| Author |
Message |
    
Hornet 168 KY
| | Posted on Saturday, September 27, 2003 - 11:53 pm: | 
|
I would like to hear some feed back on this Monkey Made Attenna. I bought one and had it professionally installed with a 1.2 match on it. But I am dissatisfied with it's performance over the attenna that I replaced. I wonder if I am running enough power through it or not. I have a Galaxy 44 peaked and tuned with a 3/4 watt deadkey
driving a Texas Star 400 HDV but am not getting the performance and distance that I was getting when I had my wilson 5000 on my truck. |
Kattracker
| | Posted on Sunday, September 28, 2003 - 12:22 pm: |
|
Hornet,
You may be interested in reading an article on the forum that is very similiar to your situation.
Click on Subscriber review, then articles, then Expensive VS cheap antennas.
I briefly tried the large coil type antennas and was not satisfied. Although some people do like them.
I am a 102" 1/4 wave user along with my shorter in-town antennas, Firestik 5/8's wave 6 footer and a Firestik 5/8's wave 4 footer.
I have found, and this is not a new discovery, as it has been known for years, the tallest antenna mounted as high as possible is the best choice.
You mentioned truck. Are you referring to semi tractor or pick-up? I have a pick-up and dropped the headliner temporarily to install a ball mount dead center on the roof of the cab.
With my Pres. Lincoln and either my 6 foot Firestik or 102" whip I can easily talk mobile to base at 40 miles, and sometimes 30 miles mobile to mobile depending on who is on the receive end.
If you use a Firestik go as tall as possible. If you do not mount it on the roof make sure 2/3rds of the total height are above any part of the truck. Firestiks are top loaded and the upper 2/3rd's do most of the radiating and must not be restricted by metal.
Also, if you use a Firestik I reccomend not going any shorter then 4 foot. Any shorter and they are narrow-banded, and like I mentioned, taller is better. And remember, it is hard to beat a 1/4 wave 102" stainless whip.
I know this did not directly address your question about Monkey Made antennas but I thought
the info would still be useful.
Good luck, 
Kattracker |
Kc0gxz
| | Posted on Sunday, September 28, 2003 - 2:11 pm: |
|
Hornet 168 KY
The Monkey Made Antenna is a big gun RF Competition antenna. It's purpose in life is to be able to absorb thousands and thousands of watts of power. LONG RANGE CB COMMUNICATIONS WASN'T ENTERED INTO THE EQUASION WHEN IT WAS ON THE DRAWING BOARD. And very few antenna retailors will tell you that.
When people not in the know see these antennas, right away they think that since these antennas have such BIG coils on them that they must be really powerful and will talk a long ways off.
Wrong! If you will notice, your Monkey Made is mostly coil and a short whip. It is only a 1/4 wave antenna. Any Wilson and many, many other antennas will out-perform it as far as distance talking goes.
A lot of people are mislead about these big coil antennas. And some people are even foolish enough to buy them just because they think the antenna looks cool. BIGGER COILS DOES NOT MEAN BETTER PERFORMANCE when is comes to antennas. Bigger and longer coils only mean less radiating whip.
In reality the rule of thumb is, the more whip you have in the air and the higher you have it in the air, the farther it's range will be. Less coil and more whip means better long range performance. There is just no arguing that point.
If range isn't really important, then any coil loaded 1/4 wave will work just fine. Any coil loaded 1/2 wave 6 foot antenna will outperform any coil loaded 1/4 wave of the same length when mounted in the same location. And a 5/8 wavelength antenna of the same length will outrange either one of them.
In other words, when comparing coil loaded antennas and if range IS important to you, use the longest 1/2 or 5/8 wave whip antenna that will feasibly work on the roof of your vehicle, using a true grounded system and not a magnetic mount.
Also, the longer the antenna's whip, the farther it will broadband. That's pretty much a must if you use the other bands in your Gal-44.
One other thing. Any mobile CB antenna on todays market worth its salt will easily handle at LEAST 1500+ watts of power and wont even break a sweat with a 1KW amplifier running through it.
Jeff, kc0gxz. |
Crazyfrenchmen
| | Posted on Sunday, September 28, 2003 - 3:41 pm: |
|
HORNET,
i would put youre wilson 5000 back on. i run a wilson 5000 on my ford van an it work's great. Dan
|
Alsworld
| | Posted on Sunday, September 28, 2003 - 5:20 pm: |
|
I still love my Monkey Made, but have not compared it to the Wilson 5000. Obviously you are noticing differences. That's too bad it's so noticable compared to the Wilson. Are they mounted in the same place? Coils above the roof?
Which version do you have? Reason being is different versions are different lengths.
