| Author |
Message |
    
Quickdraw
New member
Username: Quickdraw
Post Number: 8
Registered: 12-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 04, 2005 - 6:39 pm: | 
|
well i bought one... have a s.e. six element quad with a i max2000 on top and after floridas last wind storm left me with a broken driven element, broken yaesu g450xl rotor and a snapped in half imax...... took it all down and put up the I-10K ground plane... my buddy down the street runs a big galaxy and a i maxx2k and thinks like a lot of you out there.. trust me, they are nothing alike, in signal strenght or anything else.. last night i made contact on channel 21 am to a station in phili, pa and iam in baltimore, and there was no skip conditions.... pure ground wave. my friend couldnt even hear who i was talking to. i had 3 s units and no air noise. after that contact another in delaware, again he had nothing but static noise,me, i had 2 s units, no noise. another local contact 40 miles had 5 s units on me with " sounds like 20db of audio" and the i max..... sorry ole buddy cant quite pull you out!!!!!!!! well now my friend conceded and is ordering a I -10K as we speak.. i dont know how this antenna does what it does but i have had em all, sigma 4, i maxx2000, astroplanes and just about every other one made and i tell u this, i will never have to buy another omni, and if a act of god takes her from me, i order two more..... income tax return = new 5 element yagi, stay tuned and have fun...CEF 464 Quickdraw..... |
Bruce
Senior Member
Username: Bruce
Post Number: 1988
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 05, 2005 - 5:04 am: |
|
Quickdraw
A 5/8 wave is a 5/8 wave no matter how much you pay for it ....... |
Bruce
Senior Member
Username: Bruce
Post Number: 1989
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 05, 2005 - 8:46 am: |
|
Looking at this antenna no doubt its nicely made but past that the matching is very close to the old mosley match on their DI antennas and just a well decoupled 5/8 wave.
To obtain 2 s units change you would have to have about 12 db of gain NOT going to happen with any 5/8 wave antenna NO MATTER WHAT PRICE.
Hummmmm ..."sounds like 20db of audio" Now that comment got me what the heck is 20 db of audio? and how did he measure it? ..... does he even know what a DB is???
I make a point of contesting antenna gain posts that i have no reason to beleve are correct since everyone here works hard for their money and should not be spending it based on mis-information or pseudo - science.
Antennas get gain by a givin compression / change in radiation and nothing else..... and this is not going to change much between 2 antennas of the same type ( 5/8 wave ) provided the antenna is well designed NO MATTER WHAT THE COST. |
Tech808
Moderator
Username: Tech808
Post Number: 4485
Registered: 8-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 05, 2005 - 6:43 pm: |
|
Hmmmmmmmm,
What happened to the Maco V 5/8 Antenna. 
It performs as well as the I-10K in actual use and on the test range and is far less than 1/2 the price of the I-10K.
Just wondering?
Lon
Tech808
CEF808
N9OSN |
Kid_vicious
Intermediate Member
Username: Kid_vicious
Post Number: 110
Registered: 9-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 05, 2005 - 9:29 pm: |
|
why do people continually waste bandwidth with these questions? HEY PEOPLE!!! this site has been active for at least three years, and ALL of these antenna designs have been discussed, reviewed, and then discussed again ad nauseum. please use the search function on the left side of the screen. in my experience, you will find a lot more info this way and probably will answer some questions you didnt even know you had.
if you had done the search, you might have saved yourself a pretty penny by taking lon's advice and purchasing the maco v-5/8 wave. if you had read the reviews you would know that there is no possible way that the i-10k out performs the maco to any noticable degree. or maybe you were just looking for a bigger tax write off! J/K
matt |
Bruce
Senior Member
Username: Bruce
Post Number: 1996
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 05, 2005 - 11:18 pm: |
|
kid.....
no 5/8 wave vertical even a db products does any better that the maco and im a mosley fan ... yep your correct .... right on ...... |
Sitm
Intermediate Member
Username: Sitm
Post Number: 162
Registered: 1-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, January 06, 2005 - 10:54 am: |
|
Imax 2000, flip the pre-amp switch, more receive.
Imax 2000, flip the other three switches, next to the preamp switch........ they hear you. TaDa. |
Bruce
Senior Member
Username: Bruce
Post Number: 2003
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 06, 2005 - 12:48 pm: |
|
Sitm
Could you explain how throwing 3 swiches will increase antenna gain? Why does the 1st switch act like a preamp .... how does the next 3 add antenna gain ..... neet idea anyway ..... |
Sitm
Intermediate Member
Username: Sitm
Post Number: 164
Registered: 1-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, January 06, 2005 - 4:07 pm: |
|
Well, Bruce, Its called a receiver preamp and a transmit amplifier.
Hope you understand |
Bruce
Senior Member
Username: Bruce
Post Number: 2006
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 06, 2005 - 7:04 pm: |
|
Hummmmmm? |
Gonzo
Intermediate Member
Username: Gonzo
Post Number: 157
Registered: 9-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, January 06, 2005 - 9:40 pm: |
|
I ordered a 10K, and its sitting in my garage waiting to go up. It looks to be built well. It is a copy of my personal favorite the Hygain Penetrator 500, so it should work well.
I will try to test as sson as weather herer improves.
Says who? The Maco 5/8 wave isn't a true 5/8 wave on CB frequencys. I have never tested one, but will sometime in the spring. I doubt this antenna would beat a Penetrator or a 10K in overall performance.
My friend has one and it does get out very well however. |
Gonzo
Intermediate Member
Username: Gonzo
Post Number: 158
Registered: 9-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, January 06, 2005 - 9:41 pm: |
|
Quick Draws comment about the lack of noise is beleiveable. The Hygain Penetrator is silent, with extremely good ears, and good signal. |
Bruce
Senior Member
Username: Bruce
Post Number: 2009
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, January 06, 2005 - 10:50 pm: |
|
Interesting mosley is still around look at what they say about their antennas gain wise.
http://www.mosley-electronics.com/citizen_band.htm |
Tech808
Moderator
Username: Tech808
Post Number: 4489
Registered: 8-2002
| | Posted on Thursday, January 06, 2005 - 10:56 pm: |
|
Gonzo,
I believe it is already posted here on the Copper Forum for the member's to read.
