| Author |
Message |
    
mikefromms
| | Posted on Friday, August 01, 2003 - 5:46 pm: | 
|
Any of you run the Skyhawh beam? How does it compare to PDL II's?
mikefromms |
Tech808
| | Posted on Friday, August 01, 2003 - 8:26 pm: |
|
mikefromms,
I had a set of the Bencher/Butternut Skyhawk beams and for a 5 band beam, I was not impressed with them.
The problem here was Large Crows and birds landing on the elements and breaking them off and the Wind & Ice Storms bent several of the elements.
My R-5 and R-7 performed much better for me.
Sorry, I can't compare the Skyhawk to the PDL II's as the PDL II was not a 5 Band Ham Antenna.
Lon
Tech808
|
Bullet
| | Posted on Saturday, August 02, 2003 - 3:04 am: |
|
i think he might mean the SE hawk beam?
if so they would (should) be very close in performance. i think they are both around the 5 foot something niehborhood so theyll be close on gain. i just never liked that orbital gamma match.
im a cut to freq,balun/direct feed kinda guy.... |
Tech808
| | Posted on Saturday, August 02, 2003 - 8:22 am: |
|
mikefromms,
If you meant the SE SuperHawk 2 Element Beam, then there have been several post's from Forum members who own them, on Performance & Quality.
As for compairing them to the PDL II's that might be hard to do as maybe only 1 in 2000 antenna owners have owned both.
Tech833 and Myself and many others have posted on the SE Antennas here on the Forum, From Quality, Performance, and Assembly.
Try the Search Area: Type, Click, Read, Enjoy.
Lon
Tech808 |
mikefromms
| | Posted on Saturday, August 02, 2003 - 7:39 pm: |
|
Thanks Lon,
I'm asking serious questions. I guess I like to ask a lot before dropping the dough. BTW, other than bandwidth, the Top One I own is a real performer of a groundplane. I'm truly impressed.
mikefromms |
RCI 2990
| | Posted on Sunday, August 03, 2003 - 2:23 pm: |
|
Do any of you guys know the badwidth of the Lightning 4 in comparison to the moonraker 4? Someday i want to replace my aging 'rakers with another beam close to what the moonrakers are but id like to stay with the 4 elements like the lightning 4.. Will the lightin 4 tune above and below the reg 40 and keep a good swr? |
Bullet
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 05, 2003 - 1:25 am: |
|
yes its suppost to be good for 2mc band width. |
Tech833
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 05, 2003 - 9:14 pm: |
|
The Signal Engineering 2 element quad works about the same as the PDL 2. It may have slightly better bandwidth.
The Signal Engineering 4 element quad has much better bandwidth than the Moonraker 4. The Rakers were known for being a little narrow anyway compared to the GP antennas. The quads are load stable over a wide frequency range removed from design center. |
Sixkiller505
| | Posted on Monday, August 11, 2003 - 9:11 pm: |
|
mike i wished i could have caught you before you brought the thunder8.the skyhawk from signal engineering is a fantastic product!!i know you hear a lot of sliderule comments on this db won't do this and that antenna won't do that.and i know it's confusing.they never agree on anyone thing because a book told them one thing or another.and i know that antenna theory is"god on this site"(so is a building on paper,but for some reason after it's built things change.)that's why we must not forget that theory does't compare with hands on.I-OWN-A-SKYHAWK!!READ MY LIPS!!!i speak from a owners point of veiw.it has better side and back rejection than the pdl2 that i had.and better forward gain (my numbers went from 7 to 9+ to the station who recieved my pdl2's.) on this site a while back some one mentioned "big buba"and how he destroyed there hearing.on 6 and 11.he lives about 3 mins from me.now when i turn my back to him,i can finally hear other stations and talk to them.(that was not the case before!!)and when i drop the klv 1000 on it they think i'am a big boy from ch 6!!it's the best advice tech 808 gave me and i think him a 1000 times!!!"THEY-DO-WHAT-THEY-SAY!!! be it magic or workmanship,I-DON'T-CARE!! try it you'll like it!!nough said!!SKEPTICS IT'S YOUR LOST!! SIXKILLER505 |
bruce
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 12, 2003 - 8:43 am: |
|
Ok you got me who makes this antenna " skyhawk " i cant find it ..... |
Tech808
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 12, 2003 - 8:58 am: |
|
bruce,
Read my post above on the Sky Hawk, Aug 1st.
The SKY HAWK was a 5 Band antenna made by Bencher/Butternut.