I'm just curious. Jeff and I have debated this before, and I won't argue with his "102" or the higher the better" theory, but I have no problems reaching out and touching people with mine, and it was a vast improvement over the previous antenna I had (a K-40). I have no problems shooting skip on mine, or making the trip locally. Right now, the radio is run barefoot and I was shooting skip nationwide yesterday on my way home from work. I realize that is all conditions, but I could never make the trip on the K-40.
Maybe I just got lucky and got a good one, but mine gets out! I hope things work out for you after spending the cash and now owning the antenna.
Alsworld |
ss8541
| | Posted on Sunday, September 28, 2003 - 11:24 pm: |
|
we sale the monkey made antennas and everyone who has used one has had nothing but compliments about them. they all said that they could tell a difference in their tx and rx. most of our customers who bought them were upgrading from a wilson 2k/5k or one of the better fiberglass antenna's. and most of these guys had us install it and tune it, so the tuning may have been the difference over their old antenna. with all that i have going on, i have not had time to do any tests of my own with them, so i have to take my customers word. if we get some time we may compare these against several other antennas that we carry on the spec-an to see which seems to have the higher gain. it most likely will not be a lockheed test, but will be accurate enough.
we weren't even going to carry them but we had so many guys asking about the m-mades, black widows, preadators, etc, that we went with the monkey made. the only version we carry is the m9(i think this is the name, my dad and joe does all the ordering). it is the single coil 5.5ft antenna. i do know that on the mfj269 it has a wide bandwidth. if memory serves me correct on most tractor trailers it has about a 2mhz bandwidth(2:1 swr). this says nothing about gain, but is good if you are running an export radio. if i am wrong about the bandwidth, sorry, the installation guys do more of this than i do.
anyway, just wanted to pass along what 'drivers' are saying about this antenna here on the nc/sc border. |
Tech808
| | Posted on Monday, September 29, 2003 - 12:45 am: |
|
Alsworld & ss8541,
Alsworld, We are like you and Love them.
ss8541, Like you we have never had a Compliant only Compliment's from Customer's.
We have used the Monkey Made MM-9 for years on our Big trucks, Pete's & KW's.
NOTE! (We have not used them on our 4 wheeler's)
I have never had a problem and they have out performed any antenna we have put on them.
We ran our 2970DX with them and always had good wideband results.
We had used / tried, Cobra, Wilson, Francis, K-40 and many others, Whip's, Coils, Base loaded and Center loaded and the Monkey made always worked / performed the Best for us.
A lot has to do with GOOD GROUNDING on the Big Trucks and Good Coax and "GOOD Tuning" and useing the HEAVY DUTY STUDS for mounting.
Bench testing I really could not say / tell you the difference but ACTUAL Road Testing 600.000 + Miles, Our Twin MM-9's have worked / performed better than any antenna's we have ever used or tried. 
The only other Antenna we found to come close / equal the performance was the Astatic 3K, Also a Great Antenna for Big Trucks.
http://www.copperelectronics.com/cgi-bin/checkitout/checkitout.cgi?catalogSTORE:CKIE:prodA70-05130+
No Complaint's here on Performance or Quality.
Lon
Tech808
|
Midnitexpress
| | Posted on Monday, September 29, 2003 - 7:14 am: |
|
Ok, I would like to stick my POV in here. I have dealt with Monkey Made Antennas. Every 3-4 months you might have to dip them to get the corrosion off of them. As far as performance, they suck. A friend of mine owns a MM-9 Antenna. he lives approx 5 miles away from me. he uses a Connex 3300HP with his and I can barely here him. He has 1.3 match all around the bands, and i still cant here him. His radio was tested with another antenna and worked well, but not the Monkey Made. I run a General Lee with a Wilson 5000, I can talk 45 miles on low power with no problems. this is only my opinion, please do not take offense. Thank you
|
Pig040
| | Posted on Monday, September 29, 2003 - 9:42 am: |
|
I have one for you guys, I have a wilson 1000, and a wilson 5000, using the exact same mounting gear, both with swr 1 to 1.3, mounted in the same place, and the 1000 has better ears! Is there a reason for this?
Pig |
Hornet 168 KY
| | Posted on Monday, September 29, 2003 - 4:36 pm: |
|
Thanks, so much to everyone for the help I think I will go back to my wilson 5000 just because I have run one for 2 years and never had a minutes trouble with it. BTW the monkey made is mounted on a tractor/trailor with coil above the cab, the only thing different between the mounting of the 5000 and M-made is the M-made is slightly bent forward to get it below 13'6" other than that they were both mounted basically the same. |
Bruce
| | Posted on Monday, September 29, 2003 - 10:44 pm: |
|
INTRESTING !
I looked up the lockheed antenna test and found that the wilson was 4 inches longer than the K-40.