AstroPlane vs Imax 2000
Copper Talk » Product Reviews » Antennas » AstroPlane vs Imax 2000
Tech833
Member
Username: Tech833
Post Number: 50
Registered: 12-2001
Posted on Friday, October 15, 2004 - 6:43 pm:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
When this was written, the Imax was in its infancy. I had not yet tested the I-10K if I recall.
You should know, the Maco V-5/8 seems to have very slightly better performance than the I-10K antenna. The 'trombone tuning' network on the I-10K tends to send some signal straight down and distorts the field pattern slightly as well. The Maco V-5/8 tuning ring is not perfect, but it distorts the field pattern much less than the I-10K trombone tuning does. That translates to more signal on the horizon from the Maco. The Super Penetrator sealed coil matching network is slightly more lossy than the Maco or the I-10K, but it distorts the pattern much less. That loss is negligible, but it does limit the power handling capability to under 1 KW.
My complete review of the I-10K was never published at the request of the antenna maker who was kind enough to send the example for testing. If you plan to run power levels over 5 KW, or expose the antenna to 100 MPH+ winds, then the I-10K is a great choice. If you don't, the Maco V-5/8 will work better and is far less expensive.
Still, to this day, I would push the Imax 2000 for its ease of installation, stealthyness, and good performance. If stealth and ease of installation are of no concern to you, the Maco V-5/8 is almost impossible to beat. If you can't put up anything higher than 20-30 feet overall above ground, then the Top One is impossible to beat.
Sometime's it does help to read the Article's here in the Copper Forum.
We have some Very Good Helpful Information here for the Copper Forum Member's.
But, it is only Helpful if they take the time to read them.
I hope this help's to answer your question posted above of Says who?.
Lon
Tech808
CEF808
N9OSN
|
Bob_p
Advanced Member
Username: Bob_p
Post Number: 638
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Friday, January 07, 2005 - 1:00 am: |
|
I just want to mention that once my I-Max was grounded properly, it's very quite on 10, 11, and 12 meters, even on my RCI 2970DX. |
Bruce
Senior Member
Username: Bruce
Post Number: 2014
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 07, 2005 - 7:25 am: |
|
look at the mosley Devant antennas and REMEMBER my DI-6 bought in 1970 looks THE SAME.
There is nothing new in the matching using a hairpin coil" trombone tuning " if you wish its been around for at least 4 decades. |
Chad
Member
Username: Chad
Post Number: 70
Registered: 11-2004
| | Posted on Friday, January 07, 2005 - 8:53 am: |
|
As with Bob I have no noise problems with my Imax. It's REALLY dry here at times also. If I pick up noise I'm doing just that, picking it up. It's impossible for an antenna to discern from noise and the signal you WANT to hear, good antenna's pick up everything.
|
Bruce
Senior Member
Username: Bruce
Post Number: 2016
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 07, 2005 - 10:59 am: |
|
Gonzo ???
???? What do you expect to find BETTER with the I-10K ?????? |
Unit199
Member
Username: Unit199
Post Number: 74
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 07, 2005 - 6:20 pm: |
|
It seems to me this is a repeat of athread we just had not to long ago. You can show them in black and white and they still won't believe it. Nuff said.
Semper Fi!!!
Harve
Unit199
CEF210
KB0YVK |
Tech833
Moderator
Username: Tech833
Post Number: 934
Registered: 8-2002
| | Posted on Friday, January 07, 2005 - 6:10 pm: |
|
Gonzo,
I have had both of those antennas on the test range, and I can tell you without a doubt, the V-5/8 and the I-10K work the same. The gain is the same. The patterns are nearly identical except the V-5/8 has a little less downward radiation (probably an effect of the 'trombone tuning' vs. the ring on the Maco.)
Bruce,
If someone just spent that much money for an antenna, they feel the need to justify their purchase. I have NEVER seen a post on here that said "yea, I bought an I-10K and it works well". I only see "I bought an I-10K and it works better than my 10 element beam with 5 millions watts, I hear everybody in the U.S. and Canada at the same time, etc. etc'. Those are the claims of someone who has just spent a great deal of money and now does not want to feel or appear stupid.
Truthfully, I like the I-10K. I had it for several weeks and I played with it a lot on the test range. I tried EVERYTHING to give that antenna the benefit of the doubt to try and make it outperform everything else I had ever seen. The truth is, it works just like any other 5/8 wave. I really, really tried to MAKE it work like the picture that the claims paint, but I could not. In defense of the I-10K, it IS the strongest CB ground plane antenna I had ever seen. Performance wise?- Just average. |
Gonzo
Intermediate Member
Username: Gonzo
Post Number: 160
Registered: 9-2004
| | Posted on Friday, January 07, 2005 - 6:54 pm: |
|
Anyway the moral of the story may be... It doesn't hurt to have a test done by an independent tester as opposed to by the people who are trying to sell you a specific brand of antenna.
-------------------------
So I'll test it in the future, and hopefully Copper will allow whatever I think to be posted.
Unedited and Unbiased.
