as with a computer even thou ive been in and out of cb, and still have my equipment for the duration of 30 yrs. Ive bought my 1st base antenna and its still in the box. the antenna is the saliut mod. lw 150 back in 1988. the instruction sheet was very bold in building it. i never built it and used a radio shack crossbow, never liked it! ive been reading the threads saying the lw 150 is not as strong. My question is how to improve its structure. should i put a pipe inside to strenghten it so it wouldnt bend or like a bambo stick because its non conductive or painters stick? I also read there is a measurement for the top piece as well a the gama match. Im a illiterate with the metric convertion inches or feet, ex:(MM. ,mm, & cm,) in the instruction sheet given. BOy i wished i could be up there like you guys so i could tell something intrusting. Help is appreaciated .


thanks to all sanman :confused:
 
good day to all:
the thread u guys are writing is better than reading an antenna book. i learned alot in layman terms than a tech book. Im new to this as well as with a computer even thou ive been in and out of cb, and still have my equipment for the duration of 30 yrs. Ive bought my 1st base antenna and its still in the box. the antenna is the saliut mod. lw 150 back in 1988. the instruction sheet was very bold in building it. i never built it and used a radio shack crossbow, never liked it! ive been reading the threads saying the lw 150 is not as strong. My question is how to improve its structure. should i put a pipe inside to strenghten it so it wouldnt bend or like a bambo stick because its non conductive or painters stick? I also read there is a measurement for the top piece as well a the gama match. Im a illiterate with the metric convertion inches or feet, ex:(MM. ,mm, & cm,) in the instruction sheet given. BOy i wished i could be up there like you guys so i could tell something intrusting. Help is appreaciated .


thanks to all sanman :confused:

Perhaps you should consider a $65 ebay Workman (Maco?) V5/8? A lot of people really like that antenna.

I've had one and it wasn't bad. Easy to assemble and tune and seems to hold up to normal weather issues.

But if it were me, I'd assemble that thing you have and give it a try. After you have that experience you might give thought to trying to mod it according to the info found on this forum.

One step at a time is often the solution to fear of the entire journey.
 
thats more like it 007,
even a modded penetrator whooping on the i10k takes more than losing your hat(y)

i hope your not saving that old coax for the vector:LOL:
 
Naw, I sold it on ebay for $150

J/K - lol

What's a "modded" Penetrator, the loss of the top hat?

There's not a lot I can see that one could do except change the entire design to a .82 or something like that.

Again, I was only kiding about selling it on fleabay, so if you need some... :D
 
i thought you had some secret sauce on your penetrator:)

thanks for the offer 007, thats nice of you but theres easier ways to detune a vector to perform like a 5/8wave without shipping coax from the usa:sneaky2:
 
:)
i thought you had some secret sauce on your penetrator:)

thanks for the offer 007, thats nice of you but theres easier ways to detune a vector to perform like a 5/8wave without shipping coax from the usa:sneaky2:

10-4! :tongue:

- Patch cords material. :glare:
 
modding the the lw150

thank you waverider for info. i will definitely put it to good use! thanks too all for the help & info. im going to slit the tubes & hose clamp the sections , im going to try to fabricate an inside smaller diameter tube or stick to stiffen the bend a little. oo7 thanks for the tip, im going for mod and save the cash for something else for the shack. Im looking to get a ham lic. and expand!(y)
 
early sigma4 ad

SIGMA4.jpg
 

dxChat
Help Users
  • No one is chatting at the moment.
  • @ BJ radionut:
    Hamvention this Weekend!!!!~ See link above
  • @ nomadradio:
    Hello from Dayton. Well, okay. Kettering.
  • @ ShadowDelaware:
    Wow I did not know this was here until just now
  • @ c316buckeye:
    no conditions in ohio