The longer a antenna is the better it will work .... to a point. This monkymade is interesting and i would like to see a field test it vers the wilson and the K-40. I used K-40 s on cb back 10 years ago good antenna with one bad fault the top cracks under the heat here in tampa and you get water in the coil ... not good. But no mater what lets be fair.
From my own use of them another good antenna is the 7 foot ham stick fairly cheep works well. |
Bigbob
| | Posted on Monday, September 29, 2003 - 11:47 pm: |
|
What about Copper's knight stick 10k how does it stack up,I've heard about everyone elses antennas how about Copper's very own,hmmm? |
Kc0gxz
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 30, 2003 - 2:48 am: |
|
Bigbob
Good question Bob.
Jeff. |
RCI 2990
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 30, 2003 - 2:59 am: |
|
IM happy with my 10+ year old wilson 1000 magnet mount... It gets me out and pretty much everyone local and skip can hear me on my 2970 DX... Ive had a lot of other antennas and have always gone back to my good ol' wilson 1000..... :-) |
Wolverine
| | Posted on Thursday, October 02, 2003 - 2:05 am: |
|
I have a "Baby 55" antenna with the 8" shaft to off-set the wind loading effect of the extra fat coil at highway speeds. The Antenna is mounted on a 3-pad mag-mount. I also have a wilson 5000 bottom load, that I switch with occasionally utilizing the same mag-mount. My Baby 55 antenna outperforms my wilson 2/3rds of the time when I'm Dxing, or even talking local. But I use the wilson 2/3rds of the time, only because the 55 is cumbersome, and a heavier antenna to disconnect every night, along with my radio (Apartment living). In other words, the wilson is more user friendly, doesn't require constant cleaning of the coil due to weather corrosion (Living next to the Pacific ocean), and it takes less time to adjust the SWR. I bought the Baby 55 ant, which looks identical to the Monkey Made only because the bigger coil dissipates heat better when using power as opposed to a sealed coil, advertising hype, and I was taught that a bottom load ant is "Good", Center-Load is better, and top-load ants are "Best". Just my 2 cents.
Wolverine. |
Bullet
| | Posted on Thursday, October 02, 2003 - 1:56 pm: |
|
ive got many mobile antennas but i dont have the monkey made ive got a dual coil flatline by storm and have tested it agaist every thing i could get my hands on and it stomps the wilson 5000 in the mudd!
and like ss8541 mentiones it looks good on my mfj259b has broad bandwidth and great swr over anywhere i care to talk.
this will out talk a wilson 5000 trucker by 2 s units on rx and tx. at least these are my findings on my truck.
mine was custom made for me by storm its not one youll find on his website as i gave him the basic paramiters i wanted in it and let him build it. its not a 1/4 wave length as compared to the wilson.
its almost like putting a antron 99 on the truck
just not near as long |
Bruce
| | Posted on Thursday, October 02, 2003 - 2:31 pm: |
|
hummmmm ......" this will out talk a wilson 5000 trucker by 2 s units on rx and tx. at least these are my findings on my truck " ......... Bullet.
Bullet ...... How tall is this thing????? |
Scrapiron63
| | Posted on Thursday, October 02, 2003 - 4:31 pm: |
|
C:\WINDOWS\Desktop
 rock&roll
|
Scrapiron63
| | Posted on Thursday, October 02, 2003 - 6:08 pm: |
|
C:\WINDOWS\Desktop
 cb
|
Bruce
| | Posted on Thursday, October 02, 2003 - 8:16 pm: |
|
AUSUM SCRAP AUSUM ! i can here that CW now ! |
Scrapiron63
| | Posted on Thursday, October 02, 2003 - 8:52 pm: |
|
Bruce,those big coil antennas make good flower holders, ha. This guy was killed a couple years ago in an accident, his handle was 'rock & roll', he played rock music for years with a band. He loved those old big coil antennas, and a couple of his friends made this footmarker for his grave. Nice memorial for him and the antenna don't you think. |
fancypants
| | Posted on Thursday, October 02, 2003 - 11:44 pm: |
|
|
Bruce
| | Posted on Friday, October 03, 2003 - 11:15 am: |
|
Hey scrap ..... all that heavy antenna talk and still my cantenna was the best at soaking up signal and giving a flat VSWR over a very wide range .... 2-200 mhz at less that 1.5/1..... what do you think? |
Scrapiron63
| | Posted on Friday, October 03, 2003 - 11:52 am: |
|
Interesting post Fancypants, it certainly agrees with some things i've found with my poorboy unscientific tests. This guy that I showed his grave above use to made the big shootouts at Memphis and Okla City, he would bring home all different makes of the big coil antennas. He had the idea that because some of them would take those 20 KW or better keydowns, they had to be better antennas and would outtalk the smaller ones. However, our findings were, except for their power handling capabilities, they just didn't beat the Wilson loaded antennas, especially the roofmount. Our testing was just on fourwheelers, no big truck mirror mounting involved. With just barefoot radios or a moderate amount of power, up to about a KW, the Wilson was with or better than the big antennas, and man with the Wilson you didn't have all the wind resistance and noise like those big boys. I live on the highest level of this mountain, no close neighbors, and with guys scattered around at 50-75 miles that i've radioed with for years, it's a great place to have those friendly shootouts. We had a lot of them a few years back, several guys get together about dark, get the guys listening out there at a distance, and check those amps and antennas. After the one was killed in an accident and somemore of the old timers had died by then also, and we kinda dropped it, but it was a lot of fun. We didn't make any earthshaking discoveries don't guess, but plenty of BS'ing and laughs. Of course our tests might have had a + or - accuracy rate of about 50%, according to how late it was and how empty the coolers were. haha |
307
| | Posted on Friday, October 03, 2003 - 8:40 pm: |
|
Personally , I think they make great tie down anchors for people who live in trailers here in Florida....