I am sure the Maco is a good antenna, based on users feedback. |
Patzerozero
Intermediate Member
Username: Patzerozero
Post Number: 312
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Friday, January 07, 2005 - 7:25 pm: |
|
gonna have to see how my maco v5/8 15' to feed point(yes it is a lowrider!) makes trip to your neck of the woods, gonzo! & i do have considerably less noise then the A99 i had up once for a couple of months. have not been given any reason to spend $$$ for I10K's alleged (jogunn type) claims, so for $70 the maco rules!
have the 5 pill davemade in hand, debating on doing test w/jumper cables or rewiring w/#6, have to wait for friend w/ts dx500 to get back from ski trip, so will probably have time to rewire before testing! |
Bruce
Senior Member
Username: Bruce
Post Number: 2019
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 07, 2005 - 8:14 pm: |
|
833
My MOTTO
A 5/8 wave is a 5/8 wave no matter what it costs ....... |
Bob_p
Advanced Member
Username: Bob_p
Post Number: 639
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Friday, January 07, 2005 - 8:48 pm: |
|
Gonzo I really don’t know what your thinking by saying Tech833 is trying to sell anything for Copper Electronics.
He’s a Broad Cast Engineer, who is good enough to share his knowledge with the forum with out pay (as if he needed it), of any sort.
I’ve asked his advice on items that aren’t sold here at Copper Electronics many times, and he’s always been 100% reliable. Giving away years and years of professional advise for the asking.
If you feel the need, go ahead and see if you can make something better out of a 5/8-wave 11-meter antenna. It might be a fun experiment.
Just out of curiosity, why do you believe there would be a perceptible difference in gain in any antenna of the same length? Put it this way, why would there be any difference in any antenna that has a single resonating element measured at 5/8ths of a wave at 11 meters?
|
Co_786
Junior Member
Username: Co_786
Post Number: 13
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Friday, January 07, 2005 - 9:50 pm: |
|
Did anyone stop to think abuot the i-max station?
antenna height,condition of coax,
condition of pl259 connectors,
RX/TX sensitivity and selectivity of the radio
Tx power out,
station location
Any or all of these issues could have produced
the results that quickdraw came up with.
|
Bruce
Senior Member
Username: Bruce
Post Number: 2024
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 07, 2005 - 11:30 pm: |
|
786
it's the same problem ive seen with many posts the person doing the post is not using valid data. One post the guy used a top-one ver a imax2000he had the bottom of the imax where the top of the top one was ..... AND ...... used s meter readings. 4 S UNITS BETTER !!!! he posted well a cb radio S meter is junk and even though a REAL S UNIT is 6 db so 4 is 24 db of change and the TOP of the imaz 2000 was 20 foot higher than the top one. |
Road_warrior
Intermediate Member
Username: Road_warrior
Post Number: 244
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Friday, January 07, 2005 - 11:46 pm: |
|
I have both antennas./ While my tower has a beam on it now, for awhile it was not being used and i tested 3 different antennas on it at the same height./ Here were my findings in my area of the
country (PA)./ I live in a noisy area./
I-10k and Maco 5/8 were very close in performance.
I would have to give I-10k a very slight edge./
Imax 2000 in my neighborhood was weaker than
both of the above and has alot more static noise./ Even though Imax is my favorite because
of wide-bandwidth and because i have limited room
on my home and it mounts easy./
Considering costs & performance and if i had the
room./ If i would have to choose, it would be
MACO 5/8 wave Antenna would be my choice for my area./ Since all areas are different, guess you just got to find out what works best for you...
JIM/CENTRAL PA/CEF 375
|
Tech833
Member
Username: Tech833
Post Number: 57
Registered: 12-2001
| | Posted on Saturday, January 08, 2005 - 6:20 pm: |
|
Gonzo-
You said" It doesn't hurt to have a test done by an independent tester as opposed to by the people who are trying to sell you a specific brand of antenna.
-------------------------
So I'll test it in the future, and hopefully Copper will allow whatever I think to be posted.
Unedited and Unbiased. "
O.K., NOW I am honestly offended. I am independent. I do NOT work for Copper, or Maco, or Jay in the Mojave. I really AM independent and you have just accused me of bias. In my profession, that is a serious accusation and I am shocked you would say so. Perhaps you would like to retract that?
For your information, Jay asked ME to review his antenna, NOT Copper. I contacted Copper on my own to ask if they would like the exclusive on it (I also write for several other publications). Copper accepted before I ever received the antenna. FYI, Copper was considering carrying the I-10K before my review ever came to be, so the review was to be used as a marketing tool. I reviewed the antenna thoroughly on a professional antenna test range used for commercial radio and TV transmitting antennas, using the same equipment used to generate FCC accepted test results of commercial broadcast antennas. How much more 'fair' could that be?
After I found the I-10K to be comparable in gain and performance to the already available 5/8 wave ground plane antennas, not magnitudes better, it was Jay who elected to not have the entire review published. Copper still wanted to carry the antenna, but a suitable deal did not get worked out between the manufacturer and Copper, so it was not picked up as an 'in stock' item.
I cannot continue to be kind when my integrity is attacked like this. Let me say this now, I do NOT work for Copper. I paid money out of MY pocket to rent the test range and equipment for the tests and I was NOT reimbursed by Copper or Jay. In fact, my text was sent to Jay before it was sent to Copper for proof.
Am I offended? Yes. Am I biased? No. Should you retract your statement? I believe so. |
Gonzo
Intermediate Member
Username: Gonzo
Post Number: 161
Registered: 9-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, January 08, 2005 - 6:07 pm: |
|
Tech883...is not trying to sell anything, yes I know that.
Bobp...The antennas are NOT the same lenghts. 5/8 wave at 11 meters is 22 feet. How tall is the Maco?
Bruce...noise level, gain, receiving ability, construction quality, ease of tuning, power handling...can all be different with any two antennas, even if they are the same wavelenght. |
Tech291
Moderator
Username: Tech291
Post Number: 34
Registered: 11-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, January 08, 2005 - 6:27 pm: |
|
well,I have never used or even seen a I-10k until I did a web search for it last night.I did not see anything there that impressed me,with the exception that he possibly gets 250 bucks for a 5/8 vertical.I'm in the wrong business fellers.Ok,so my maco v58 is not 22 feet tall,so what-it works for me.I believe if i was gonna spend that kind of money on a vertical i would buy about 3 maco v58 and store a couple of them.20 years from now we will be saying about todays antennas what were saying about antennas of the past. |
Bruce
Senior Member
Username: Bruce
Post Number: 2026
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, January 08, 2005 - 7:02 pm: |
|
Gonzo ......
