Came to your channel after Erik from Farpoint Farms after hearing him mention you so often during his live streams. Thanks for the very informative content. I've only gotten back into BC in the past few years, thanks to Erik, and I'm trying to absorb all the info I can.
This is the best antenna comparison ever. A lot of people will talk about the theory, or what they believe will happen, but this is the only time I have seen actual real time data. I'm a ham and I'm going to apply this new knowledge to my 20, 17, and 10 meter antennas. Thanks. More videos like this one please.
Mower Junkie, New CB'er here (been a ham since 1991 though), and your CB videos are amongst the best. I appreciate them all! Be getting a President McKinley tomorrow! Have a great new year and keep the videos coming please! FlopDog 313
If you turn down your rf gain, you can dim out those weaker signals. Great job on the comparisons! Inspired me to rebuild an old frankenstein A-99. Bottom is A-99 w/GPK, the top is a 17.5' wire, hoisted up a tree (From the top,) w/550 cord. The tip is about 60ft. and the coax is lightening protected at the ground rod. Great antenna! I put a 1 ounce fishing weight on fishing line then shot it over the tree branch of my choice with a slingshot. (One of those wrist rocket types.)Then attached the 550 to the fishing line and pulled it back over the branch. Then the 550 hoists the antenna to the branch and tied off. ;)
Enjoyed the antenna test(s) 151, and it was very noticeable after 30 miles. If you ever decide to construct a 5/8 wave ground plane, then that would be some good data going forward. 73 from 770 - RI.
Hey Brother MJ!! How about a twin-base station antenna set-up where you use the half-wave to receive and the quarter-wave to transmit?! That would be some set-up indeed bro!! What do you(and your audience!!) think about that idea? 73's from your Canadian CB Bro, Norman in Montreal, Canada.
Yeah the 5/8 has a lower angle of radiation.. the .64 wave is the ideal non directional base antenna.. abs great for long distance skip... 1000 plus kms. I've still got my radio shack .64
I think this was an awesome demonstration of the effects of "Angle of Radiation". The 1/2 wave is a lower angle and has further reach to the horizon thus giving it a further skip range....with more stations coming in. The 1/4 wave has a higher angle of radiation so the range is a bit less BUT more focused to that area...so it was easier to sort you out and talk more times. Great work, even though I knew they would complain about the 2 different receivers...what can ya do? Thanks for the 📽️Video
You have answered some questions I have had. Going to upgrade soon and now I can make a more sound purchase. Appreciate the video! 73's to you and the Misses from 191 SC!
That was fantastic. Both at 14 and 22 miles. I used to talk on the CB radio back in 1977 on channel 11 in Glendale California. Now in Arizona. I get skips from "Dirty Diaper" in South Carolina all the time. Base station Cobra 29 LTD on Antron 99. Lucky III 165 Arizona
Good signal checking. Love to hear that same signal check done on AM to see what the differences would be on the AM side. AM has a carrier to see while talking.
I just had this discussion with someone on one of my antenna videos. Years ago, I did a similar test with a 1/4 wave M-400 Star Duster vs a IMax-2000 and there was no comparison in both the TX and the RX especially after 20 miles. I was using the same pole for each antenna so they were exact as far as height and location went plus they were both using the same coax too. I still run the star duster on the shop and it's only 20 feet up from the ground but I can easily shoot skip into NY and Texas etc with a barefoot radio. The IMax-2000 bit the dust so I no longer run the IMax-2000 and I'm now running a Sirio Tornado 27 5/8 wave on the 50 foot push-up pole and that antenna has a narrower bandwidth than the IMax-2000 but the performance is pretty close to the IMax-2000 on TX and RX... 5/8 wave is really the best way to go. If you ever consider switching over to a 5/8 wave you should consider the Sirio 817. It has a bit better specs than the Tornado antenna. That will be my next antenna to try out in the future. 73's and have a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year...
You should really try out the Sirio Vector. This antenna would put that tornado in the ground and eating dirt. Make sure you have guide wires for the antenna because this antenna is very heavy.
@@sweirich777 I went and looked up the specs on the Sirio Vector and it does have good specs. It looks like it's geared more towards 10 Meters although it will operate in the 11 Meter band. I went ahead and copied the specs for this antenna along with the 827 and the Tornado just to show others reading this the difference in these 3 antennas. They refer to the Vector as a J-Pole antenna. I didn't know if you were aware of that or not but I wanted to mention that. Sirio Vector: 3/4 Wave length / Gain: 2 dBd, 4.15 dB / 1.4 Mhz bandwidth / 1.2 SWR at it's center tune / Max continuous power 1000 Watts. Sirio 827: 5/8 Wave Length / Gain: 1.5 dBd, 3.65 dBi / 2.0 mHZ bandwidth / 1.1 SWR at it's center tune / Max continuous power 1000 Watts. Sirio Tornado: 5/8 Wave Length / Gain: 1.2 dBd - 3.35 dBi / 1.2 Mhz bandwidth / 1.2 SWR at it's center tune/ Max continuous power 1000 Watts. The Sirio Vector does have the better specs out of the other two but the Sirio 827 holds it's own against the Sirio Vector. The 827 has a wider bandwidth and a better SWR at it's center frequency but as a trade-off for the extra bandwidth it has a bit less gain. The Sirio Vector is going to be better than the Sirio Tornado and that's a given. The Tornado cost $80 where the Vector cost $153 and the 827 cost $150. Both of these antennas are built like battle ships where the Tornado is built with thinner walls. I have a 827 but I haven't set it up yet but I plan on setting it up somewhere in the near future. The most important thing about all three of these antennas is they have a low radiating pattern which keeps the signal where it can do the most good compared to a 1/4 wave or a 1/2 wave where their patterns radiate higher and you also have better gain on the 5/8 Wave and the 3/4 wave length antennas compared to the 1/4 Wave or the 1/2 Wave length antennas. Just curious if you are using this on the 10 Meter band too?
1/4wave has a higher angle of radiation Vs 1/2 wave . Ground affect is also a factor,once you get above ground ,around 55-65ft in my tests I found it would make a difference and ground radials are more critical,great video 👍
rpcomms1: Very cool!! That's just what I was thinking! (the angle of radiation 1/4 wave-vs- 1/2 wave!! We radio dudes(& dudettes!!) are a clever bunch, ain't we?! 73's from Norman in Montreal, Canada.