307 |
Bruce
| | Posted on Friday, October 03, 2003 - 8:44 pm: |
|
DANG ! 307 thats a great idea! |
fancypants
| | Posted on Saturday, October 04, 2003 - 1:04 am: |
|
Scrapiron: By no means was i advocating that the Wilson is the most efficient / best performing / universal antenna. I have mobile antennas that make Wilson's look like a dummy load !!! That is NOT to say that these antennas are the best, only that they work better in specific installations. Like i said, use what works best for you in your installation. I would encourage everyone interested in this subject to do their own testing and find out for themselves, but try to do so in the most controlled fashion possible. If the results from one test to the next are not repeatable on a consistent basis, there's something wrong with the way that the test is being conducted or the mobile installation is not up to the task of being used as a "test-bed". |
Wolverine
| | Posted on Saturday, October 04, 2003 - 4:00 am: |
|
Fancypants, I have a question. Picture 2 big passenger cars like let's say chevy caprices, bonneviles etc. 1 car has a 102" whip, the other car has a monkey made antenna. Both vehicles have the ants mounted smack dab in the middle of the car roof. Both vehicles are in an open field with no trees or buildings around. In a contest of say 30 miles to the recieving stations, which antenna would win, barefoot, or with power? I chose these vehicles because of the big groundplane surfaces.
Wolverine. |
Tech833
| | Posted on Saturday, October 04, 2003 - 12:33 pm: |
|
Wolverine,
Over such an ideal ground plane, a 1/4 wave whip will always outperform a loaded antenna with the same power input. That is fact proven time and time again over nearly 100 years.
Fancypants is making some very lofty claims. Claiming a loaded antenna outperforms an unloaded antenna is laughable. I appreciate the testing people do to determine the best performing antenna on a given vehicle with given mounting location, that is a good idea. However, making a blanket claim is irresponsible.
Know this: a 1/4 wave whip is NOT like a 'bazooka'. It is much more focused on the horizon than ANY loaded antenna under 1/4 wave tall. That is the truth. Unless someone shows you the data first hand (not quoting from it) do not believe it. Readers here know who I am and what I do for a living, I do not need to repeat it here. I cannot at all believe or substantiate your claims when you say things like a loaded 1/4 wave is better than a full length 1/4 wave. Please post the link to the actual test data. Simply discussing the data is basically technical gossip.
One last thing. If you increase the power input to an antenna, it will be the same power gain multiplied by the antenna gain regardless of the antenna. In other words, if you have a 0 dB gain antenna, and you run 1 watt, your ERP is 1 watt. If you increase the power by 10 dB (10 watts), your ERP is now 10 watts.
If you run 1 watt into a 3 dB gain antenna, your ERP is 2 watts. If you increase the input power by 10 dB as you did above, your ERP is now 20 watts. Field gain goes up exponentially to power gain when increasing the antenna gain. It goes up linearly when increasing power gain. A better performing antenna with small power input will put more signal on the horizon than a low performing antenna will unless the amplifier gets exponentially bigger to overcome the antenna gain deficiency. |
Wolverine
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 07, 2003 - 6:22 am: |
|
Thanks Tech 833 for the info.
As a matter of fact I have always known that 102" whips were the best, that is if you live in Montana, or the Dakotas, but because of height restrictions of using such a whip in the city.
Thanks for the reality check.
Wolverine
|
Alsworld
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 07, 2003 - 10:41 pm: |
|
Okay, now I've got a stupid question. If you cannot afford the height of a 102" whip, what is the next best alternative?
All who know me realize I run a Monkey Made MM5. Overall length (height) is 6'9" tuned to the CB frequencies. On top of my Siverado 4X4, it sits at around 12'6" give or take an inch, well below the legal limit of 13'6". No gain advertised which sounds correct, 1/4 wave. It's higher than many other typical CB antennas, but shorter than the whip.