"Bruce...noise level, gain, receiving ability, construction quality, ease of tuning, power handling...can all be different with any two antennas, even if they are the same wavelenght"
1) it is ILLEAGAL to run 10,000 watts so if it handles that means nothing.
2) My MOSLEY DI-6 lasted from aug of 1970 to Sept of 2000 when i removed it from our old house STILL WORKING. Price was $49 in 1970 I have contacted mosley to find what they want today for the current version of this antenna. As for the DI-6 IT WORKED FOR 30 YEARS and lasted through hundereds of storms 3 lighting hits and 2 hurricanes the one in 85 gave us over 100 mph winds. So much for construction.
3) For 2 5/8 waves if installed correctly and cut to frequency i have never found any real diffrence in " RECEIVING ABILTY OR NOISE " outside of center frequency anything goes.
To each his own but i can tell you that the lowley ringo ( 50 mhz ) which 833 is not inpressed with ...... justifily so just took 4 HURRICANES ! and is still standing strate and strong! .... o it was on sale $59. |
Gonzo
Intermediate Member
Username: Gonzo
Post Number: 162
Registered: 9-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, January 08, 2005 - 8:33 pm: |
|
Bruce:
1) Yes I know, as you always keep mentioning
2) Well thats great....see.. construction quality matters alot
3) The fiberglass Imax2000 (a very good antenna) is much more susceptable to noise than a aluminum 5/8 wave. Anyone who has been on CB even for just 1 year, has probably been told that fiberglass antennas are more noisy than aluminum dc grounded antennas. This I have found to be true as well.
Yes to each his own.......And yes I know..you love that Ringo. |
Bob_p
Advanced Member
Username: Bob_p
Post Number: 640
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, January 08, 2005 - 8:28 pm: |
|
Gonzo wih that logic the I-Max 2k at 24 feet and $69.00 should beat the I-10K at $250 with no problem.
I was referring to the antenna being measured to resonate on 11 meters at 5/8ths of a wave.
|
Bruce
Senior Member
Username: Bruce
Post Number: 2030
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, January 08, 2005 - 11:20 pm: |
|
Gonzo .....
most vhf/uhf stationmasters / gain verticals are fiberglass. Most have served there owners well and many for decades.
I have run both them and alumin and had the chance to compair them with little change in receive noise on ( 50, 144, 220 and 440 ) between them. Right now im running a 144mhz (9db) 440 (11db)fiberglass which replaced my alumin ringo ranger.
Also the reason fiberglass is widely used on cb is safety at one time using uninsulated antennas was ILLEAGAL for any antenna sold for cb. Now as for that ringo ..... you would love it you tune the slider for best match tighting down the screw and forget about the antenna for 15-25 years....
|
Patzerozero
Intermediate Member
Username: Patzerozero
Post Number: 320
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, January 08, 2005 - 11:27 pm: |
|
AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!my maco v5/8 5/8wavelength aluminum antenna is 20 feet and 1 and 1/2 inch long at 26.835 mhz. is it a 5/8 wave antenna? beats the %&$# out of me. it hears farther and talks farther with less "static" then my A99 did, in general. my radios are 'fairly' sensitive/selective, again, relatively speaking. if i was gonna spend $250, i could probably get a maco 3 element beam on a tripod with a rotor and guarantee a 100% increase in gain. or, for no cash outlay, i could use my dx1600 on the 2 batteries & large charger and get an additional 10X power increase OVER the beam. i can outhear, with my S9 and v5/8 at 15' to feedpoint my friend , using a galaxy base and A99 at 40' to feedpoint. i'm well below height of trees, he's well above 'em. heck, my mobile can out hear his base, from his driveway, at times. receiver is a big part of the equation, along with my low loss cable vs his all loss coax, etc.
ease of assembly/stealth of imax2k is not going to convince me to switch should v5/8 need replacement,price of I-10K wouldn't even make it an option, and should somebody NEED to hear me a bit better, more watts will do the trick. more expensive, maybe, but a big beam & my property width don't mix well. and if i can't hear you, i probably don't need to talk to you. if there is a vertical non-beam that's better then the v5/8, how much difference could there be? same with the v5/8 vs imax-how much difference is there, to the ear/S meter, anyway. receiver quality/sensitivity is what needs to be improved at this point, if a big beam isn't an option. that, & MORE WATTS. |
Bob_p
Advanced Member
Username: Bob_p
Post Number: 643
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, January 09, 2005 - 12:51 am: |
|
Lets put it this way, as Bruce said a "5/8ths wave is a 5/8ths wave". Any 5/8ths wave antenna is going to perform very near the same in most respects.
You can spend $250.00 on an I-10k if that makes you happy, but don’t expect it to have any appreciable dB gain compared to any other 5/8ths wave antenna.
In the review of the I-10K Tech 833 did say "CBers who install them at home will probably have bought the last base station antenna they will ever buy in their life".
I like the I-Max because it covers 10 through 17 meters without an antenna tuner. And since I’ve grounded everything properly it's very quite.
|
Bruce
Senior Member
Username: Bruce
Post Number: 2033
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, January 09, 2005 - 12:54 am: |
|
This was the safety standard i was talking about.
It MAY have never became law ........ I just dont know.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
August 12, 1981
Release # 81-022
CPSC Seeks Alternatives To A Mandatory Rule For CB Antennas
WASHINGTON, D.C. (August 12) -- The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission has approved a proposed safety standard for base-station omnidirectional citizens band antennas, but gave clear signals that the standard may never be issued if industry can devise an acceptable voluntary alternative.
The proposed safety standard would require manufacturers to insulate base-station omnidirectional CB antennas to help protect consumers if the antennas contact high-voltage power lines. But the Commission simultaneously approved an alternate proposal to publish a description of the standard's provisions to facilitate its voluntary use by industry or other persons.
