| Author |
Message |
    
Funtimebob
Intermediate Member
Username: Funtimebob
Post Number: 171
Registered: 5-2002
| | Posted on Sunday, November 20, 2005 - 3:09 am: | 
|
anybody remember the sigma 2 5/8 wave? any good?
how do they compare? |
Road_warrior
Advanced Member
Username: Road_warrior
Post Number: 948
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, November 20, 2005 - 10:07 am: |
|
I had a Sigma 4 (copy). Was the sigma 2 5/8
wave built the same???
Does it have a bottom hoop or radials that
stick out?
JIM/PA/CEF 375 |
Marconi
Intermediate Member
Username: Marconi
Post Number: 492
Registered: 11-2001
| | Posted on Sunday, November 20, 2005 - 1:25 pm: |
|
The original Sigma 5/8 was nothing like the Sigma four. It was more like the Maco 5/8 of today, except it looks like it might have been very weak at the connection point of the radiator insulator right at the feed point in the base mount of the antenna. Now I could be wrong, because I don't remember anything about a Sigma 2.
The sigma IV was originally a three element cone setup at the base and used a gamma match to feed. It was later modified to have 4 elements in the cone when Antenna Specialist built it.
At least that is the way I figure it, digging it up from the past. |
Road_warrior
Advanced Member
Username: Road_warrior
Post Number: 958
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, November 20, 2005 - 8:27 pm: |
|
Just wondering because of never seen one.
Thanks
JIM/PA/CEF375 |
26_op_141
Member
Username: 26_op_141
Post Number: 64
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, December 01, 2005 - 10:22 am: |
|
I have both the original Sigma 4 and the Sigma 2 although my Sigma 2 has snapped in high winds in the base section. Still not bad for a 30 year old antenna in our high winds here in the UK.
I would say by years of use on both antennas the 5/8 Sigma 2 is the better DX antenna working long distance skip contacts however the 3/4 wave Sigma 4 is the better ground wave performer for working the countys etc. The 4 has a good set of ears for sure but then the Sigma 2's arnt that bad either.
There both excellent antennas but one has the advantage over the other in a particular condition.
Didnt relize Antenna Specialist copied it? I only had the Avanti versions.
Sirio has copied the Sigma 4 but constrution is weak and its 7/8 wave instead of 3/4.The fake also has four legs instead of 3.
73
Tim
26 OP 141 |
Kyoji_fujimatsu
Junior Member
Username: Kyoji_fujimatsu
Post Number: 13
Registered: 11-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, December 08, 2005 - 7:56 pm: |
|
The sigma IV was a halfwave.
Yes , as long as it was it was just a halfwave.
It is a J-pole in disguise, look carefully at the desighn .
It's not a bad antenna but any 5/8 desighn will do better. |
26_op_141
Member
Username: 26_op_141
Post Number: 67
Registered: 2-2005
| | Posted on Friday, December 09, 2005 - 6:59 am: |
|
Kyoji,
Yes I can see the j-pole in the design and yes a 1/2 waves does appear above the basket. But I thought the antenna radiated as a whole as its feed point is at the bottom?
That basket cone must be angling the radition pattern for sure??
73
Tim
26 OP 141 |
