I was just reading an old post that I can't believe I never found before today.
http://www.worldwidedx.com/cb-antennas/26551-penetrator.html
Unfortunately it is now closed, but DaveGrantSr made a point I wanted to address, hopefully without so much perceived hostility.
He wrote,
...and I just wanted to answer that with:
Dave, you're correct.
and,
Dave, You're incorrect.
IF you have one of the earliest Maco V5/8 you are correct, you shouldn't see any noticable difference between them.
I was informed by an Amateur friend of mine that when Maco acquired Wilson they were allowed to sell the old Wilson Alpha V-5/8 until out of stock, after which they had to make them shorter, legal CB antennas 20' or under.
The old Wilson/Macos were ~23' and were a true .64. I had one and it performed neck-n-neck with the Avanti Sigma5/8 and the Hy-gain Penetrator. I would've kept it but I had issues with the short-nippled aluminum radial hub, the Penetrator's radial mounting design appeared much stronger.
But,
If you have a newer, 19.7' Maco, you're incorrect. I have tested one against my Penetrator and saw no less than 1 S-unit loss to local stations within 5-10 miles. (While having the Penetrator down for a couple of weeks for cleaning and polishing, and testing a friend's new MacoV5/8 on the same mast, coax, radio, etc.)
If you have an old, original Wilson/Maco .64 then you have a terrific antenna and the only net gain I believe you'll see is in power handling should you replace it with an I-10K. However, if you have a newer, paper-weight 19.7' version MacoV5/8 you'll see a noticeable improvement in performance, unless you have no meter and only talk to people really nearby.
I hope to be purchasing a good used I-10K from a local who is taking it down to place a Beam on the tower, so if that goes thru I'll post the results of my many meticulous tests comparing the Penetrator to the I-10K.
I expect to see nothing but negligible differences, but am keeping an open mind. I'm always up for improving my station performance.
The I-10K IS the Penetrator of the 21st Century, and can handle substantially more power, but I doubt the claims that it otherwise outperformed the Penetrator, unless the Penetrator in question, and/or the coax hooked to it was loaded with oxidation from years of use.
I kinda hope I'm pleasantly surprised and end up admitting myself to "Jay's church of I-10k" - we'll see.
73zzzzz
http://www.worldwidedx.com/cb-antennas/26551-penetrator.html
Unfortunately it is now closed, but DaveGrantSr made a point I wanted to address, hopefully without so much perceived hostility.
He wrote,
...and I just wanted to answer that with:
Dave, you're correct.
and,
Dave, You're incorrect.
IF you have one of the earliest Maco V5/8 you are correct, you shouldn't see any noticable difference between them.
I was informed by an Amateur friend of mine that when Maco acquired Wilson they were allowed to sell the old Wilson Alpha V-5/8 until out of stock, after which they had to make them shorter, legal CB antennas 20' or under.
The old Wilson/Macos were ~23' and were a true .64. I had one and it performed neck-n-neck with the Avanti Sigma5/8 and the Hy-gain Penetrator. I would've kept it but I had issues with the short-nippled aluminum radial hub, the Penetrator's radial mounting design appeared much stronger.
But,
If you have a newer, 19.7' Maco, you're incorrect. I have tested one against my Penetrator and saw no less than 1 S-unit loss to local stations within 5-10 miles. (While having the Penetrator down for a couple of weeks for cleaning and polishing, and testing a friend's new MacoV5/8 on the same mast, coax, radio, etc.)
If you have an old, original Wilson/Maco .64 then you have a terrific antenna and the only net gain I believe you'll see is in power handling should you replace it with an I-10K. However, if you have a newer, paper-weight 19.7' version MacoV5/8 you'll see a noticeable improvement in performance, unless you have no meter and only talk to people really nearby.
I hope to be purchasing a good used I-10K from a local who is taking it down to place a Beam on the tower, so if that goes thru I'll post the results of my many meticulous tests comparing the Penetrator to the I-10K.
I expect to see nothing but negligible differences, but am keeping an open mind. I'm always up for improving my station performance.
The I-10K IS the Penetrator of the 21st Century, and can handle substantially more power, but I doubt the claims that it otherwise outperformed the Penetrator, unless the Penetrator in question, and/or the coax hooked to it was loaded with oxidation from years of use.
I kinda hope I'm pleasantly surprised and end up admitting myself to "Jay's church of I-10k" - we'll see.
73zzzzz