The Electronic Industries Association had been developing its own voluntary standard for base-station omnidirectional CB antennas, but EIA's members terminated work after CPSC staff completed a report on the proposed mandatory rule. In a meetinq called Monday morning, CPSC's Chairman Nancy Harvey Steorts urged the antenna industry to renew efforts to develop a voluntary standard to obviate the need for mandatory regulation.
At that meeting, industry representatives also agreed to , work closely with CPSC staff to devise a national information and education plan to inform consumers about the potential electrocution hazard. One manufacturing firm indicated it would be willing to contribute substantial funds to be used to educate consumers. CPSC staff will present a detailed plan to the Commission within the next month.
Every year 45 to 50 electrocutions occur that are associated with citizens band base-station omnidirectional antennas. The electrocutions occur when the antennas contact power lines as consumers install or dismantle their antennas.
CPSC staff estimates that the mandatory standard would prevent approximately eight deaths and four severe injuries each year. Currently, about 75,000 base-station omnidirectional CB antennas are sold annually, and approximately five million antennas are in use. Since the proposed standard would cover only new antennas, the Commission expressed encouragement of industry's willingness to warn the millions of consumers who already own antennas of the electrocution hazard.
The proposals will be published shortly in the Federal Register, opening a 60-day public comment period. Comments should be addressed to: U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, Office of the Secretary, Washington, D.C., 20207.
|
Racer X (Unregistered Guest)
Unregistered guest
| | Posted on Sunday, January 09, 2005 - 8:36 am: |
|
The difference in gain between a .5, .625, and .64 wavelength antenna is small enough (only about 1.2 dB - considerably less than one S-unit) that installation can make a big difference in performace.
The height of the antenna is probably the biggest factor in performance. Getting the antenna higher than local obstructions is critical. Nearby hills or structures that are higher than your antenna can drop performance so every foot is going to make a difference and sometimes a REALLY BIG difference.
The only time height isn't a critical factor is if you live on the highest local elevation for 20+ miles around, and have very low local obstructions. If that's the case, then get the antenna up to where it's in the clear and ground it like an anal-retentive electrical engineer would!
Simple rule for Omni antennas - higher is better!
Personally, I'd recommend a 5/8 wave or .64 wave antenna if you had no antenna already, but if you already have a 1/2 wave antenna then just do a good solid installation as high as you can and you're golden.
I chat over 40 miles on ground wave with my A99 that is only about 30' to the feed point. I'm on a hill and at the feed point I can see for miles and miles and miles and miles and miles - oh yeah! |
Tech833
Moderator
Username: Tech833
Post Number: 939
Registered: 8-2002
| | Posted on Sunday, January 09, 2005 - 10:54 am: |
|
Racer X hit a bullseye. |
Road_warrior
Intermediate Member
Username: Road_warrior
Post Number: 245
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, January 09, 2005 - 10:56 am: |
|
BobP,
The Imax 2000 i have is weaker on transmit & recieve compared to Maco 5/8 or I-10k./
JIM/CENTRAL PA/CEF375 |
Bob_p
Advanced Member
Username: Bob_p
Post Number: 645
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, January 09, 2005 - 1:22 pm: |
|
Road_warrior Ok I don't know if that’s true or not. But it is a 5/8ths wave, and as stated above a 5/8ths is a 5/8ths.
I do know the I-Max works without an antenna tuner on 10,11,12,15,and 17 meters, and will work on 20 with a tuner. So that said in my case that’s more than enough to swing my vote for the I-Max.
I've read enough posts where people claim that the Maco will out perform the I-Max, again I'll leave that alone. But by how much is arguable, I would not think it would be a significant factor.
Finally I will defer to what Tech833 said in regards to the I-Max vs. the Maco 5/8ths and a few other 5/8ths wave antennas, "Still, to this day, I would push the Imax 2000 for its ease of installation, stealthyness, and good performance. If stealth and ease of installation are of no concern to you, the Maco V-5/8 is almost impossible to beat."
|
Road_warrior
Intermediate Member
Username: Road_warrior
Post Number: 248
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, January 09, 2005 - 10:06 pm: |
|
BOb P.,
Don't get bent out of shape...LOL.. If you read
my other post, i run an Imax 2000 because of
of the reason you state above./
My post was not meant to upset you or anyone./
Please read my other post. Thanks
JIM/CENTRAL PA/CEF 375
|
Bob_p
Advanced Member
Username: Bob_p
Post Number: 649
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Monday, January 10, 2005 - 12:56 am: |
|
Road_warrior I'm not bent out of shape at all.
I just think that the question of greatly improved performance of one 5/8ths wave antenna over another is over done, and I agree with Bruce and the others who’ve said a 5/8ths wave is a 5/8ths wave. Building materials and quality of construction aside there isn’t going to be much difference between any of them.
73
Bob
|
Airplane1
Intermediate Member
Username: Airplane1
Post Number: 256
Registered: 5-2004
| | Posted on Monday, January 10, 2005 - 8:21 am: |
|
My MaCo V 5/8 talks local distance of 40-50 miles regularly, It`s only 7ft to ground planes mounted on my wash post, I live in low area. Just Love the MaCo V!
No TVI in my house or neighbors and they are close.
I talk DX pretty good also, I just picked up a new PDL-2 but I wont give up my MaCo V, I will just mount it above the PDL-2.
I asked alot of questions on copper befor I bought the MaCo V and was not steered wrong.
after all the info on copper then I made my choice, and it was a great choice so thanks copper forum members.
All posible info on all antennas,radios and what ever on this hobby if copper sells it or not is good for us all.
I buy most of my stuff from copper and will buy alot more from them but I also buy else where too.