So my question is, what can beat it performance wise other than the whip given my height (or the legal height) limitations? It's taller than most Wilsons, and few antennas besides a Firestick or other coils can fit within that range. So????....what would be a logical solution?
Not trying to argue here by any means, but ask what I hope to be a legitimate question? For my personal situation, I'm real happy with the MM5, but realize each vehicle and setup will have differing results.
Help?
Alsworld |
Wolverine
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 08, 2003 - 3:33 am: |
|
Alsworld, you must be psychic. I was just going to post the same question. So I'll add the question, would a 5' or 6' top-load 5/8's wave
Firestick be a good alternative compared to the Wilson 1000 and 5000 base loads?? I'm going nut's here. Thanks.
Wolverine |
Bruce
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 08, 2003 - 2:02 pm: |
|
alworld
I run a hamstick clone and have both the 5 and 7 foot ones The 7 foot easly goes down on to cb just pull out the stubby wip at the top the 5 foot one atleast mine has no adjustment but is cut for 27.4. you night look around they are cheep one buy i made i got 10, 15 and 17 meters for all 3 for $49.....might be something to play with..... as long as you run under 400 watts. |
Bigbob
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 08, 2003 - 9:58 pm: |
|
My wilson silver load is a dual coil top loaded fiberglass antenna with an adjusting stub and a tap 3 inches above base to shift center of tune lower 455kc. |
Bigbob
| | Posted on Thursday, October 09, 2003 - 7:20 pm: |
|
Man,it's amazing how easy it is for me to kill a thread,hoohaw. |
Hornet168ky
| | Posted on Saturday, October 11, 2003 - 2:02 pm: |
|
Just a little update, I now have just a 10.00 fiberglass anttenna on my truck and is working almost back up to snuff, so now I have a monkey made anttenna for sell cheap!!!! lol I have been working too much to go and have my wilson 5000 installed agian but I will get it done shortley, anybody know of any good CB shops around locally I mean around Kentucky, Ohio, or WV.
Thanks for all the info. |
Tech833
| | Posted on Saturday, October 11, 2003 - 5:05 pm: |
|
Alsworld,
You would be better off taking a 102" whip and bending the top 90 degrees to stay under 13' 6" than you would loading an antenna.
A loading coil does not radiate. A horizontal whip radiates. Although, a bent antenna is much uglier than a loaded antenna, it depends on whether looks are more important than performance. For those of us who are married (to girls) the looks vs. performance issue is decided quickly. |
Alsworld
| | Posted on Saturday, October 11, 2003 - 9:20 pm: |
|
he he he. Thank you Tech833 for clarifying (girls that is hehe). Okay just kidding. I will admit publically I like the looks of the antenna, BUT...I really have been happy with performance. I have no complaints but I did not realize the coils do not radiate. I guess my theory and true antenna theory have nothing in common. This isn't the first time. Seems life is that way sometimes (see quote at the end of this).
Now, I guess the intent of my question is like what Bigbob and others have mentioned, maybe a 6 or 7 ft 5/8ths wave antenna, or if there is such a thing, a true "top loaded" antenna, would it be better than a Wilson but not as good as a 102" whip"?
Wait, not worded right. Would the antenna described (5/8th wave or "top loaded" (if that exist) fill the void between the height of a Wilson and a 102" whip? Maybe that makes more sense. I guess the bottom line, the max bang for the height filling that void.
Gosh, I hope it doesn't sound like I'm asking for the best mobile antenna shorter than 102" because this thread could go on forever, opinion vs fact. Well, on the other hand it sounds just like my opinion of my antenna. Maybe I better just shut up now  .
Now in all honesty, I have no plans to change my Monkey Made, unless only to simplify and stop all the attention I'm getting from this small town. I am not an attention addictee, but I am happy with performance. With the mount, I can add almost anything (3/8ths X 24), but trying to keep the overall height down but maintain performance.
Now if I bent a 102" at the appropriate place, would I get both horizontal and vertical polarization? (I don't really care for that answer, threw the question more in pun than anything). Man I'm just not right LOL!
Alsworld
"In this crazy world we live in, The Key to Sanity is to Stay Insane". Yup, I invented this quote years ago. Fits my whacked personality perfectly. I either need a beer or a trip to the shrink LOL! See y'all tomorrow on the air. |
Buck
| | Posted on Saturday, October 11, 2003 - 10:59 pm: |
|
Well maybe you can have a beer on the way to the shrink AL!!!