@@norman2999 Ive also discovered its best to isolate the antenna from mast, the mast should be Earthed via copper ground rod for electrical safety!, but the antenna and ground radials float, why because SMP PSU do not like being ground via the dc neg to EARTH,rfi,emi,dc rail noise! Why you ask? if you isolate the coax braid sits at dc negative ground, the mast at Earth ground and you connect the two together ,ull get a ground loop! SMP PSU do not like this as its a balanced DC output on power supply. Yes height of mast on 1/4 GP also affected impedance due to ground effect, my tests showed ideally 55-65ft or more for least ground affect, also the ground radials become efficient. Yes the 1/2 will have a slightly higher angle ,gain about 2.5-3dB (about 1/2 a S point),the advantage with 1/4 GP is less windage loading VS 18 ft 1/2wave.
Thanks for making this excellent video, I was searching for the very test you did and it was good to see your findings. As others have said, this is probably radiation angels. As you say, both antennas have their uses. A 5/8th test has to be the next in the trilogy.
Very nice comparison. I Home made the Half Wave End Feed Antenna for 11 meters, modify the toroide to a rectangular shape and that´s it, working very well above 12 meters of wire. 4,40 meters that´s the length of the new antenna. The new End Feed for 11 meters, is now End Feed JS20. So when compare between a vertical dipole and new End Feed, the goal was amazing, the noise has fallen from 9 to zero with beautiful signals. tks again fer sharing this information. 7351
Hey there mower junky, I always enjoy watching your videos! Always good stuff. I've always enjoyed your homemade antennas. I regularly drive my mobiles out to between 25-40 miles away. There is a big mountain range in-between. I test on AM channel 20 since it's right in the middle of the band. I rarely talk on SSB. I tune all my radios for maximum audio and I've gotten some incredible results. I run a Penetrator SPT-500 ground plane back at the base at 36 feet to the bottom of the antenna. Since you're a mower junky, do you by any chance watch Tarryl fixes all on TH-cam?
Hey Mower Junkie, I've been subscribed for a couple of years now , and your videos are still as informative and entertaining now as when I first subscribed to your channel . This was another good video . Thanks for all you do and Happy New Year to you and your family .
1/4 wave will hit the ionic layer sooner, and have a stronger rf signal. The 1/2 wave hits lower on the ionic layer, but is faded by its range and rounded bounce off of the layer, it may be in fact skipping over stations, and hitting ocean. Thank you wife for being so supportive of your research documentation of only written theory, that in reality always has suprises in the results, yet same ol' fun. 😁
It would be really interesting to see those tests again with the antenna at various different heights as each different division of a wave has different take off angles at various heights. Wouldn't it be interesting if they actually work locally better if they are a bit lower or a bit higher, and then certain skip distances might also be effected by as little as a few ft to tens of feet at different heights. I have a pump up mast at my dads and this is pretty good to run such tests in light or no wind conditions, i lost the antenna i wanted to use with it and i'm extremely upset about it. Hoping to find a big mac one day. That might cheer me up.
The groundplane provides the unbalance to match impedence at feedpoint of 52 ohm coax, it does not radiate different because of that, it is forced up because of ground reflection. A horizontal dipole radiates lower, but broadside, and at ends it has nulls. For skip, a rotatable broadside favoring east/west, north/south, ect. is a great setup for noise reduction, and polarization cancelling out local stations, and just 16.5' of wire and coax.
The engineering documents for the original Hy-Gain Colinear, the daddy of the CLR2 and the granddaddy of the Penetrator, are available for free on the web. Same with the Hustler G-2537, a direct descendant of the Super Swamper base antenna. That one shows the difference between a 1/4, 1/2, 5/8, and .64 wavelength antennas.
I think the difference is the angle of the GP reflectors 1/4 wave appears closer to 45° reflection angle versus a flatter response on 1/2 wave Good luck with the sc winter to come here in Wis we been below 0 several times over the last 2 3 weeks hanging in 20s as highs enjoying 40s the last couple days .happy holidays to you and your family
Great video ,very interesting. At some point im going to build myself a Starduster with steel whips but i dont think I'll retire the a99 though.Hope to hear ya out there. 73s 514 Ontario Canada
The quarter wave antenna does have a higher angle of radiation versus the half wave and the ground radials do help bringing the angle of radiation down closer to the horizon. What you really need to try is the 5/8 wave antenna. This antenna would be the best antenna for local talking versus the half wave. If you do get a antenna like that, make sure you get the ground plane radials for the antenna. Another thing that you need to try is from the ground pole dig out a trench and put ground plane radials in the ground. Run a braided copper radial from the pole to a ground rod in the yard about a half wave length worth of wire. Then from that point add 4 radials in a North, South, East and westerly direction. This would also give you what is called ground wave and your antenna itself will be skywave. The both of these working together is a big difference between just having skywave. This would also give you more distance in talking local as well as helping you talk skip. Give this a try and also try a 5/8 wave antenna. Love watching your videos on this antennas that you build. I myself also love building antennas, I am a Amateur Radio Operator and building,home brewing antennas is a very good for me to relax and enjoy the hobby. Take care and 73'S! kb3hay- Steve
I heard you about a week ago i believe it was, but ole Bearded Dragon aka 6012 Athens Alabama just couldn’t make a connection. Maybe one day my friend. God bless you and your family and have a great Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year
No….the legal limit for CB radio is 4 watts on AM and 12 watts on SSB. Put your money into antennas and quality coax cable (LMR-400 or better) and it will do more than an amp generally. Now, that was the truth and legal answer……will you get prosecuted for using a linear amp? Probably not. Might have a better chance winning the lotto than getting caught, but in reality. Most linear amps make you sound like crap on the radio and bleed over several channels.
I was thinking about the take-off angle of your 1/2 wave that may be a clone of the A99, if so adding the radial kit is said to help with skip because it LOWERS the take-off angle. Please remember the radials on the A99 are not resonate on 27 mregs but more like 32 megs, which means you might get better skip by shorting the radials to the length used by the A99 which is less than 102 inches. Just a thought, but it might be worth trying. Also because your 1/2 wave end fed has 2 coils in it to match, but this matching might eat up some signal? The half-wave in theory should be stronger if we use the old saying, to be stronger use more metal.. I once had an M2000 and an A99 mounted near the same height, same coax, and same length, the 2000 was 1.5 DB better both receive and transmit. The old 102-inch whip is still hard to beat if installed correctly as you have done it. Again, CB as it is best done, you show the same fun I found now over 60 years ago with bright eyes hear signals from all over the world. I just wonder how many countries we might have worked with todays' radios back then. The old Johnson transmitters and a good receiver did it then and covered the frequencies we use today. Hopefully, as this sunspot cycle grows the old worldwide openings will return. Back then channel 22 A, B was used by oil companies all over the world in their drilling locations, I worked several of these sites remembering one in Russia just north of Japan when an American drilling company was drilling there for the old Soviet state-owned oil company.