Thanks, just my 2cents |
Road_warrior
Intermediate Member
Username: Road_warrior
Post Number: 249
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Monday, January 10, 2005 - 1:05 pm: |
|
Since i have alot of noise problems in my
Area, i pay more attention to how a Antenna
recieves, rather than to how it transmits.
I have tried everything to quiet my Imax 2000,
but, have failed in every attempt./ I mounted
the Imax 2000 at my friends house who lives
in the country, grounded it good, still static
& noise./Mounted Maco 5/8 down there also way more quiet./ I am simply baffled!
JIM/CENTRAL PA/CEF 375 |
Superhot
New member
Username: Superhot
Post Number: 1
Registered: 1-2005
| | Posted on Monday, January 10, 2005 - 5:42 pm: |
|
10K will win the shootout hands down,I have one its quiet and built very strong and out performs anything I have ever owned. Including the Imax and the Maco |
Patzerozero
Intermediate Member
Username: Patzerozero
Post Number: 334
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Monday, January 10, 2005 - 7:58 pm: |
|
1234567890-=qwertyuiop[]\!@#$%^&*()_+asdfghjkl;'/.,mnbvcxz.
there, now, i'd say that just about sums up the whole thing. |
Bob_p
Advanced Member
Username: Bob_p
Post Number: 651
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Monday, January 10, 2005 - 10:30 pm: |
|
Road_warrior I don't know what to say about your I-Max being noisy. I swear that even on my RCI 2970DX, it's dead quite on 10,11,and 12 meters. And on the Kenwood it's the same, but is also dead quite on 15 meters as well. It is sometimes noisy on 17 showing between 1 to 3 S units, and on 20 meters it shows about 3 S units of moise all the time, no matter how I adjust the filters.
I'll leave it to you to figure out why yours is noisy if you are interested in finding out why. But if you like the Maco it's supposed to be a great antenna, and if you like it thats great.
But the point is my I-Max is dead quite on 11 meters, and I have power lines in my front yard that come down to the house. But again the Maco is a fine antenna and I'm sure it will serve you well.
Good luck
Bob
|
Road_warrior
Intermediate Member
Username: Road_warrior
Post Number: 251
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 11, 2005 - 12:07 am: |
|
A 5/8 wave is a 5/8 wave...HUMMMMMM
If this was a perfect world & every Antenna
was built exactly the same & performed exactly
the same, i would say this was true./ But, if
you know the Bible, this isn't so./ Have you ever
bought 2 of the same item & one worked better
than the other???/ A slight difference in an
antenna can mean the difference between hearing
someone or not hearing them./ Every manufacturer
at one time or another has produced some lemons
in there products, Antennas are NO Different!
So, results will vary from person to person./
Plus, god made us all think different so we could
fight about antennas....GEEZ!
|
Bruce
Senior Member
Username: Bruce
Post Number: 2061
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 11, 2005 - 8:12 am: |
|
If JOGUNN made this I-10K and it cost $500 ill bet we would still see this discission only the JOGUNN would have 25DB of gain and 30 db of AUDIO gain! |
Road_warrior
Intermediate Member
Username: Road_warrior
Post Number: 252
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 11, 2005 - 8:51 am: |
|
There's other people in my area that have Imax
2000, some don't even have them grounded &
they are quiet./ Mine is noisy!/ I turn my beam
trying to find which direction the 4 S-units
of static is coming from, doesn't show up on
beam./ I for one am not going to judge all Imax
2000 as junk because i get noise./ Because i
know other owners have had good luck with there
Imax 2000's./ Its just things like this that
give people there own different opinions on different antennas./ |
Forummaster
Moderator
Username: Forummaster
Post Number: 383
Registered: 11-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 11, 2005 - 12:31 pm: |
|
As a note to everyone here that thinks Copper is pushing a certain brand or model. After being in business for 30 years we have seen just about everything. Our experience is not on the use of an item but in the customers satisfaction of said item.
Our job is to determine what products the customers want and then sell it at the best price. This forum helps us to determine which products are gaining in popularity. We listen carefully to what is said on this forum about new products.
If a number of forum members state that they are using something and it works great we will try to get one and have one of the techs test it. If it passes muster then we will contact the manufacturer and negotiate the best deal possible.
It doesn't matter what the item is we can almost always negotiate a price that will allow us to make a reasonable profit and still be competitive. It makes no difference to us if customers are buying V5/8's or I-10K's as far as profit goes. However it does make a difference when it comes to customer satisfaction.
After Tech833 tested the I-10K and told us there was very little difference between the V5/8's and I-10K it was easy to determine which one customers would like best. Remember from our point of view we are interested in which item will work best for the most customers. This means more sales and fewer returns. If the I-10K was a better choice for say 20% of our customers who were interested in a 5/8's wave antenna we would find a way to stock it. But if less than 1% of our customers would choose the I-10K then we would not have enough buying power to negotiate a good price. Maco builds a more sturdy version of the V5/8's the V5000 and we sell probably 1 to 100 of the V5000 to the V5/8's.
If our customers want it we will find a way to get it. Take the Wilson line of antennas as an example. Wilson will not sell to us directly because we will not sell their product at full retail. Yet we still carry their product at very good prices.
Trust me when I say we don't have a dog in this fight. However there are a number of people who are members on this forum that would love to persuade you to one product or another. Small dealers who compete against us cannot buy the products that we carry at a price low enough to be competitive against us. They are left to carry the items we have determined customers don't want. They go around telling everyone that will listen how these products are better. As you have probably already determined from the above conversation installation, conditions, and use can make one item look better than another. These dealers use that confusion to their advantage. Since this forum has such a large membership it is a prime target for these vultures.
We have purposely put together a group of experts here to help you determine which items would be best for you. We use their advice as well. You can bet if we are considering anything new at least one of our techs will be testing it and letting us know whether we should carry it.