Buck |
RCI 2990
| | Posted on Sunday, October 12, 2003 - 2:40 am: |
|
Big Bob.. You and me share a trait! Making a post go dead when we reply!! Happens to me all the time whenever i reply to a post viola' it goes DEAD!!! |
Kc0gxz
| | Posted on Sunday, October 12, 2003 - 5:49 am: |
|
Alsworld
I was going to leave this alone because I was afraid of repeating myself on this MM subject.
In none of your posts did you ever say just how high you can go off the roof of your truck with an antenna and still be at or under 13.6.
13.6 is the legal hight of a semi-trailor. Did someone tell you that your antenna can't be higher than that?
As far as bending a 102, the little bit that would be bent would not effect the wave pattern to where anyone would notice on their S-meter.
The MM IS a 1/4 wave antenna. NO, IT WILL NOT OUTPERFORM A 102. And why? Simple. Too much coil and not enough whip. Or put another way, very, very little below the whip radiates. I believe Tech833 also said that in one of his posts.
Every antenna company makes the same claims. Companys that make bottom loaded antennas claim that bottom loaded antennas are the best. The same holds true for center and top loaded antenna companys. The reason why you need a shrink is because all of the antenna companys have brainwashed you. But you're not alone. We all suffer the same thing.
Your MM can't do anything that a Wilson 2 or 5000 can't do. They are both 1/4 antennas and yes, the MM is taller, BUUUUT, if you want more overall hight on the Wilson, just add an extention under the coil.
You have told us in 2 or 3 of your posts that you bought this antenna because of it's looks. If that MM was bought under those circumstances and performs well for you, then you now own the best antenna on the market.
Never mind the fact that it is only a 1/4 wave and about 65% of it is coil. And we'll also forget the fact that it wasn't intented to be mounted on a everyday moving vehicle because of the TREMENDOUS windload that it has at highway speeds, but was actually designed for stationary vehicles for competition use.
You pretty much answered your own question about the 6 and 7 foot Firestiks. Both of them have more whip and less coil. And both of them have a lower radiation angle than all of the 1/4 waves. But since I can't talk you into "performance over appearance", we'll just have to forget about using longer-whip-less-coil antennas. And since performance isn't a factor, I'm puzzled why you would even consider anything other than your MM.
But lets get back to the 1/4 wave 102 for a minute. If you put one on the roof of your truck, it WILL, WITHOUT A DOUBT, out talk your MM. Only because the 102 is a REAL 1/4 wave antenna and all 100% of it radiates. THE 102" 1/4 wave antenna WILL OUTPERFORM ANY COIL LOADED 1/4 WAVE ANTENNA OF ANY LENGTH ON THIS PLANET.
OH OH. Looks like I DID repeat myself.
PS: Why the heck did you ever move away from Florida? I'm originally from the Bradenton area and have been trying to get back there for years but my wife had other plans.
Catch ya later Al.
Jeff. |
Bullet
| | Posted on Sunday, October 12, 2003 - 7:46 am: |
|
say what you will about antennas theory and i will most likey agree, that is whats read and supost to be true. and in most cases it is so!
but ive tryed my flatline "big coil" antenna against the 102" whip and it out performed the ss whip.
now im not saying this cause i get a dollar for every time i say it or that i just love to argue with the so called experts, but because i run what works the best for my use. "not a multi kilowatt contesting mobile".
if the 1/4 wave ss whip out performed my flatline the flatline would find a new owener that simple!
im an old soldier that cares more about real world performance than anything else, it matters little to me that on paper the 1/4 wave ss whip is supost to be superior to the loaded antenna.
thats all fine for discussions but when its time to get my message across the county "ya cant talk to the other party using a book"! you use the antenna that gets the signal to that station with the most strength possible.
if i got the best results using a 14 dollar whip antenna believe me id be using it instead of the more costly coil job.
i am a fan of the ss whip its a good antenna but it also changes resistance as it changes shape bending while you drive.... check this out some time as well.
i made a single coil antenna using 1/8"x1" aluminum flat stock rolled it into a 8"x 12" coil for 4 1/2 turns and used 1/2 copper water pipe as the body of the antenna using 1/2" pvc pipe for an insulator at the coil and aprox 3' whip.
its awesome for free banding as it has a large band width,and ive been told it does a better job than my hi doller flatline. but its very ugly nothing youd want to be seen with on your car in town.
well here go's let me have it!