I think he was talking about the "SuperHawk" made by Signal Engineering, it is a 2 Element Quad Beam.
Lon
Tech808 |
bruce
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 12, 2003 - 9:35 am: |
|
thats what had me confusezzzz!
Ok so its a 2 elm quad good for 6 dbd gain should be a nice sharp antenna....but sounds like his meter is a tad loose 2 s units is 12 db! I take it your not a skyhawk fan ......I tried a miniquad GASP! it was as good as a cantenna ... sorry several db below my 10 meter dypole! |
Taz
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 12, 2003 - 5:46 pm: |
|
Yeah, my raker is a little narrow banded. But Its ok with me since it has very acceptible swr where I want it to be. |
Sixkiller505
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 12, 2003 - 7:30 pm: |
|
SORRY MY BAD!! i meant superhawk!!and yes it has great back and side rejection, the best i've seen on a 2 element quad (9s with the klv 1000) sixkiller505 |
Alsworld
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 12, 2003 - 9:39 pm: |
|
Hey Sixkiller505,
would you mind posting the price you paid? That antenna intrigues me.
I need a "small" beam, and a quad sounds interesting.
Alsworld |
Znut
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 13, 2003 - 5:44 pm: |
|
I have a homemade 2 element quad. Yep, I sure do. Wouldn't trade it for ten PDL II's. Nope, sure wouldn't. |
Sixkiller505
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 13, 2003 - 10:00 pm: |
|
SURE THING ALSWORLD?? 174.95 plus shipping well spent!! sixkiller505 |
Alsworld
| | Posted on Thursday, August 14, 2003 - 12:54 am: |
|
Thank you Sixkiller. No doubt on the quality of the SE antennas.
I need a "small" beam and a two element sounds perfect.
Thanks brother!
Alsworld |
Bullet
| | Posted on Thursday, August 14, 2003 - 2:35 am: |
|
there is know dought its a good beam!
but if you have access to a old pdlII beam, or enuff junk parts you can make a 2 element that will do every thing that superhawk will with no problem. and at a fraction of the cost and do so in one day.
with spare parts from a friend i made one in a afternoon for him and the cost of 12ga wire,1/4 elec wave of 75 ohm coax,a few snap ferrite cores for the coax, and a conector. i guess i might have had a bit over 20 bucks in it besides alittle time.
dive in and give it a try and build one youll do fine thiers plenty of folks to help ya if need be. |
Alsworld
| | Posted on Thursday, August 14, 2003 - 10:44 am: |
|
Yes I've been thinking about doing just that. Need to find some plans for a two elemment quad. I'm goind to have to do some research. What did you use for spreaders Bullet?
Alsworld |
Bullet
| | Posted on Friday, August 15, 2003 - 6:01 am: |
|
ive used PDLII and moonraker beams to make alot of these quads. there easy to change over and give you a nice frame to work with.
ive used 3/8ths fiberglass rods for the spreaders. its lighter than 1/2 inch rod but youll need to use a short 6 inch section of the aluminum section that normally goes in thier to make it fit well.
i can save you alot of reading, tell me what you want it to do. and i can email you some figures.
blackhawk454@hotmail.com |
Sixkiller505
| | Posted on Friday, August 15, 2003 - 8:43 pm: |
|
oh! buy the way!! the superhawk already done that for you.spreaders fiberglass 13'7" elements enamel protected copper wire,fasterners plated for corrosion resistance,and it weight is 11lbs.so if you want a complete package it's there already. sixkiller505 |
Alsworld
| | Posted on Friday, August 15, 2003 - 8:51 pm: |
|
Thanks Bullet, I will e-mail you sometime this weekend. I do have a CD ROM that came with my ARRL Antenna book I have not played with yet so it may help along with your assistance. Mine will have to be from scratch (no older beams to base it on) but I have ideas.
I'm still trying to break my new computer right now. I guess that should be "break IN", but if you know me and computers....
What a time to set up a new computer running Windows XP Professional with some idiot named Blaster.exe out there trying to spoil my fun!
Alsworld |
RCI 2990
| | Posted on Saturday, August 16, 2003 - 11:28 pm: |
|
Anyone know the price on the lightning 4? Someday maybe when i get the extra dough i might get one to plya around with and see if it is better than a moonraker 4!
|
Tech808
| | Posted on Saturday, August 16, 2003 - 11:45 pm: |
|
RCI 2990,
I think mine was around $280.00 plus shipping last year.
