| Author |
Message |
    
Dale
| | Posted on Sunday, October 19, 2003 - 6:41 pm: | 
|
i got a 5000 mag mount was wondering if a trucker anttena would do better on a mg. mount on the roof. reason being ive read that center loaded anttenas outperform base loaded anttenas. also the 5000 trucker only has a 48 inch whip so at speeds 55 mph i think the whip would stay perfectly vertical. this is what ive heard on other forms and some of my opions what does everyone elese think |
Pig040
| | Posted on Monday, October 20, 2003 - 10:12 am: |
|
Dale,
I tried the trucker on my pickup, kept blowing over at high speeds on my mag mount (supposed to be a good one). I liked the performance, tried it on my van, which had a luggage rack that kind of broke the wind, and it worked well. |
Kc0gxz
| | Posted on Monday, October 20, 2003 - 12:42 pm: |
|
Dale
No, it won't perform better. This is not to say that a magnet mount Wilson does not perform well, but ANY antenna that is "true ground mounted" will be a better performer becaust it then becomes a part of your vehicle's complete ground. I'm refering to the battery-chassis-body ground.
Another thing to remember is the fact that the longer the whip, the more radiation you are putting out there. Or put another way, the shorter the length of whip used, the larger the coil has to be. Less whip means less talking distance.
These Wilson 5000 Trucker Antennas with only a short 4 foot 1/4 whip were designed with the big truck in mind. Overall hight limitations were also figured in when they were designed.
However, when comparing the performance of coil loaded 1/4 wave antennas, the Wilsons are hard to beat. They do perform just as they were intended to do.
Don't let the BIG numbers (1000-5000) of these antennas impress you as they do with most people. These numbers are the ratings what the antennas can handle as far as input power goes. If both of them are "megneticly" mounted, one will work just as well as the other.
In my opinion, you have two of the best coil loaded 1/4 wave antennas ever designed. But like any other antenna on the market, they do have their limitations.
73s.
Jeff, kc0gxz. |
Dale
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 21, 2003 - 7:45 pm: |
|
thanxs for the info i was reading that center coiled anttenas like wilson trucker will outperform base loased anttenas, but i dont see how they can .like you said the trucker anttenas only have a 4ft whip. what bout the truk mount would i get a better ground with that as compred two the other two |
Bigbob
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 21, 2003 - 9:27 pm: |
|
The shorter the whip on a loaded antenna in a given band the more energy is radiated by the coil,provided it has an acceptable swr,a center load "sees" a further horizon than a base load and so for a top load compared to a center or base load.The whip on a loaded antenna is there for capacitive reactance and radiates little energy compared to the load or coil.Bigbob |
Kc0gxz
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 22, 2003 - 3:28 pm: |
|
Bigbob
What? If that was the case, a 102" whip wouldn't radiate at all. Or am I misunderstanding you statement about a whip radiating very little.
Lol. As usual, you're confusing me again. Time to get the books out.
Later Bob.
Jeff. |
Dale
| | Posted on Wednesday, October 22, 2003 - 6:41 pm: |
|
hmmm yea thats what i was reading on another site bigbob so that means a center loaded coil like wilson trucker would outperform a 5000 mag. mount cause the coils sees more horizon am i understanding this right.wish tech 833 were here hes the man when it comes 2 antennas so im told |
Kc0gxz
| | Posted on Thursday, October 23, 2003 - 1:25 am: |
|
Dale
The "stem" under the load gives the antenna some overall height.
As far as a truck mount, I don't know what kind of truck or truck mount you are talking about or where you plan to mount it.
Antenna performance greatly depends on where AND how it is mounted.
Jeff. |
Wolverine
| | Posted on Thursday, October 23, 2003 - 5:25 am: |
|
Now I'm also confused. If using my Trucker 5000 on a 3 pad mag-mount will out perform my wilson 5000 base load, I too want to know why!.