Great videos love them! - question did you ever test of had a 5/8 antenne? Maybe for the test of regular use. Check out the Sirio 827 megarange this is a full aluminium antenne. I have this one in the Netherlands over here and with a little guide over al 40 channels (here on FM) with 0.5 watts never see any needle moving on the swr and with 400 watts no needle movie up till 800 watss maybe a little needle movement. This antenna is a beast with send and reception, but the coast are minimal at least here i bought i brand new for 100 dollars. Its a very great antenne and can also handle a nice amount of watts. Keep the videos coming! thnx.
How is the receive section of the 2 different radios? That is a HUGE VARIABLE! And the length of the coaxial cables to the radios, significant loss after so many feet.
awesome test John I was wondering which was better now I know so I will keep my NOS antenna specialist starduster in the box 73s 714 in the buckeye click click
Interesting video and even more interesting were the ideas in the comment section as to why the results were what they were. Apparently opinions are like noses, everyone has one. The only thing for sure in CB radio is that every person knows what works, and it just happens to be what they have, no matter what that is. :)
Yup! I get asked a lot "what is the best antenna" until I have had one of every kind of antenna made......I just can't answer that question. Thanks for the comment, Happy Holidays.
How about building a full wave vertical? I got an A-99 with a 102" steel whip on the top element which I cut about 10" off it to get a flat match for most of the 11-meter band. What does it mean when they say the A-99 is a half way over a quarter wave?
I think that base station CB you have was based (similarly) to the mobile version the AX144 being sold at the same time which I have, and that was a brilliant radio in the day. I don't know much about the realistic. I wonder if differences in radios are having some effect too.
I recently did a video comparing this 1/2 wave against a Maco v58 5/8 wave antenna. th-cam.com/video/ce5Bklmj9O4/w-d-xo.html Thanks for watching, Take care.
I have not read through all 262 current comments. However what I have read is 5/8 wave has a lower angle of radiation versus the 1/4 wave. Yes so on flat terrain 5/8 will be better. What you are not able to show here is how altitude affects communications. 1/4 wave is better for communications in the mountains. You kind of touch on this for skip, 1/4 wave may hit more skips (pending on conditions) but 5/8 when conditions are right and you are on flat terrain, longer skips are going to have an ability to go further. Overall great great great video.
Nice setups..... very clear at 22 miles ! still somewhat clear at 25 miles.....35 miles still very impressive yet ! I use to built diopoles younger. I still have my 3 cb radios yet. They are awesome fun to talk on.
@@MowerJunkie I suspect if tip heights were equal, antennas would perform near to identical. Always testing here as well, great fun. Have not heard you in the skip lately, conditions have turned to texas Dx a lot here, not picking up much SC, these days, Always listening for you!
@@pixotica I can't wait for the conditions to move back to the north, I've been getting the UK in the morning and Arizona in the evening. Take care Mike, 73's
151 SC.. I heard you all the way in Toledo Washington . I tried to reply to get you back but I'm only running a 980SSB with a rm Italy 203p with dual oil filled antenna that I got from a truck stop. Oh well, I'll try again next time I'm out over the road.
Are you Testing the Different Ground Planes or is it the Halfwave Antenna over the Quarter Wave Antenna, as you say the Halfwave Antenna has Quarterwave Radials, as so does the Quarterwave Antenna, as it has winded quarter wave whips Confusion
Hey Brother MJ!! How about a twin-base station antenna set-up where you use the half-wave to receive and the quarter-wave to transmit?! You could switch when DX-ing. That would be some set-up indeed bro!! What do you(and your audience!!) think about that idea? 73's from your Canadian CB Bro, Norman in Montreal, Canada.
thinking about getting a cb again. never did sideband much always had cheap radios. would the antenna check be easier to compare on regular channels since easier to see key power on meter.
Thanks for a Brilliant Vidclip .... You so well covered the topic that I am Just Busy researching ..... I am on 27 MHz here in New Zealand, using a 1/4 Wave homemade 'Glassfibre Fishing Rod' Antenna .... The Skip from Australia has been Fantastic the last few days .... So .... Do I go 1/4 or 1/2 ????? .... Seems like you have answered that question for me .... Very Best to You and Yours for the Festive Season.... Keep well and Stay safe .... Cheers from Christchurch, New Zealand
Interesting comparison. Just an observational question though, how long were the ground plane radials on the 1/4 wave antenna? i'm just curious as in the video it didn't look like there were anywhere close to 1/4 wave in length. The other questions i have about the comparison is what was the coax that you used on each antenna? and what were the antenna heights? as far as antenna locations it really isn't a fair comparison as you can move the antenna 6 feet 1 way or another and have completely different results. What you would really need to do is test with 1 antenna then after the test take that antenna down and put up the second antenna in it's place. That way you are keeping the location the same, Antenna height the same, the coax type the same and the coax length the same. for me there are just too many question marks to call it a fair comparison. None the less though as i had said, interesting comparison.
I've gotten excellent results from both my Sirio Tornado 27 and Penetrator SPT-500. Once you switch to an aluminum 5/8ths antenna, there's no going back.
5/8 wave antennas are a compromise antenna. The higher radiation angel is shifted lower, however, that is less than ideal for all locations. While a 5/8 antenna is a good choice for those who are in a high location or in the clear, those lower in elevation will have quite significant ground loss. Transmitting your signal into nearby hills equates to substantial loss and signal degradation. Also, shifting the max radiating angel from about 20 degrees (half wave) down to about 16 degrees (5/8 wave antenna) is not as good for sporadic-E skip (the most common type) in all cases but does have the edge in long skip. Sporadic E will favor the half wave every time as 20 degrees is the optimal angle. So, one can never generalize that one is superior to the other. The real answer is that it depends. There are path profiling calculators on line that allow you to plot your radiation pattern from a particular location. At my house in Pennsylvania, (1,485' ASL and the second highest point in the county) the 5/8 wave antenna is a winner. From my house in Essex county, NJ, the half wave is, by far the better choice.
Great video. I enjoyed watching it. In the market for a siro starduster. Currently running a Solarcon 99 47ft high. Maybe catch ya on the radio. I monitor Channel 36 LSB - 727 Mike in Lake Havasu City, AZ
Have you ever made a mobile antenna wrapping a wire on a fiberglass pole, say 1/2 wave or 3/8 to see if they could due a better job than the 1/4 wave whip..... just curious
To make that test that you have done more accurate !!!! you should have used the same radio on both antennas while you were transmitting you could have had someone hook that same radio up to antenna A then antenna B the reason I say this is because some radios just have better receive than others at the same distance like I have told you my Sears Road talker performed much better on receive then my Galaxy at the same distance and location using the same antenna
OK that was good how about changing the radios switch him those two radio switch him why do we sound like are there any difference in it would it radios make antennas be different from a different radio I like to see that Shep FC one or shep 73
I don't know why you didn't use the SBE above unless it's the AM only version, but it looks just like my old SBE (SSB) Land Command *LCBS-8* which shares the same 8719 PLL circuit board with a Cobra 142, *_UNIDEN_* Washington, Cobra 140GTL mobile and a host of others.
