| Author |
Message |
    
Charliebrown
Intermediate Member
Username: Charliebrown
Post Number: 355
Registered: 10-2002
| | Posted on Saturday, August 23, 2014 - 9:24 pm: | 
|
O.K. I really like my I max but have any of you guy's tried the slim jim antenna? If you have how did it do against the I max 2000? Also what about the J pole antenna? I am always looking to learn more about antenna's and how they perform. |
Tech237
Moderator
Username: Tech237
Post Number: 1814
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, August 24, 2014 - 10:49 am: |
|
Used to a Slim-Jim on 10m,made from a bamboo center pole and cross arms and copper clad steel wire for the element. (somewhere I have a dimensioned sketch of it). Worked OK, but cannot compare to Imax as they did not exist at the time. It did work as least as well as A Ringo and RS 5/8th wave vertical.
Slim-Jim's and J-Poles perform about the same, but the Slim-Jim is slightly shorter as the top is folded back over.
As with any antenna question, the true answer is try it and see.
Tech237
N7AUS
God made me an athiest, who are you to question his wisdom?
|
Charliebrown
Intermediate Member
Username: Charliebrown
Post Number: 356
Registered: 10-2002
| | Posted on Sunday, August 24, 2014 - 6:40 pm: |
|
Thanks 237. Every time I read up on different radio antenna's from the old day's to present time I always wonder how the older antenna's do against the newer antenna's. Of course many people may have already tried to compare these antenna's and I always ask here first. Usually it can save a person time and money by asking other's about what they have done and know. If a person would want to learn , this is the place to come to. Once again thank you for your quick response. If any other people have any advice please let me and other's know. |
Tech833
Moderator
Username: Tech833
Post Number: 2296
Registered: 8-2002
| | Posted on Sunday, August 24, 2014 - 7:05 pm: |
|
An Imax 2000 will outperform a Slim Jim.
Your radio 'Mythbuster' since 1998
|
Charliebrown
Intermediate Member
Username: Charliebrown
Post Number: 357
Registered: 10-2002
| | Posted on Monday, August 25, 2014 - 8:09 am: |
|
Good morning 833, thank you also for your quick response and your advice. As I had said before I like to learn about different antenna's and I like to see how the performance of the older antenna's do against the new antenna's. My dad use to own a CLR2 antenna and a Star Duster antenna. I do not know who made the CLR2 but he did well with both antenna's. What do you think about these two antenna's from back around 1970 ? Of course I do not think they can come close to the I max 2000 but did you ever have either of these two antenna's? |
Dale
Senior Member
Username: Dale
Post Number: 2109
Registered: 12-2002
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 26, 2014 - 7:09 pm: |
|
cb , ive always been interested in the starduster
got 2 locals here that use them. both do very well
one reported with same tip height the little
starduster kept up with the imax. one guy lives
in a hole much like me and he can tx/rx to everyone
i can .just signals are slightly lower.on a couple
contacts he does better than me even great little antenna
the clr2 i THINK is made by hygain i might be wrong though
dale/a.k.a.hotrod
cef426
cvc#64
454 [dx numbers]
38lsb
|
Charliebrown
Intermediate Member
Username: Charliebrown
Post Number: 358
Registered: 10-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 27, 2014 - 12:33 pm: |
|
Thank you Dale for your information. I think that if we would give the information of what antenna's we have used and the type of coax and antenna height that we may help other's to radio better. After all what will work for you in your location may not work for other's but it could help another person with your same type location. The same goes for me as well. I live in a very mountainous location and perhaps my information may help other's. Any way I think it is very interesting to compare the old antenna's with the new antenna's. For me my I max 2000 is a lot better than the A-99. |
Tech833
Moderator
Username: Tech833
Post Number: 2297
Registered: 8-2002
| | Posted on Sunday, August 31, 2014 - 4:25 pm: |
|
The CLR-2 was a 5/8 wave with a printed circuit board type matching coil at the base. The Starduster (sold through Sears) was a 1/4 wave "droopy drawers" ground plane.
The CLR-2 has more gain than the Starduster. However, the Starduster will handle more power (for the hams) and is more broad-banded than the CLR-2.
Your radio 'Mythbuster' since 1998
|
Charliebrown
Intermediate Member
Username: Charliebrown
Post Number: 359
Registered: 10-2002
| | Posted on Sunday, August 31, 2014 - 9:09 pm: |
|
Thank you 833. It has been over 40 year's since my Dad had one and I have been wondering about these antenna's. I remember though these antenna's had worked very well for him. It is always good to here from you 833 and every person I have spoke with here on this forum. I really like to read the information given on this hobby. |
