Sidebar Sidebar
  • 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.

Merlin Base Up Close and Personal

Cajun Invader

Cajun Invader

Membership Moderator
Oct 13, 2008
360
1
26
Here are some nice up close pics of the Merlin Base Antenna.

These pics will let you see what $256.00 shipped to my door looks like and the type of craftsmanship that went into this antenna.

I have not tested the antenna as of yet.

Directions/Assembly provided with antenna.

2mmbviu.jpg




Top Hat Section
e63guc.jpg


210xapj.jpg


35c0ndv.jpg


Top shaft base adjustment.
24pdx52.jpg


Base Section.

md02e8.jpg


SO239 Bracket.
hvto2b.jpg


Base of antenna. Lock pin after grinding.
33bihsn.jpg


Lock pin for radial. No grinding.
28lglqh.jpg


Mounting holes. Note alignment.
33a59mv.jpg


View of base from above looking down.
11w94zd.jpg


Radial 1.
23sayjp.jpg


Radial 2.
2hwi2jp.jpg


Radial 3.
sqrzhe.jpg


Radial attached to base. Note holes do not line up.
xbbmkw.jpg


One radial attached for perspective.
30nekgi.jpg
 

Hmm, price doesn't seem to match the quality, not impressed at all.

Good luck, let us know how it works, and Thanks for sharing.
 
what grade of aluminum is it made with ?

why didnt they solder all the way aroung the elements fot the top hat ?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
wow someone please remind me when I take down my A99 not to waste money on this piece of garbage.. I would be ashamed to put my name and my reputation on something like this.

My main concern with this is going to be in the area that you live, you get a lot of rain.. isnt the moisture getting inside of this piece of trash going to blow your setup up? I honestly think when 55 built this he must have been drunk or extremely stoned. It is a shame because I have always heard good things about his workmanship. I guess you truely can not believe everything you hear or read on the internet.
 
I think "piece of trash" might be a bit harsh, but I can understand some of the concerns. I'm curious...what is the power rating of this antenna? Also, do you have a link to a web site for the manufacturer? I'm curious about that cap hat because I don't understand the need for the loading coil up there, unless the cap hat is in the wrong location or just not big enough. When I search for Merlin antennas, I mostly get this site, so a link might help clear up the coil in the cap hat mystery.
 
moleculo said:
I think "piece of trash" might be a bit harsh, but I can understand some of the concerns. I'm curious...what is the power rating of this antenna? Also, do you have a link to a web site for the manufacturer? I'm curious about that cap hat because I don't understand the need for the loading coil up there, unless the cap hat is in the wrong location or just not big enough. When I search for Merlin antennas, I mostly get this site, so a link might help clear up the coil in the cap hat mystery.
Click to expand...

The only information I have from the builder other than what he told me on the phone is what is written on the piece of paper that came with the antenna.

This website has more information on his antenna than any other place on the Internet.

I'm hoping this isn't, "a piece of trash" and that it will tune properly and make me happy.

I'll be honest here. I have neither the knowledge in antenna theory nor the equipment to properly test this antenna to give a fair and accurate discription of it's performance. I will have to rely on my swr meter, on air reports and my own opinion when it comes to the performance.

However, that's not to say that I would not be open to the idea of allowing someone else who does have the proper equipment and knowledge of antenna theory to test it.
 
I'd like to know how tall that antenna is when you get it assembled. I'm betting that it's shorter than similar antennas because of that cap hat design. His manual is kind've funny.

OK, I just figured it out: "The feedpoint is 75 inches from the top of the antenna". That, with the radials sloping down and the lack of matching network tells us that this is a 1/4 wave groundplane radial antenna. The coil and cap hat account for the missing length. and the angle of the radials is what brings the impedance to 50 ohms. I wouldn't expect miracles from this antenna, but if it does what you need it to do, then you'll be happy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Marconi
Cajun Invader,
If you start with the idea that you have a 1/4 wave groundplane antenna, and don't expect any more from it that you would any other antenna of the same type/size, then I think you will be happy with it. From the size/type of materials used in it's construction, and assuming that it's put together correctly, I think it will out last a lot of other antennas. That says nothing about the things 'quality of construction', and I'm not implying that you put it together incorrectly!
Considering the price, I think it could have been 'improved' in it's construction, sort of (the same things everyone else has commented on), I really don't think that would be unreasonable, would it?
Just one comment about the 'design' features. That top-hat and coil works, but why bother if you can do the same thing by making that 'whip' another couple of feet longer? Seems like it would be a lot less trouble, faster. There's really no benefit from using a top-hat and loading coil unless 'length' is a problem, no 'magic' there. Who was it said something about the proximity of that top-hat and loading coil? They were right, it ain't exactly 'optimal'. Certainly makes it look different from the typical 1/4 wave groundplane though.
Antenna testing. I don't think I know anyone who has the necessary equipment, or space to do that kind of testing in a really objective fashion. Don't feel 'lonely' in that regard. All 'on the air' testing is 'subjective'. That means that you have to depend on the other person giving you reports, that person's equipment and knowledge, and their opinions about the whole thing. Lots of variables there. I think the 'best' way of doing such a test is making it a 'blind' test, don't tell'em what the antenna is, just that it's different. That can get rid of ~some~ of the biases people may have, but certainly not all of them. Are 'on the air' tests worthless? No, not if you season them with the proper amount of 'salt' and other spices. One'a them 'season to taste' thingys...
- 'Doc
 
i think if a coil and/or top hat were anywhere near as effective as claimed by the cheerleaders for this antena that ham antennas would have them as standard design features .

sooooooo . if i take my 10k mobile.....replace the stinger with a top hat.....extend the bottom shaft with all thread........put it on a pole with a few angled grounds ..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
 
Wow, I just scanned through most of that thread. Clearly some of those that think they understand what this antenna is doing are a little misguided. It's just a beefed up 1/4 wave ground plane antenna with a cap hat and coil on top which effectively shortens the antenna. It would have been easier & cheaper to build if they left the cap hat and coil off and just lengthened the main element to the normal 1/4 wave length. The comments about "which antenna gets better reports" has more to do with who you are talking to and where their location is relative to you than anything else. An 1/4 wave ground plane with sloping radials is going to have different radiation angle and different shaped lobes than a 1/2 wave or 5/8 wave. The height over ground is going to have something to do with that also. If the 1/4 wave puts the radiated signal more "on target" with your intended stations, then it will be better for you. However, when you start to talk about the far field, it's an entirely different discussion.

Maybe someone who is a little more knowledgeable than me can chime in here, but I believe the "broadbandedness" (did I just make up a word?) that they are seeing is because of the cap hat and coil. I believe the added inefficiency of that combination is allowing the SWR to remain flat over such a wide frequency range. Can anyone comment on that?
 
looks like an oversized starduster, with an unnecessary hat & coil... how much does that thing weigh?

(don't get me wrong, for what they were, the 'duster was a decent antenna)
 
"It's just a beefed up 1/4 wave ground plane antenna with a cap hat and coil on top which effectively shortens the antenna"

you must be another moron . welcome to the club :)
 

dxChat
Help Users
  • No one is chatting at the moment.


      Top Bottom
      Back