I love all of your "Radio Shack/Realistic" gear you have, i remember seeing those radio shack base antennas in their sales flyers all the time. Are those Radio shack base antennas like the old Big Stick base antennas?
Radio Shack only had this model available for 2 years (2000-2001) it is not like the Big Stick, This model is just like the Antron 99. Thanks for watching, Take care.
You pretty much can talk all over your town if the channel is clear. Using one of the slots or A channels very likely one would be clear so it should work. If one of those was an A99 clone then it is not a ground plane but an end-fed 1/2 way with the angle being better one the1/4 wave. Interesting test, your radios are very clean and clear both ways. Sadly too many CBers try too hard for distance and overdrive, but you my friend are the exact example I love to remind condescending fellow Hams still exist and seem to be now keeping the hobby going. Your pileups of folks trying to make contact show more courtesy than many Hams. Listening or watching DX Commander with an 80-meter net he has been doing, some guy was recording him and playing it back on top of him on air, stuff we all hated years ago, but hopefully is gone now.
As a general rule, the more Mass you have in the air the better. During skip, you need to use Channel 35 LSB to reach Australia. It's out local channel.
Interesting comparison , how about trying on AM ?, establish contact on ssb the both stations switch to am on an agreed channel. I have has some spectacular results on am when doing this switcheroo , using a 1/2 wave vertical ant at only 12 feet above the ground. The best distance I could get on am was 2900 miles !
Hi, I want to make an external quarter wave ground plane antenna, mainly to monitor frequencies 118.000 MHz to 136.975 MHz (aircraft band). As far as the 3mm welding rod is concern, is bronze better than aluminum? Also, when using the antenna calculator to determine the length of the radiating element and radial elements, what frequency will I input in the calculator and will I retain the 0.95 velocity factor?
Do you think the starduster is a good antenna or I was gonna build your 102 whip antenna with ground plane ? I have a TRC490 SSB & a Lafayette telsat 140ssb
Save your dollar$ and using a coax-insulated L-bracket designed for mounting SS whips, erect a 103" stainless steel whip atop a 40' push-up pole on your roof, then do as he did - bring down 3-4 directions of 103'' of wire from the ground base of the antenna or U-bolt, to insulators or non-metallic cord, and use those as both guy lines and 1/4 wave radials. - You should have excellent performance, better than an Antron A99 and high power handling. You won't have any matching network loss because you don't need a matching network for that design - *_It's a ''Direct-Drive'' Center-fed 1/2 wave!_*
The skip is going crazy. I hit Mexico city yesterday on my 980 on 38 lsb with new antenna set up. Then hit most of the Midwest on the washington bearfooted. 360 Rockhill radio out !
Came to your channel after Erik from Farpoint Farms after hearing him mention you so often during his live streams. Thanks for the very informative content. I've only gotten back into BC in the past few years, thanks to Erik, and I'm trying to absorb all the info I can.
Awesome! Welcome to the channel. I've been playing with CB's for over 30 years, and I'm still learning! Enjoy the hobby, Take care.
This is the best antenna comparison ever. A lot of people will talk about the theory, or what they believe will happen, but this is the only time I have seen actual real time data. I'm a ham and I'm going to apply this new knowledge to my 20, 17, and 10 meter antennas. Thanks. More videos like this one please.
Thank You so much. Take care, Happy Holidays.
Mower Junkie, New CB'er here (been a ham since 1991 though), and your CB videos are amongst the best. I appreciate them all! Be getting a President McKinley tomorrow! Have a great new year and keep the videos coming please! FlopDog 313
If you turn down your rf gain, you can dim out those weaker signals. Great job on the comparisons! Inspired me to rebuild an old frankenstein A-99. Bottom is A-99 w/GPK, the top is a 17.5' wire, hoisted up a tree (From the top,) w/550 cord. The tip is about 60ft. and the coax is lightening protected at the ground rod. Great antenna!
I put a 1 ounce fishing weight on fishing line then shot it over the tree branch of my choice with a slingshot. (One of those wrist rocket types.)Then attached the 550 to the fishing line and pulled it back over the branch. Then the 550 hoists the antenna to the branch and tied off. ;)
5/8 wave has much better gain and this test proves it has better ears. Great video!!
@45AMT Do you think a 5/8 wave Sirio GAINMASTER is better than a 1/2 wave President HIMALAYA WB??? Thanks for any reply!
Enjoyed the antenna test(s) 151, and it was very noticeable after 30 miles. If you ever decide to construct a 5/8 wave ground plane, then that would be some good data going forward. 73 from 770 - RI.
If you go 5/8th try a .64 wave antenna....it's a few inches longer. You may be surprised :-)
@@djmossssomjd8496 : How so?
Hey Brother MJ!! How about a twin-base station antenna set-up where you use the half-wave to receive and the quarter-wave to transmit?! That would be some set-up indeed bro!! What do you(and your audience!!) think about that idea?
73's from your Canadian CB Bro,
Norman in Montreal, Canada.
Yeah the 5/8 has a lower angle of radiation.. the .64 wave is the ideal non directional base antenna.. abs great for long distance skip... 1000 plus kms. I've still got my radio shack .64
I think this was an awesome demonstration of the effects of "Angle of Radiation". The 1/2 wave is a lower angle and has further reach to the horizon thus giving it a further skip range....with more stations coming in. The 1/4 wave has a higher angle of radiation so the range is a bit less BUT more focused to that area...so it was easier to sort you out and talk more times. Great work, even though I knew they would complain about the 2 different receivers...what can ya do? Thanks for the 📽️Video
You have answered some questions I have had. Going to upgrade soon and now I can make a more sound purchase. Appreciate the video! 73's to you and the Misses from 191 SC!
Really enjoyed this video of distance checks from your mobile set up. Comparison was great. Keep them coming!
Thanks Troy, 73's
That was fantastic. Both at 14 and 22 miles. I used to talk on the CB radio back in 1977 on channel 11 in Glendale California. Now in Arizona. I get skips from "Dirty Diaper" in South Carolina all the time. Base station Cobra 29 LTD on Antron 99. Lucky III 165 Arizona
Good signal checking. Love to hear that same signal check done on AM to see what the differences would be on the AM side. AM has a carrier to see while talking.