|
Alsworld
| | Posted on Sunday, October 12, 2003 - 12:11 pm: |
|
|
Bigbob
| | Posted on Sunday, October 12, 2003 - 4:08 pm: |
|
A 1/4 wave whip radiates along it's entire length,assuming it is current fed it will radiate more at its base than at its tip,a base loaded more so because more of the antenna is concsentrated there,where ever the most antenna is concentrated that is where the most radiation will occur,a center load radiates more at the center,and a top load radiates more at the top,but loads are lossy,so for greatest percentage of radiated power at any input a full length whip is best,you can change the angle of radiation with different coil positions,but the coil will eat up watts,thats why those MMs are so fat so you can offset losses with mega-inputs,an ss whip will heat up with inputs of 350 watts dk,BUT change that to 1/2 inch aluminum tubing and it will take 2000 watts all day long,I've used 1/2 inch tubing with 6 inch spring quite durable,the alloy must be 50t5 minimum,this on top of my pick up roof,swr and radiation pattern is same as ss whip but will take GOBS of power.Bigbob |
Kc0gxz
| | Posted on Monday, October 13, 2003 - 3:54 am: |
|
Bullet
I was waiting for you to tell us that the 3 foot whip on your home-brew antenna was outperforming your 102 but it never came. So, I'll leave that one alone.
And, since you didn't give me any specs on your "Flatline", I have no idea what antenna you are talking about because I have to admit, I never heard of a Flatline until you mentioned it.
But, one thing I do know, there isn't a cut-down, big coil 1/4 wave antenna in production today that will outperform a 102. And theory has nothing to do with it. Like you, I too could care less what it says on paper.
All theory aside, coil loaded 1/4 wave antennas were originally designed for the purpose of one thing. It amounts to nothing more than a feasible way to shorten a 102 inch whip antenna.
The task was simple. Cut the whip to around 4-4 1/2 feet and add a coil at the bottom that will bring everything within resonance for a givin frequency range.
Results? Long range communications suffered because A COIL TOOK UP THE LOSS OF THE SHORTENED WHIP.
I'm not in any way shape or form going to tell you that your "Flatline" doesn't perform well. I'm sure it does. And it just may perform better than any coil loaded 1/4 wave on todays market.
But, what I will tell you, no way will it outperform a 102 inch 1/4 wave antenna. It is theoretically, electrically, and physically impossible for a shortened, cut-down, big coil 1/4 wave antenna to perform just as good or better that a 102. The sooner you design one that will, the sooner you will become filthy rich.
This is probably a poor comparison, but I'll use it in an attemp to make a point. Here goes... Does a cut-down 18" barreled shotgun perform better than it did when in its original 28 or 30" configuration? No. Of course it doesnt.
Personally, I wouldn't use a 1/4 wave of any length. Loaded OR unloaded. The radiation angle is too high for my liking. I'll take a 6 or 7 foot 1/2 wave any day over a 1/4. And a 5/8 wave of the same length will even out perform the 1/2 waves.
Tech833 answered a question very similar to yours a few posts back. Just scroll up and find it. His answer was far better than mine because he's forgotten more about antennas and antenna design than I and most of us on this forum will ever know.
73s for now Bullet.
Jeff, kc0gxz.
PS: As of now, I'm done with this thread. |
Kc0gxz
| | Posted on Monday, October 13, 2003 - 3:59 am: |
|
Alsworld
You're right. I wasn't following your post very well and ended up repeating myself. I opologize for that.
I'll make this short and to the point.
If you want something that will perform better that your coil loaded 1/4 wave, use your 6 foot 5/8 wave Firestik. It's a proven design and performs well.
PS: My hat's off to you for deciding to stay in the Military. God bless you and yours AL.
Jeff. |
Rob5mike
| | Posted on Monday, October 13, 2003 - 10:23 am: |
|
Bullet I did like you and built mine out of 1/2"copper water pipe and #4 cooper wire with the 3 1/2 foot ss whip it works great on the big truck,does much better than the Wilson 2000 it replaced.When it takes a •••• on me I will just make another one its about ten times cheaper than buying one.I still use the 102 ss whip on my pickup its hard to beat. |
Flybynight
| | Posted on Monday, October 13, 2003 - 11:14 am: |
|
Well,i'll say this about the big coil antenna's.I just put a Bad Boy competition antenna on my van and it out performed my wilson 5K mag mount.Only difference i noticed is that the Bad Boy is a little directional which is a good thing for competition.I had a 2 S-unit increase in recieve and transmit over the 5K.I was skeptical at first but i'm well satisfied as i won my first keydown this past saturday with it. |
Tech833
| | Posted on Monday, October 13, 2003 - 11:29 am: |
|
Alsworld,
a 102" whip mounted right behind the cab may outperform a bloated corkscrew on the roof. If you can stay under the height limit with a 102" whip mounted on the bed behind the cab, it would be less visually obtrusive and may perform better. |
Bullet
| | Posted on Monday, October 13, 2003 - 2:16 pm: |
|
|
Alsworld
| | Posted on Monday, October 13, 2003 - 10:07 pm: |
|
|
Bullet
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 14, 2003 - 1:21 am: |
|
forum master,
sorry, yea i did get a bit steamed up. lol
not for opposing opinions, thats fine. "its the spice of life rite"!
