| Author |
Message |
    
Airplane1
Junior Member
Username: Airplane1
Post Number: 11
Registered: 5-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 01, 2004 - 9:25 am: | 
|
Hi, Does anyone know the difference between the antron A99 and the so called new and better Imax A99 on the copper antenna website? the Imax is a little more in cost, Is it built better?
Thanks, airplane |
Tech808
Moderator
Username: Tech808
Post Number: 2547
Registered: 8-2002
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 01, 2004 - 10:41 am: |
|
Airplane1,
From what I read from the below link's, the difference's I see are:
A-99 = 18'
I-Max99 = 17'9"
I-MAX99 has 1/2db Relative Gain over A-99
Both are made by Solorcon so click on the link's below for the comparison's of both antennas.
I have also included the link for the IMAX 2000.
The shipping will be the same on all of them, but I would personally recommend / suggest the IMAX 2000.
The difference in the Extra Performance of the IMAX 2000 over the 99's is well worth the extra money.
http://www.copperelectronics.com/cgi-bin/checkitout/checkitout.cgi?catalogSTORE:CKIE:prodA65-00009+
http://www.copperelectronics.com/cgi-bin/checkitout/checkitout.cgi?catalogSTORE:CKIE:prodA65-00002+
http://www.copperelectronics.com/cgi-bin/checkitout/checkitout.cgi?catalogSTORE:CKIE:prodA65-00001+
Hope this help's.
Lon
Tech808 |
Airplane1
Junior Member
Username: Airplane1
Post Number: 12
Registered: 5-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 01, 2004 - 11:33 am: |
|
Thanks Lon tech 808,
Guess I was hopeing they fixed the spater problem fixed in the newer one!
I did`nt want to go quite that tall as the Imax 2000.
Thanks, Roger
|
Tech548
Moderator
Username: Tech548
Post Number: 91
Registered: 5-2004
| | Posted on Friday, June 04, 2004 - 1:28 am: |
|
Airplane1
Why don't you want to go that tall? The I-Max 2K is a better constructed and better performer than either the A-99 or Max-99 with far less bleeding (interference) problems.
With the base of the 5/8 wave I-Max 2K mounted at least 30-32 feet above ground level, it will outperform any 1/4 and 1/2 wave on the market mounted at the same heigth. Not only that, the 6 feet of extra length is also putting more of a RF signal on the air.
However, if high performance isn't your priority then either the A-99 or the Max-99 will work just fine as Lon suggested.
Copper carries these above mentioned antennas and many other brands and designs.
Jeff. |
Airplane1
Junior Member
Username: Airplane1
Post Number: 16
Registered: 5-2004
| | Posted on Friday, June 04, 2004 - 10:53 am: |
|
Hi and thanks Jeff,
Maybe The hight is not that much of a diff.
Would the Imax 2k out perform the maco v 5/8 at that same hight?
I am going to try to build a tilting 35 foot free standing tower from plans I got on ebay.
airplan1 |
Tech833
Moderator
Username: Tech833
Post Number: 722
Registered: 8-2002
| | Posted on Saturday, June 05, 2004 - 9:07 pm: |
|
The Imax 2000 will not outperform the Maco V-5/8 at the same height. However, the Imax 2000 is more broadbanded and MUCH easier to assemble.
If assembling and tuning an aluminum antenna do not intimidate you, go with the Maco. |
Airplane1
Junior Member
Username: Airplane1
Post Number: 18
Registered: 5-2004
| | Posted on Monday, June 07, 2004 - 12:50 pm: |
|
Hi Tech833,
You say if tuneing an aluminum antenna does not intimidate me I should go with it.
I have no experience with any antennas. Is it hard? I not afraid of learning so I think i`ll try it. If I have problems I can just ask questions on the post.
Do you think the 30-35 Foot tower will be sufficiant for DX ing?
Thanks everyone for all the help,
airplane1 |
Dindin
Intermediate Member
Username: Dindin
Post Number: 157
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Monday, June 07, 2004 - 5:40 pm: |
|
Airplane1,I use a Maco v5/8 on a 45' tower and dx is not a problem when conditions exist. |
Airplane1
Junior Member
Username: Airplane1
Post Number: 19
Registered: 5-2004
| | Posted on Monday, June 07, 2004 - 7:58 pm: |
|
Dindin,
Was it hard to tune? how do you do it? are you happy with the Maco V 5/8?
Thanks everyone for lots of info,
airplane1
|
Marconi
Intermediate Member
Username: Marconi
Post Number: 307
Registered: 11-2001
| | Posted on Monday, June 07, 2004 - 8:50 pm: |
|
Hey Airplane1, if you are up to the challenge and want to learn, then go for the V-5/8. You will get plenty of good advise here. If you just want to get on the air, then go for either A99 or the Imax. They're like plug-n-play. They will all get the job done. |
Dindin
Intermediate Member
Username: Dindin
Post Number: 159
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Monday, June 07, 2004 - 9:59 pm: |
|
Airplane1,I'm very pleased with the Maco.out of all verticals in production now the V5/8 would be my only choice.just checked swr and it is 1.1:1 on ch 1 and 1.4:1 on ch40.been up a year or so and not touched since.it is relitivly easy to tune if you follow the steps in the instructions.one other thing you can do to make it last longer is go to your local electrical supplier and get a tube of Noalox or Penatrox to use on the aluminum connections.it will minimize corrosion in the alum.slip connections. |
Tech833
Moderator
Username: Tech833
Post Number: 732
Registered: 8-2002
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 08, 2004 - 5:15 pm: |
|
Be sure to sand the aluminum where pieces join for good conductivity. And use the Penetrox suggestion above for sure.
I experimented once with filling an aluminum antenna with expando-foam. It really stiffened it up a lot! Works well in windy locations but it is not for the faint of heart to do correctly. I ruined a lot of tubing before I figured out how to do it properly. |
Tech548
Moderator
Username: Tech548
Post Number: 106
Registered: 5-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 09, 2004 - 3:47 am: |
|
Lol.
Paul, you never cease to amaze me.
Which number "Wonder Of The World" are you??
Jeff. |
Tech833
Moderator
Username: Tech833
Post Number: 735
Registered: 8-2002
| | Posted on Monday, June 14, 2004 - 1:19 pm: |
|
I am a wonder to myself sometimes.
I used the foam filling to make an antenna twinkie. Actually, it was to get a lowband antenna to survive the nearly 200 MPH winds on a tall mountain that was unreachable most of the year. Back when we used to use 72 MHz. for paging links. I did it to a Top One a while back for fun. Really stiffened it up a lot. Now I cannot get it apart either. |