I just had this discussion with someone on one of my antenna videos. Years ago, I did a similar test with a 1/4 wave M-400 Star Duster vs a IMax-2000 and there was no comparison in both the TX and the RX especially after 20 miles. I was using the same pole for each antenna so they were exact as far as height and location went plus they were both using the same coax too. I still run the star duster on the shop and it's only 20 feet up from the ground but I can easily shoot skip into NY and Texas etc with a barefoot radio. The IMax-2000 bit the dust so I no longer run the IMax-2000 and I'm now running a Sirio Tornado 27 5/8 wave on the 50 foot push-up pole and that antenna has a narrower bandwidth than the IMax-2000 but the performance is pretty close to the IMax-2000 on TX and RX... 5/8 wave is really the best way to go. If you ever consider switching over to a 5/8 wave you should consider the Sirio 817. It has a bit better specs than the Tornado antenna. That will be my next antenna to try out in the future. 73's and have a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year...
You should really try out the Sirio Vector. This antenna would put that tornado in the ground and eating dirt. Make sure you have guide wires for the antenna because this antenna is very heavy.
@@sweirich777 I went and looked up the specs on the Sirio Vector and it does have good specs.
It looks like it's geared more towards 10 Meters although it will operate in the 11 Meter band.
I went ahead and copied the specs for this antenna along with the 827 and the Tornado just to show others reading this the difference in these 3 antennas. They refer to the Vector as a J-Pole antenna. I didn't know if you were aware of that or not but I wanted to mention that. Sirio Vector: 3/4 Wave length / Gain: 2 dBd, 4.15 dB / 1.4 Mhz bandwidth / 1.2 SWR at it's center tune / Max continuous power 1000 Watts. Sirio 827: 5/8 Wave Length / Gain: 1.5 dBd, 3.65 dBi / 2.0 mHZ bandwidth / 1.1 SWR at it's center tune / Max continuous power 1000 Watts. Sirio Tornado: 5/8 Wave Length / Gain: 1.2 dBd - 3.35 dBi / 1.2 Mhz bandwidth / 1.2 SWR at it's center tune/ Max continuous power 1000 Watts. The Sirio Vector does have the better specs out of the other two but the Sirio 827 holds it's own against the Sirio Vector. The 827 has a wider bandwidth and a better SWR at it's center frequency but as a trade-off for the extra bandwidth it has a bit less gain. The Sirio Vector is going to be better than the Sirio Tornado and that's a given. The Tornado cost $80 where the Vector cost $153 and the 827 cost $150. Both of these antennas are built like battle ships where the Tornado is built with thinner walls. I have a 827 but I haven't set it up yet but I plan on setting it up somewhere in the near future. The most important thing about all three of these antennas is they have a low radiating pattern which keeps the signal where it can do the most good compared to a 1/4 wave or a 1/2 wave where their patterns radiate higher and you also have better gain on the 5/8 Wave and the 3/4 wave length antennas compared to the 1/4 Wave or the 1/2 Wave length antennas. Just curious if you are using this on the 10 Meter band too?
Interesting results - thanks for sharing this!
Thanks for watching!
Su comparación me ha servido de mucho para la elección de mi antena CB, gracias
Really Fun way of real world testing there buddy…continue to keep it real 73s👍
1/4wave has a higher angle of radiation Vs 1/2 wave .
Ground affect is also a factor,once you get above ground ,around 55-65ft in my tests I found it would make a difference and ground radials are more critical,great video 👍
rpcomms1: Very cool!! That's just what I was thinking! (the angle of radiation 1/4 wave-vs- 1/2 wave!! We radio dudes(& dudettes!!) are a clever bunch, ain't we?!
73's from Norman in Montreal, Canada.
@@norman2999 Ive also discovered its best to isolate the antenna from mast, the mast should be Earthed via copper ground rod for electrical safety!, but the antenna and ground radials float, why because SMP PSU do not like being ground via the dc neg to EARTH,rfi,emi,dc rail noise! Why you ask? if you isolate the coax braid sits at dc negative ground, the mast at Earth ground and you connect the two together ,ull get a ground loop! SMP PSU do not like this as its a balanced DC output on power supply. Yes height of mast on 1/4 GP also affected impedance due to ground effect, my tests showed ideally 55-65ft or more for least ground affect, also the ground radials become efficient. Yes the 1/2 will have a slightly higher angle ,gain about 2.5-3dB (about 1/2 a S point),the advantage with 1/4 GP is less windage loading VS 18 ft 1/2wave.
Love your tests, Appreciate all your time spent. Great info
Very enjoyable comparison
Happy New Year from Vancouver, Canada!
Thanks for making this excellent video, I was searching for the very test you did and it was good to see your findings. As others have said, this is probably radiation angels. As you say, both antennas have their uses. A 5/8th test has to be the next in the trilogy.
Thanks! I have been looking for an affordable 5/8 for testing, Hopefully soon. Take care, Thanks for watching.
Very nice comparison. I Home made the Half Wave End Feed Antenna for 11 meters, modify the toroide to a rectangular shape and that´s it, working very well above 12 meters of wire. 4,40 meters that´s the length of the new antenna. The new End Feed for 11 meters, is now End Feed JS20. So when compare between a vertical dipole and new End Feed, the goal was amazing, the noise has fallen from 9 to zero with beautiful signals. tks again fer sharing this information. 7351
Love the videos, we talked briefly on the radio the other day. 73's 481 mobile standing by.
Merry Christmas Mr 151. Have a good one. I've really enjoyed watching your videos this year. 73s keep safe. Wr456 UK 👍
Hey there mower junky, I always enjoy watching your videos! Always good stuff. I've always enjoyed your homemade antennas.
I regularly drive my mobiles out to between 25-40 miles away. There is a big mountain range in-between. I test on AM channel 20 since it's right in the middle of the band. I rarely talk on SSB. I tune all my radios for maximum audio and I've gotten some incredible results. I run a Penetrator SPT-500 ground plane back at the base at 36 feet to the bottom of the antenna.
Since you're a mower junky, do you by any chance watch Tarryl fixes all on TH-cam?
I have not watched that channel. I love working on mowers, But I don't like to watch others do it.
Take care, Happy Holidays.
Interesting antenna test, especially on the range test on a straight line.
Hey Mower Junkie, I've been subscribed for a couple of years now , and your videos are still as informative and entertaining now as when I first subscribed to your channel . This was another good video . Thanks for all you do and Happy New Year to you and your family .