Lon
Tech808 |
Bullet
| | Posted on Monday, August 18, 2003 - 3:29 am: |
|
thats much better than skykings prices for a 4 element quad.not to mention that signal beam will talk circles around the skyking.
thiers was around 400 bucks for a 4 element quad.
sixkiller505, ya im very familure with signals beams. thier a nice product,but thiers things you can do to make them BETTER.
alot of guys use zinc coated hardware and other types but i perfurr stainless steal through out.
ive made many a quad antenna and have alot of small tips and tricks for these types of antennas that add up in the the long run and will make them perform as well at old age as they will new. as well as making disasembly/rebuilding much easier.
73's |
bruce
| | Posted on Monday, August 18, 2003 - 10:37 pm: |
|
AMENT on stainless steel i had to toss 2 hygain 6 meter 4 elm beams because the hardware was so bad it was not possable to get apart. im happy to see cushcraft has seen the light there products are much better than 30 years ago SS is common on their antennas now! |
Bullet
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 19, 2003 - 3:12 am: |
|
ya know i dont understand why they all dont use ss now a days.
when i go to buy bolts ,nuts ect their isnt that much of a price differance to make buying anything but ss a option. whats a few bucks when it comes to something that important. |
Sixkiller505
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 20, 2003 - 8:44 pm: |
|
BULLET,AND BRUCE, YOU GUY'S ARE NOT FAIR!!you are going to make me drop that tower and use stainless steel.i'am a stone's throw from the chesapeake bay,and those salt blowbacks are murder. sixkiller505 |
Bullet
| | Posted on Thursday, August 21, 2003 - 12:40 am: |
|
sixkiller505,
sorry man you can blame us now if ya want to.
but 10 years from now w/salt water near by youll be glad ya did!
heck here in indiana in a couple of years bolts rust up pretty good i bet its murder where your at. |
bruce
| | Posted on Thursday, August 21, 2003 - 4:35 am: |
|
AMENT and youll not need to worry because 10 years from now non stainless will be rusted beyond use .... like 2 good hygains i had. |
Scrapiron63
| | Posted on Thursday, August 21, 2003 - 1:11 pm: |
|
Anyone remember the Hornet antennas out of oklahoma, they build ham beams and CB beams also for a while. They were build with stainless steel, boom, elements, gamma, and all hardward was stainless. Of course they were higher priced than others, and didn't stay in the CB business very long. I found a set of stacked six elements, stacking kit and all, about 10 or 12 years ago, they were disassembled at the time, stored in a barn. I never did stack them, did run one 6 element for awhile, then used the parts to make 3 and 4 element beams, still have some of the parts. I gave the stacking kit, which was double boomed stainless also, to a friend and he used it to stack PDL-4's. Yep I said 4's. I know 2 or 3 guys that have used the PDL-2 orbital gamma match, moonraker parts, and built 4 quad PDL-4's, they really work well. And that guy that stacked them really had a very directional high gain antenna. He had'em up for 2 or 3 years on a hinged 60 ft tower, had no problems with weather or anything, untill he was getting ready to move, in letting them down, his cable broke, now he has lots of parts, and did salvaged enough to build one pdl-4. |
Bullet
| | Posted on Thursday, August 21, 2003 - 9:12 pm: |
|
a local fella here was thinking about doing that to his pdl2's i thought it was a neat idea.
i kinda hope he does it id like to see it.
if your reading this house cat go ahead and try it. |
Mikefromms
Intermediate Member
Username: Mikefromms
Post Number: 321
Registered: 6-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 15, 2004 - 1:17 pm: |
|
Let it rust out. This will give you an excuse to buy something better later on.
mikefromms |
Twa77
Intermediate Member
Username: Twa77
Post Number: 123
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 15, 2004 - 3:38 pm: |
|
i,ve always thought that a pdl 3 on a 10 foot boom would rock for a small beam. |
Gonzo
Intermediate Member
Username: Gonzo
Post Number: 137
Registered: 9-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 15, 2004 - 9:48 pm: |
|
I have both beams, The SE Superhawk and the PDLII quad. They are about the same in performance. So far the SE superhawk has held up, I was not thrilled with the construction of the antenna, nor with the quality of the tiny chinese screws holding it together. But it works well. |
Mikefromms
Intermediate Member
Username: Mikefromms
Post Number: 326
Registered: 6-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, December 16, 2004 - 6:49 am: |
|
Gonzo, do you believe the old PDLII was built more solid than the new SuperHawk? How difficult was it to put the SuperHawk together?