In closing it is your hard earned money we are talking about here. Before deciding whether to take someones opinion on a product do a search on that members name and see if they have a good track record for recommending products. Determine their level of expertise. Doing these things will help you to make the best decision possible. |
Sitm
Intermediate Member
Username: Sitm
Post Number: 165
Registered: 1-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 11, 2005 - 2:29 pm: |
|
Well............I have an Imax 2000. Works very well. From coppers. Best price......ordered it and it came in just a few days. Still up there. |
Bruce
Senior Member
Username: Bruce
Post Number: 2067
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 11, 2005 - 2:31 pm: |
|
Thank you Forummaster
Copper DOES please its customers and you are correct in there are limits to what you can sell and at what price and still make money.
As a dealer you DO NOT NEED unhappy people out there who feel they payed too much and got nothing for that money. MOST 5/8 wave antennas sell for $60-100 bucks and one priced at more than TWICE that the buyer would expect unrealistic results.
Since 2000 I have bought from copper a skylab a top one and a a-99 base antenna several moble antennas plus 2050, 2950dx, lincoln, dx-959, 454 handheld and several 257 radios and a number of other radio goodies.
All of them were as i would have expected and at prices the others could not touch.
Keep up the good work! |
Unit199
Member
Username: Unit199
Post Number: 76
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 11, 2005 - 2:58 pm: |
|
There are some people in this world that no matter what it is, antennas,radios,mics they are experts even though they really don't even have a clue as to what they are talking about. All they want to do, is to keep people stirred up and try to get people to argue with them. the sad part of the whole thing is that some people believe what they say and end up spending hard earned money for something and they could have had something cheaper that works just as well. I consider myself knowledgable, but I still read what the techs have to say about it before I make my final decision.
Semper Fi!!!
Harve
Unit199
CEF20 |
Patzerozero
Intermediate Member
Username: Patzerozero
Post Number: 337
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 11, 2005 - 8:11 pm: |
|
"If JOGUNN made this I-10K and it cost $500 ill bet we would still see this discission only the JOGUNN would have 25DB of gain and 30 db of AUDIO gain!"-
my ASTATIC 3KL has 30 db of AUDIO gain, maybe more. ask the AM netters last weekend. i could NEVER do that with 100 watts.
alright, i quit. |
Bruce
Senior Member
Username: Bruce
Post Number: 2068
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 11, 2005 - 11:38 pm: |
|
Patzerozero ......
DANG! "ASTATIC 3KL has 30 db of AUDIO gain"
I would take 48 19 elm mikes to get that ( LOL ) |
Road_warrior
Intermediate Member
Username: Road_warrior
Post Number: 253
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, January 13, 2005 - 10:32 pm: |
|
Ok, took my Imax 2000 down today & put up my
old Shakespear Super Bigstick./ No bad static./
Ran radio for a few hours, no problems with
static./ My friend Bob called & offered to let
me use his Imax 2000, so, down came the Super
Big stick, up went another Imax 2000./ Have NOT
had any problems with Static all night./Transmit
& recieve Strengh is alittle stronger on his Imax 2000./ Now, my Imax 2000 that i was getting bad
static on has a perfect 1.1 SWR./ What would
be a wrong with it???/ No matter where i mount
it, the recieve is terrible with Static./ Anybody
have any ideas as to why???
JIM/CENTRAL PA/CEF 375 |
Quickdraw
Junior Member
Username: Quickdraw
Post Number: 10
Registered: 12-2004
| | Posted on Friday, January 28, 2005 - 5:55 pm: |
|
i have had all four. a99, imax, maco 5/8 and now the i 10k.the ONLY way to know is to have all four. 10k hands down over all others..... quality to me is what counts. if i would have started with the 10k i would not have had to replace the other three. as far as performance, for me, the 10k surpasses the other by far. bye bye.. |
Road_warrior
Intermediate Member
Username: Road_warrior
Post Number: 271
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, January 29, 2005 - 10:24 am: |
|
Quickdraw,
I agree with you on the heavy tough build of
the I-10K, and if other antennas are breaking
from storms where you live, then you have made
a wise investment./ But, from my experence, i
did not see much of a difference between the I-10k
and Maco 5/8 in performance in MY AREA, with the
2 that I OWN./But, i'm glad you like your new antenna./ Thats all that counts./
JIM/CENTRAL PA/CEF 375 |
Marconi
Intermediate Member
Username: Marconi
Post Number: 342
Registered: 11-2001
| | Posted on Sunday, January 30, 2005 - 11:22 am: |
|
Lighten up Kid, Quickdraw is probably a new member and he didn't ask a question. He was telling us a story of an experience he had or knew of. Others chimed in with their tid-bits and the thread got a lot of response. Copper's staff is quite good at determining what is a waste of bandwidth, whatever that means.
I like the post where guys get in there and do some real talking even if I don't believe everything that is written.
Good thread Quickdraw. But be a little more careful next time and check things out with the Kid first. They don't call him Kid vicious for nothing you know.
This is so much fun! |
Dale
Member
Username: Dale
Post Number: 82
Registered: 12-2002
| | Posted on Monday, May 23, 2005 - 7:28 pm: |
|
hmmmmm they did a review on maco 5/8 wave .i didnt see on there were ya might have 2 deburr them. maco says keepsc consumer prices down . but i say thats bull . as a buyer i say they should be competly deburred sanded and finished the right way.while none of this may not hurt performance but shows the real quality in workmanship in this antenna.and if you didnt deburr the antenna witch maco should have done then i see alot of problems with swrs and bad performance down the road |
Patzerozero
Advanced Member
Username: Patzerozero
Post Number: 809
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Monday, May 23, 2005 - 8:55 pm: |
|
18 years in a heavy duty saltwater environment, a hurricane or 2, numerous blizzards & monster snowstorms, ice, wind you name it. the mast came down twice, the antenna was rebent to somewhat pointing up & out. the day my maco v5/8 needs to be replaced, it will be replaced by another maco v5/8!!! |
Airplane1
Intermediate Member
Username: Airplane1
Post Number: 433
Registered: 5-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, May 25, 2005 - 7:39 am: |
|
I did`nt deburr my maco v and swrs are great and did`nt change in the year that it`s up, in fact the swrs went down a slight bit and were very good to begin with. I would not worry so much about deburring and if it saves me a few bucks thats great.