1/4 wave will hit the ionic layer sooner, and have a stronger rf signal. The 1/2 wave hits lower on the ionic layer, but is faded by its range and rounded bounce off of the layer, it may be in fact skipping over stations, and hitting ocean. Thank you wife for being so supportive of your research documentation of only written theory, that in reality always has suprises in the results, yet same ol' fun. 😁
Thanks for watching. Happy Holidays, 73's from 151 + 268 SC.
Right back at ya!
ionic layer?
It would be really interesting to see those tests again with the antenna at various different heights as each different division of a wave has different take off angles at various heights.
Wouldn't it be interesting if they actually work locally better if they are a bit lower or a bit higher, and then certain skip distances might also be effected by as little as a few ft to tens of feet at different heights. I have a pump up mast at my dads and this is pretty good to run such tests in light or no wind conditions, i lost the antenna i wanted to use with it and i'm extremely upset about it. Hoping to find a big mac one day. That might cheer me up.
Great test, really like all your range videos❤️🎄😊 73s from Manchester UK
Thank you very much!
Great video mate, do you have a 5/8th wave antenna you could test being the most used base Antenna.
I've been looking for a 5/8, But I haven't found one I can afford yet.
@@MowerJunkie, take a look at the Hustler G-2537. It's $100 cheaper than the Penetrator.
What I notice also is your low level of floor noise like static etc very clear transmission
Ground plane antennas have a high takeoff, ideal for DX.
Dipole antennas have a low takeoff in vertical polarization, good to local comunications.
The groundplane provides the unbalance to match impedence at feedpoint of 52 ohm coax, it does not radiate different because of that, it is forced up because of ground reflection. A horizontal dipole radiates lower, but broadside, and at ends it has nulls. For skip, a rotatable broadside favoring east/west, north/south, ect. is a great setup for noise reduction, and polarization cancelling out local stations, and just 16.5' of wire and coax.
The engineering documents for the original Hy-Gain Colinear, the daddy of the CLR2 and the granddaddy of the Penetrator, are available for free on the web. Same with the Hustler G-2537, a direct descendant of the Super Swamper base antenna. That one shows the difference between a 1/4, 1/2, 5/8, and .64 wavelength antennas.
I think the difference is the angle of the GP reflectors 1/4 wave appears closer to 45° reflection angle versus a flatter response on 1/2 wave
Good luck with the sc winter to come here in Wis we been below 0 several times over the last 2 3 weeks hanging in 20s as highs enjoying 40s the last couple days
.happy holidays to you and your family
Great video ,very interesting.
At some point im going to build myself a Starduster with steel whips but i dont think I'll retire the a99 though.Hope to hear ya out there.
73s
514 Ontario Canada
I have a genuine Starduster that I had up for five years. It's not worth the effort. I have a Super Magnum up now and it works much better.
Thanks for watching. Happy Holidays, 73's from 151 SC.
The quarter wave antenna does have a higher angle of radiation versus the half wave and the ground radials do help bringing the angle of radiation down closer to the horizon. What you really need to try is the 5/8 wave antenna. This antenna would be the best antenna for local talking versus the half wave. If you do get a antenna like that, make sure you get the ground plane radials for the antenna. Another thing that you need to try is from the ground pole dig out a trench and put ground plane radials in the ground. Run a braided copper radial from the pole to a ground rod in the yard about a half wave length worth of wire. Then from that point add 4 radials in a North, South, East and westerly direction. This would also give you what is called ground wave and your antenna itself will be skywave. The both of these working together is a big difference between just having skywave. This would also give you more distance in talking local as well as helping you talk skip. Give this a try and also try a 5/8 wave antenna. Love watching your videos on this antennas that you build. I myself also love building antennas, I am a Amateur Radio Operator and building,home brewing antennas is a very good for me to relax and enjoy the hobby. Take care and 73'S! kb3hay- Steve
I recently purchased a 5/8 wave ground plane antenna, and I will be doing a comparison video soon. Thanks for watching, Take care.
I heard you about a week ago i believe it was, but ole Bearded Dragon aka 6012 Athens Alabama just couldn’t make a connection. Maybe one day my friend. God bless you and your family and have a great Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year
Thanks for watching. Happy Holidays, 73's from 151 SC.
Is the shooting star 225 a linear amp. Is it legal? I'd like one...
I also live in South Carolina
No….the legal limit for CB radio is 4 watts on AM and 12 watts on SSB. Put your money into antennas and quality coax cable (LMR-400 or better) and it will do more than an amp generally. Now, that was the truth and legal answer……will you get prosecuted for using a linear amp? Probably not. Might have a better chance winning the lotto than getting caught, but in reality. Most linear amps make you sound like crap on the radio and bleed over several channels.
@@DocJoeThesDoctor thank you
Just about all cbers run an amp these days.
Hello Mr 151 968 east tn with the wave love all your videos stay young and proud 73's
I was thinking about the take-off angle of your 1/2 wave that may be a clone of the A99, if so adding the radial kit is said to help with skip because it LOWERS the take-off angle. Please remember the radials on the A99 are not resonate on 27 mregs but more like 32 megs, which means you might get better skip by shorting the radials to the length used by the A99 which is less than 102 inches. Just a thought, but it might be worth trying. Also because your 1/2 wave end fed has 2 coils in it to match, but this matching might eat up some signal? The half-wave in theory should be stronger if we use the old saying, to be stronger use more metal.. I once had an M2000 and an A99 mounted near the same height, same coax, and same length, the 2000 was 1.5 DB better both receive and transmit. The old 102-inch whip is still hard to beat if installed correctly as you have done it. Again, CB as it is best done, you show the same fun I found now over 60 years ago with bright eyes hear signals from all over the world. I just wonder how many countries we might have worked with todays' radios back then. The old Johnson transmitters and a good receiver did it then and covered the frequencies we use today. Hopefully, as this sunspot cycle grows the old worldwide openings will return. Back then channel 22 A, B was used by oil companies all over the world in their drilling locations, I worked several of these sites remembering one in Russia just north of Japan when an American drilling company was drilling there for the old Soviet state-owned oil company.
Great videos love them! - question did you ever test of had a 5/8 antenne? Maybe for the test of regular use. Check out the Sirio 827 megarange this is a full aluminium antenne. I have this one in the Netherlands over here and with a little guide over al 40 channels (here on FM) with 0.5 watts never see any needle moving on the swr and with 400 watts no needle movie up till 800 watss maybe a little needle movement. This antenna is a beast with send and reception, but the coast are minimal at least here i bought i brand new for 100 dollars. Its a very great antenne and can also handle a nice amount of watts. Keep the videos coming! thnx.
always enjoy ur videos, 73's & Happy Holidays to u & urs🤓
Happy holidays!