mikefromms |
Gonzo
Intermediate Member
Username: Gonzo
Post Number: 138
Registered: 9-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, December 16, 2004 - 9:58 am: |
|
"do you believe the old PDLII was built more solid than the new SuperHawk" YES
How difficult was it to put the SuperHawk together? Not difficult, just be prepared to use some electrical tape, and replace some of the screws if you can. Hopefully you will have extra parts, instead of missing parts in your antenna package. |
Tripple5inri
New member
Username: Tripple5inri
Post Number: 3
Registered: 10-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, December 22, 2004 - 4:23 pm: |
|
i have a old pdl-II and whoops, i love it and dont think i would replace it with any other antenna. just my .02 |
Airplane1
Intermediate Member
Username: Airplane1
Post Number: 247
Registered: 5-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, December 23, 2004 - 8:12 pm: |
|
Does anyone know the spects on the PDL-2?
Thanks |
Bruce
Senior Member
Username: Bruce
Post Number: 1935
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Friday, December 24, 2004 - 5:37 pm: |
|
A 2 elm quad will give about 5DBD gain ( 7.5 dbi )
( no matter who makes it ) |
Dalowe
New member
Username: Dalowe
Post Number: 7
Registered: 3-2007
| | Posted on Saturday, April 21, 2007 - 11:55 pm: |
|
The PDL 2 has that co-inductive thing going on. I've read that the PDL 2 has a little more gain than a vanilla 2 element quad because of it. |
Tech833
Moderator
Username: Tech833
Post Number: 1669
Registered: 8-2002
| | Posted on Sunday, April 22, 2007 - 2:02 am: |
|
Where did you read that? It is untrue. The 'orbital gamma match' is actually more lossy than a more direct feed method on a quad. |
Dalowe
New member
Username: Dalowe
Post Number: 8
Registered: 3-2007
| | Posted on Monday, April 23, 2007 - 8:44 pm: |
|
Quote:
"Back in the days when CB was at its height, with CBers in the millions, the antenna companies strived to build the best. Two interesting designs emerged. Avanti Antennas produced a little quad called the PDL-II. This quad , fed by 2 coax lines, was able to work both vertical and horizontal. Its "co-inductive" secret was that it used a folded dipole to feed the quad. This gave the antenna more gain than a simple quad. I modelled the program to find out how it worked. The loops of folded antenna have been replaced by V shaped elements without any changes and easier matching. This antenna is worth experimenting with especially with its reduced size. Co-inductive and PDL-II are trademarks and this antenna is most certainly covered by patents. You are allowed to build a not for monetary gain, experimental version for yourself."
Moderator Note!
This post was edited as the original link contained more than 50 other additional links.
PLEASE read the Topic in the OPEN FORUM Titled:
Posting Links in Copper Forum Posts! |
Dalowe
New member
Username: Dalowe
Post Number: 9
Registered: 3-2007
| | Posted on Tuesday, April 24, 2007 - 3:21 pm: |
|
Al Legary VE3SQB, said that the co-inductive design gave the PDL2 more gain than a direct fed two element quad. Do a search on google for him and you'll find his website.
|
Tech833
Moderator
Username: Tech833
Post Number: 1671
Registered: 8-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, April 25, 2007 - 12:21 pm: |
|
Like I said, it is untrue. The orbital gamma reduces gain out the front of the antenna because it wastes an amount of current through the sides, which reduces the front-to-side ratio, which reduces the forward gain. Perhaps Al Legary is also responsible for determining the gain of the A99? '9.9 dB gain'.
If the orbital gamma were balanced, the loss would be reduced. However, there is nothing balanced about a big circle. The reason Avanti used the orbital look was to reduce the physical length of the matching section so it would fit between the support mast and the driven element without folding it. That is all. |
Bigmac
New member
Username: Bigmac
Post Number: 1
Registered: 9-2007
| | Posted on Friday, December 14, 2007 - 4:58 pm: |
|
I Own The Bencher Skyhawk Beam..Its Been Up Since 1998..I've Made Over 40,000 Contacts,WORLDWIDE!! This Beam Weighs 75 Lbs..ALL Stainless Construction, Even The Pop Rivets!! NO Traps Or Coils..Its Designed For 10-15-20 Meters..BUT..With A Tuner..It Will load ANY Band!!! Ive Worked It From 2M-160M!! NO Problems AND That Includes The 11Meter CB Band!! When I Bought Mine It Was OVER $700..Now OVER $1100!! Lets KNOW What We Are Talking About & Compare Apples To Apples!! |