If it worries someone it can be cleaned up very quickly with little fuss.
I think it`s a great product.
my 2 cents,
AP
|
Dale
Member
Username: Dale
Post Number: 88
Registered: 12-2002
| | Posted on Friday, May 27, 2005 - 2:24 pm: |
|
i think its a great antenna no dought.but right on macos web page it says antennas may need beburr.i just thought it was strange this was never brought up on the review.as for maybe having to deburr them i have no clue on how 2 do that or what 2 use. i thought bought buying one but want 2 know if i gotta beburr them or not. and if o do what could i except. |
Tech808
Moderator
Username: Tech808
Post Number: 5857
Registered: 8-2002
| | Posted on Friday, May 27, 2005 - 2:43 pm: |
|
Dale,
Nothing strange about it as the Article was written before Maco changed its policy.
To de-bur it if needed you can simply use sandpaper to make the parts ends smooth / easier to slide together.
You will not know if you will need to de-bur them or not until you start to assemble them.
Some pieces may need it and other pieces may not.
I personally use sand paper on all connections prior to assembly of any aluminum antenna.
Hope this helps,
Lon
Tech808
CEF808
N9OSN |
Road_warrior
Advanced Member
Username: Road_warrior
Post Number: 602
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, May 28, 2005 - 10:52 pm: |
|
DALE,
Theres a good article on Aluminum antennas
in the Subscriber (preview) section of
the forum. After clicking on the above
section, click on articles and scroll
until you find: Do Aluminum Antennas Need
Time To Settle?
JIM/ PA/ CEF 375 |
Kmt36264
New member
Username: Kmt36264
Post Number: 7
Registered: 1-2006
| | Posted on Thursday, February 16, 2006 - 6:05 am: |
|
I have a question about the length of the 5/8 wave antennas.
Why is the Maco v58 so much shorter than the I-10K?
If a 5/8 wave is about 271 inches, why are both of these significantly shorter? Is that because of the diameter, velocity factor, or matching network? (or something else)
The I-10K is about 257 1/2" on the driven element. The Maco v58 is 238 1/2" including the base assembly. Why the big difference? |
Marconi
Advanced Member
Username: Marconi
Post Number: 596
Registered: 11-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, February 16, 2006 - 7:57 am: |
|
36264, I say all of these longer than 1/2 wave non-resonant antennas are about the same excepting maybe by the limits of TO angle as we approach the longer elements being a little less that one wavelength long. What makes the obvious difference to me is that each has a different type or form of matching, and depending on the matcher the matcher type alone probably determines how long this non-resonant radiator has to be in order to be brought into resonance. So the physical length is really somewhat irrelevant. I also believe they all work just about the same, but some may show a bit better signal to some stations and maybe less to others, when in fact the biggest difference in performance probably occurs due to conditions and the soil condition under the antenna.
I have contended for years that I find little difference in the real function among the group of verticals we all use in 11 meters. If you guys did not have receive meters to look at I bet 99% of all this difference thing would just go away. If you can really hear a difference in the quality of a radio on the air, then there is a big chance that the radio plays a big part in this mix as well. Excepting for when using a real gain antenna, as in a multi element beam, I have never lost a signal by switching between any two antennas I had up at any particular time, or for that matter even among a group on the radio at one time. Most of the time this difference is noted on the air as a signal difference and nothing else is really involved. To me they are all about the same even if one may show a bit better signal over another.
For some period of time in the past I operated an antenna that had an attnetuated feed line due to water getting in the feed line at some point. When checked out later I found that with 12 watts into the line I was actually only getting about 2 watts out at the other end of the 100' run of RG8X clear coat coax. Did it make a big difference to my radio work, not really. There was obviously a difference to what the signal was at any other station in the far field, but I always managed to make the same contacts that all my other buds were making. If not I would have know right away, don't you think?
BTW when that line was on that antenna I was know for having the best ears if the area. Now explain that bit if information? I always just thought it was the antenna, but I think now that it just muted out the ground level noise better than what all the other buds around were experiencing. The real test for much of this has to be done with several antenna up an working at one time using a good antenna switch. If not then the impressions are about as good as ego will allow or maybe good guesses. Recollections for me just don't cut anything. |
Road_warrior
Senior Member
Username: Road_warrior
Post Number: 1242
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, February 16, 2006 - 10:13 am: |
|
Some state that the Maco is not a true
5/8 wave. So, that's why it's shorter in length
in there opinions.
I myself do not worry about how long an antenna
is, as long as it performs well.
The Maco performs well. The I-10K performs well.
I've run them both. |
Kmt36264
New member
Username: Kmt36264
Post Number: 8
Registered: 1-2006
| | Posted on Thursday, February 16, 2006 - 8:43 pm: |
|
I am running the I-10K and I love it. Good SWR, low noise, lots of distant ground wave contacts and it gets out as good or better than anything I have ever used. What impressed me the most was the craftsmanship.
I am looking to buy and install an antenna for a disabled friend. He can't afford much and I am trying to help out. He has his own place next to his family but no one will help him out. He has been on an A99 that has a little high SWR, over 2:1. He's such a nice guy, I wanted to help him improve his station a bit. I started collecting A99 parts from other people to try and mix and match parts till I get a good SWR and so far I have three bottom sections that are bad. The one he is using works but the fiberglass is broken at the top (of the bottom section) and will probably fold over any day. His tower is in good shape, about 37 feet, and I was thinking about getting him a Maco v58 and letting him pay me back as he was able to.
If anyone has a good bottom section of an A99 and would like to donate it, I will pay the shipping.
Additionally, if anyone has a good used astroplane or Maco, I may be interested. |