Very well done, easy to understand.
How is the receive section of the 2 different radios? That is a HUGE VARIABLE! And the length of the coaxial cables to the radios, significant loss after so many feet.
awesome test John I was wondering which was better now I know so I will keep my NOS antenna specialist starduster in the box 73s 714 in the buckeye click click
Very valuable comparison, 73!
Interesting video and even more interesting were the ideas in the comment section as to why the results were what they were. Apparently opinions are like noses, everyone has one. The only thing for sure in CB radio is that every person knows what works, and it just happens to be what they have, no matter what that is. :)
Yup! I get asked a lot "what is the best antenna" until I have had one of every kind of antenna made......I just can't answer that question. Thanks for the comment, Happy Holidays.
How about building a full wave vertical? I got an A-99 with a 102" steel whip on the top element which I cut about 10" off it to get a flat match for most of the 11-meter band. What does it mean when they say the A-99 is a half way over a quarter wave?
I think that base station CB you have was based (similarly) to the mobile version the AX144 being sold at the same time which I have, and that was a brilliant radio in the day. I don't know much about the realistic. I wonder if differences in radios are having some effect too.
Was the first antenna a "half-wave" of metal or is it actually a coaxial vertical dipole like an A-99 (in which case the ground plane was superfluous)
Many thanks, an interesting video. Do you fancy doing the test again with a 5/8 wave for more comparison.
All the best,
26DR576, West Yorkshire, UK.
Great informative video.
It's a pity you don't have a 5/8 or 7/8 wave antenna to make a further comparison of various antenna lengths. 🇬🇧
I recently did a video comparing this 1/2 wave against a Maco v58 5/8 wave antenna. th-cam.com/video/ce5Bklmj9O4/w-d-xo.html
Thanks for watching, Take care.
@@MowerJunkie
Ah, great.
Take care out there.
Enjoy your range test 👍
I have not read through all 262 current comments. However what I have read is 5/8 wave has a lower angle of radiation versus the 1/4 wave. Yes so on flat terrain 5/8 will be better. What you are not able to show here is how altitude affects communications. 1/4 wave is better for communications in the mountains. You kind of touch on this for skip, 1/4 wave may hit more skips (pending on conditions) but 5/8 when conditions are right and you are on flat terrain, longer skips are going to have an ability to go further. Overall great great great video.
Great comparison test.
Any good radio stuff at the Florence flea market? I used to go all the time before I cared about radios and I've been wondering.
Good stuff as always!
I'm not sure, I've only been there a couple of times,
but the barnyard fleamarket in Lexington has Cuz Customs CB shop
Nice setups..... very clear at 22 miles ! still somewhat clear at 25 miles.....35 miles still very impressive yet ! I use to built diopoles younger. I still have my 3 cb radios yet. They are awesome fun to talk on.
Thank You, Take care. 73's from 151 SC.
Always great stuff! Were they at same tip height?
Thanks. the feed points were at the same height. 73's
@@MowerJunkie I suspect if tip heights were equal, antennas would perform near to identical. Always testing here as well, great fun. Have not heard you in the skip lately, conditions have turned to texas Dx a lot here, not picking up much SC, these days, Always listening for you!
@@pixotica I can't wait for the conditions to move back to the north, I've been getting the UK in the morning and Arizona in the evening. Take care Mike, 73's
151 SC.. I heard you all the way in Toledo Washington . I tried to reply to get you back but I'm only running a 980SSB with a rm Italy 203p with dual oil filled antenna that I got from a truck stop. Oh well, I'll try again next time I'm out over the road.
Are you Testing the Different Ground Planes or is it the Halfwave Antenna over the Quarter Wave Antenna, as you say the Halfwave Antenna has Quarterwave Radials, as so does the Quarterwave Antenna, as it has winded quarter wave whips
Confusion
Hey Brother MJ!! How about a twin-base station antenna set-up where you use the half-wave to receive and the quarter-wave to transmit?! You could switch when DX-ing. That would be some set-up indeed bro!! What do you(and your audience!!) think about that idea?
73's from your Canadian CB Bro,
Norman in Montreal, Canada.
thinking about getting a cb again. never did sideband much always had cheap radios. would the antenna check be easier to compare on regular channels since easier to see key power on meter.
Did adding ground planes to The halfway make a difference to the signal
Thanks for a Brilliant Vidclip .... You so well covered the topic that I am Just Busy researching ..... I am on 27 MHz here in New Zealand, using a 1/4 Wave homemade 'Glassfibre Fishing Rod' Antenna .... The Skip from Australia has been Fantastic the last few days .... So .... Do I go 1/4 or 1/2 ????? .... Seems like you have answered that question for me .... Very Best to You and Yours for the Festive Season.... Keep well and Stay safe .... Cheers from Christchurch, New Zealand
Thanks for watching. Happy Holidays, 73's from 151 SC.
Interesting comparison. Just an observational question though, how long were the ground plane radials on the 1/4 wave antenna? i'm just curious as in the video it didn't look like there were anywhere close to 1/4 wave in length. The other questions i have about the comparison is what was the coax that you used on each antenna? and what were the antenna heights? as far as antenna locations it really isn't a fair comparison as you can move the antenna 6 feet 1 way or another and have completely different results. What you would really need to do is test with 1 antenna then after the test take that antenna down and put up the second antenna in it's place. That way you are keeping the location the same, Antenna height the same, the coax type the same and the coax length the same. for me there are just too many question marks to call it a fair comparison. None the less though as i had said, interesting comparison.
Early in the video he stated the ground plane elements were 103 inches.
Love your BC smoking jacket.
Great demo thanks for sharing
@Mower Junkie. Wish you would have just used 1 base radio so the one base receiver was tuned the same in both test.
You really need to get a high performance 5/8 wave ground plane. Several great antennas to choose from. What a difference it would make.
I would like to get a 5/8 wave antenna, But I'm working with a small budget and use what I can afford. Take care, 73's from 151 SC.
I've gotten excellent results from both my Sirio Tornado 27 and Penetrator SPT-500. Once you switch to an aluminum 5/8ths antenna, there's no going back.
5/8 wave antennas are a compromise antenna. The higher radiation angel is shifted lower, however, that is less than ideal for all locations. While a 5/8 antenna is a good choice for those who are in a high location or in the clear, those lower in elevation will have quite significant ground loss. Transmitting your signal into nearby hills equates to substantial loss and signal degradation. Also, shifting the max radiating angel from about 20 degrees (half wave) down to about 16 degrees (5/8 wave antenna) is not as good for sporadic-E skip (the most common type) in all cases but does have the edge in long skip.
Sporadic E will favor the half wave every time as 20 degrees is the optimal angle.