what i had a hard time with was being told that no it will not perform as you said period! when he was not thier.
i dont care if he buys it or not but one shouldnt say it didnt work like claimed if one wasnt thier to see it.
heck if it didnt i wouldnt post that it did.
most of us thats been into this hobby for 20+ years and have gone to school in this field know a little antenna theory well enuff to know the facts of how the wavelengths of antennas stack up on the food chain.
i never refuted that and wont, my point was thier can and are exceptions to the rule. and i think that some of these kind of antennas "may" just fall into this.
i dont have a controlled setting for testing, wish i did.
but i have run several comparison tests between most of the popular antennas for mobiles. as our local group has dicussed this topic for a long time.
i posted my results on another site a few years back when we had this same topic come up. this is not my first rodeo on this topic!
to my best recollection this is how they compared on my truck.
i had wilsons 1000,5000 trucker, workmans coil job,penetraiter,firestick 5/8 7 footer,francis long whip,workmans oil filled coil ant,flatline dual coil,two 102 ss whips,tried to get mr coily to send me one of his to test but he declined.
the results were the flatline by 2 s units over the firestick 7 footer.
firestick over the 102 whips by 1/2 s unit.
the 102 whips beat both the wilsons,workmans coil job and the penetraiter by a good s unit.
and workmans oil filled coil ant was a s unit under them.
flybynite had the same results with a big coil job vs wilson 5000. 2 s-units more signal!
"thats big"
now thier shouldnt be this big of increase from one to the other in "theory" but i do believe his claim.
this deserves a serious study i wish i had the means to do so but all i can do is field tests and comparisions.
i forget some do more reading than PE in the field as a old commo guy i tend to be more active in the field than some,and may have run across things that some have not. i need to keep this in mind when posting at times. ill try to do that.
anyway jeff no hard feelings.
|
Wolverine
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 14, 2003 - 5:09 am: |
|
Thank You Alsworld, for asking all of the right questions, and to the rest of the forum members for giving detailed, informative answers. This thread was like watching the the California Governor's debates. (Sniff, Sniff), I think I'm going to cry!
Wolverine. |
Bigbob
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 14, 2003 - 9:11 pm: |
|
Bullet,1/2 inch pipe,that's the ticket,gobs and GOBS of power,how about this,the little whip just adds capacitance to tune out the inductive reactance of the coil and really doesn't radiate much in the way of rf,go figure.Bigbob |
Alsworld
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 14, 2003 - 9:49 pm: |
|
Thanks Wolverine. I don't mind looking like an idiot and asking the dumb questions if it's educational. I've got my strong points, and it seems antenna theory just ain't one of those (although it seems somewhat easy to understand if I apply myself). I've got the books, but the ARRL does not mentioned anything about super hyped coil antennas for some reason. Go figure heh?
Well, I'm just gonna have to do some unofficial testing comparing the MM and a 102" whip on my vehicle just to see what turns out. Today after work, I went and purchased me a brand new 102" whip and spring to do this (when I have the time). I'll have to get Tech833's best opinion on my testing methods if he hasn't written me off as a complete moron yet.
Check this out. I had to reduce quality and crop it to fit within the Copper size so it looks pretty bad, but it's a side by side picture of my new whip (in container) comparing height to my other antenna, which will remain nameless (smirk).
I'll be the first to admit that I got far too focused on the whole height issue and tuned most everything else out. I lost focus of the big picture. Well enough is enough and it was the perfect excuse to go buy another antenna, like I need a reason.
{image}
Alsworld |
Alsworld
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 14, 2003 - 9:51 pm: |
|
Maybe this will work better.
|
Tech833
| | Posted on Friday, October 17, 2003 - 3:43 pm: |
|
Alsworld,
No way. You are not a moron! Ask me anything youlike and I will give you my best answer. If I don't know the confirmed answer, I will say so and try to find out. |
Hornet168ky
| | Posted on Saturday, October 25, 2003 - 11:10 pm: |
|
Friday October 24, I stopped by a certain CB shop near Toledo,OH. on RT.420 south of the Ohio Turnpike. I have been here before and bought a wilson 5000 mirrior mount for my tractor/trailer.
Less than a half hour later I was on my way home new anttenna and all. 1.4 SWR I called my wife to meet at my terminal to pick me up. I have a cavilier with a Galaxy 959 tuned and peaked with a 150 watt kicker and a wilson 5000 trunk mount.
My tractor/trailer has a Galaxy 44 with a Texas Star 400 HDV and wilson 5000. I got with in 50 miles of my home and I broke for my wife and she immediantly came back to me. We talked all the way with no problems what so ever. I would not trade either of my Wilson 5000 anttenna's for 10 monkey made's. |
|