So, one can never generalize that one is superior to the other.
The real answer is that it depends. There are path profiling calculators on line that allow you to plot your radiation pattern from a particular location. At my house in Pennsylvania, (1,485' ASL and the second highest point in the county) the 5/8 wave antenna is a winner. From my house in Essex county, NJ, the half wave is, by far the better choice.
@@MowerJunkie Make one, roughly 21 feet.
@@timmack2415 Can you tell approximatelly how "clear" should terrain be to experience benefit of 5/8?
Wondering the make & model of the homebase on right ?.. thanks..
Great video. I enjoyed watching it. In the market for a siro starduster. Currently running a Solarcon 99 47ft high. Maybe catch ya on the radio. I monitor Channel 36 LSB - 727 Mike in Lake Havasu City, AZ
Thanks Mike. Take care, 73's from 151 SC.
@@MowerJunkie thank you sir sent you a friend request on facebook
Thanks, best video yet!
Thanks for watching, 73's from 151 SC.
Thank you, this is a very good real world test.
Also you should try a full wave dipole in a vertical orentation
That would be too long to be effective, there would be multiple lobes, none pointing where you’d want the signal to go. 0.64 of a wavelength is max
@@toby000000 ok sounds logical
So their both good just shows where a good set of beams would come in handy as you can rotate to one direction in my opinion
Hey this is Joe up in Vermont are you still doing the CB things here in 2023?
Two different receivers makes the test flawed because the sensitivity of both receivers is different.
Were you using an amplifier while transmitting and receiving skip?
Have you ever made a mobile antenna wrapping a wire on a fiberglass pole, say 1/2 wave or 3/8 to see if they could due a better job than the 1/4 wave whip..... just curious
That is a pretty good test. I know what kind of antenna I will get... Is it fairly flat where you live? I live in the mountains.
Years ago my father had a 5/8 wave antenna for his CB. I had a Big Stick antenna for mine here but think that was 1/4 wave.
Very informative video 👍🏾
To make that test that you have done more accurate !!!! you should have used the same radio on both antennas while you were transmitting you could have had someone hook that same radio up to antenna A then antenna B the reason I say this is because some radios just have better receive than others at the same distance like I have told you my Sears Road talker performed much better on receive then my Galaxy at the same distance and location using the same antenna
Question is...why were you using side band instead of AM. You need to see what you can do with AM transmit.
the testing I do is for Me, and I share it with you guys. I don't ever use AM mode, I'm always on SSB. So my testing is usually done on SSB.
Someone told me the Solarcon A99 works better on skip with no ground plane vs having a ground plane. Is that true? Very cool video.
I've had a lot of A99 style antennas, with and without ground planes. I found with every one the DX was better with the ground radials.
OK that was good how about changing the radios switch him those two radio switch him why do we sound like are there any difference in it would it radios make antennas be different from a different radio I like to see that Shep FC one or shep 73
I don't know why you didn't use the SBE above unless it's the AM only version, but it looks just like my old SBE (SSB) Land Command *LCBS-8* which shares the same 8719 PLL circuit board with a Cobra 142, *_UNIDEN_* Washington, Cobra 140GTL mobile and a host of others.
The TRC-451 is a different board from the Uniden Washington & 142GTL. It's the same as a Uniden 144 and Cobra 146GTL.
...& that was a VERY interesting comparison!🤔
Is very good explanation about antenna cb can rx from distance station..
Great Job!
Thank You!
I love all of your "Radio Shack/Realistic" gear you have, i remember seeing those radio shack base antennas in their sales flyers all the time. Are those Radio shack base antennas like the old Big Stick base antennas?
Radio Shack only had this model available for 2 years (2000-2001) it is not like the Big Stick, This model is just like the Antron 99. Thanks for watching, Take care.
Interesting test. Thanks for sharing.
You pretty much can talk all over your town if the channel is clear. Using one of the slots or A channels very likely one would be clear so it should work. If one of those was an A99 clone then it is not a ground plane but an end-fed 1/2 way with the angle being better one the1/4 wave. Interesting test, your radios are very clean and clear both ways. Sadly too many CBers try too hard for distance and overdrive, but you my friend are the exact example I love to remind condescending fellow Hams still exist and seem to be now keeping the hobby going. Your pileups of folks trying to make contact show more courtesy than many Hams. Listening or watching DX Commander with an 80-meter net he has been doing, some guy was recording him and playing it back on top of him on air, stuff we all hated years ago, but hopefully is gone now.
I had someone do that to me too, They were broadcasting one of My skip clip videos.
Thanks for watching, Happy Holidays.
As a general rule, the more Mass you have in the air the better.
During skip, you need to use Channel 35 LSB to reach Australia. It's out local channel.
Interesting comparison , how about trying on AM ?, establish contact on ssb the both stations switch to am on an agreed channel. I have has some spectacular results on am when doing this switcheroo , using a 1/2 wave vertical ant at only 12 feet above the ground. The best distance I could get on am was 2900 miles !
Question. When you are calling CQ, what does "151" mean and does this need to be on Ch. 38? It does sound like side band.
the numbers are like a handle or name, and can be used anywhere on CB.
@MowerJunkie so in other words I could use my HAM call sign, if nothing else
Hi, I want to make an external quarter wave ground plane antenna, mainly to monitor frequencies 118.000 MHz to 136.975 MHz (aircraft band). As far as the 3mm welding rod is concern, is bronze better than aluminum? Also, when using the antenna calculator to determine the length of the radiating element and radial elements, what frequency will I input in the calculator and will I retain the 0.95 velocity factor?
increasing power twice will give 3dB increase and 0,5 s-units... so good antenna choice and design is a must...
Do you think the starduster is a good antenna or I was gonna build your 102 whip antenna with ground plane ? I have a TRC490 SSB & a Lafayette telsat 140ssb
Save your dollar$ and using a coax-insulated L-bracket designed for mounting SS whips, erect a 103" stainless steel whip atop a 40' push-up pole on your roof, then do as he did - bring down 3-4 directions of 103'' of wire from the ground base of the antenna or U-bolt, to insulators or non-metallic cord, and use those as both guy lines and 1/4 wave radials.
- You should have excellent performance, better than an Antron A99 and high power handling.
You won't have any matching network loss because you don't need a matching network for that design - *_It's a ''Direct-Drive'' Center-fed 1/2 wave!_*
The skip is going crazy. I hit Mexico city yesterday on my 980 on 38 lsb with new antenna set up. Then hit most of the Midwest on the washington bearfooted. 360 Rockhill radio out !
Having 4 12 gauge wires acting as a ground plane would it make a difference do you think