Wolverine. |
Dale
| | Posted on Thursday, October 23, 2003 - 3:44 pm: |
|
wolverine from what i read somewere else the load coils is what gets u out on the wilson trucker there higher seeing more of the horizon meaning tx/rx farther this is only what i was reading elsewere and this was my understanding about it. this is becoming a interesting subject weres tech 833 |
Bigbob
| | Posted on Thursday, October 23, 2003 - 9:49 pm: |
|
Kc0gxz:In a full length whip inductance is greater at the base,capacitance is greater at the tip,as you move up from base inductive reactance decreases and capacitive reactance increases,the full size whip radiates it's full length but radiation is greater at it's base,it's current node if you will and less at it's tip it's voltage node,since most 1/4 wave antennas are current fed.The current node on loaded antennas is at the base of the coil,that is why you see 17 foot coax on center and top loaded antennas,(3/4 wave length of coax)an impedance transformer.The same is true of wilson and other base load antennas that use a tapped coil,they use an impedance transforming length of coax to more closely match the feed point.What I'm saying is that loaded antennas concentrate the inductive reactance in a small area this in turn is the point of highest radiation,the little whip may not radiate much in the way of rf but it is very nessessary to properly tune the antenna,if you could feed the 1/4 wave whip from the top instead of the bottom you would produce almost exactly the same effect as the top loaded 5/8 fiberglass antennas,which use more wire in the antenna and longer coax to do just that and that is to "see" a further horizon to increase line of sight communication.Bigbob |
Kc0gxz
| | Posted on Thursday, October 23, 2003 - 10:01 pm: |
|
Dale
The shorter the whip, the more coil is needed to take up that loss of whip length. Also, the shorter the whip, the more bottom stem is needed to feasibly bring the tip of the antenna back up to the heigth it originally was--102".
Now, will a cut-down coil-loaded 1/4 wave antenna send a RF signal over the horizon as well as a 102" full 1/4 wave?
Yes. But "ONLY" if the tip of said coil-loaded 1/4 wave is at the same tip height as the 102" whip. Will it perform as good as a full 1/4 wave 102"?
No. How could it? A great deal of the whip is missing.
I don't care what the manufacturers claim. There isn't a coil-loaded 1/4 wave antenna on this planet that can out-perform or even perform as well as a full 1/4 102" whip!!! Why? Simple. Because ALL 102 inches OF THE WHIP ARE BEING USED!! No coil needed.
Never compare ANY 1/4 wave coil-loaded antenna to a 102 inch whip. They are a completely different animal. Why? Because one has a coil and the other doesn't. If you need to compare antennas, do it fairly. Coil-loaded 1/4 wavelength against coil-loaded 1/4 wavelength.
The old 102 inch whip is a original FULL QUARTER WAVE antenna and a breed all it's own. Since it doesn't need a coil for it to work, how can it possibly be fairly compared to a antenna that NEEDS a coil to work?
Bottom line. The shorter the whip of ANY 1/4 wave antenna, the less distance and RF saturation it's going to have. So, when choosing a coil-loaded 1/4 wave antenna, choose the one that has the longest whip. Longer whip means less loading coil. Less coil means longer range.
Even though it's coil can radiate, it doesn't radiate enough to be usuable--at any wavelength. If it did, we wouldn't need the whip.
Jeff, kc0gxz. |
Wolverine
| | Posted on Friday, October 24, 2003 - 9:11 am: |
|
I like both my Wilson Antennas just the same. May be the fun part is using, and experimenting with different mobile antenna configurations, as well as the different loads: Top, Center, and bottom that are available to play with, in an attempt to find the "Holy Grail", 102" Whip performance, in a compact package. I shall now carry on with my quest, to find the impossible, ala "Raiders of The Lost Ark". I can't wait to purchase the Anttron A-1700.
Wolverine. |
Scrapiron63
| | Posted on Friday, October 24, 2003 - 12:24 pm: |
|
I guess a whip is a little better, but I sure am glad we have the Wilsons and others. If a whip was the only choice to use on one of these nice cars, trucks, suvs, etc, I would just have to do without a mobile radio. To me, the wilsons and others don't take away from the looks any, but man, an old flopping whip, no way. I do use a whip on my old 4X4 pickup because it will take the beating out in the woods. It's mounted in the center of an across the bed toolbox with the ball and spring, its a little directional out the front. Several times over the years, I've sit out here in my yard, with the truck pointed toward some base stations 30-50 miles away, get a radio meter signal check with the whip, screw it out, put a 4 foot or longer firestick in the same mount, and the signals would show no difference. If the whip had more gain, it was not enough to show on the radio meters. Thats just my poorboy testing, and of course the reason is, it takes a lot more gain to show any increase on the meters. |
Kc0gxz
| | Posted on Friday, October 24, 2003 - 4:58 pm: |
|
Wolverine and Scrapiron63
Wait a minute you guys.
Just so you understand, I never said that a "Wilson" is not a good antenna. Because I know very well that when mounted correctly, they are very good performers. I rank them as the best "loaded" 1/4 waves on the market.
But the simple fact remains, the longer the whip and less coil, the better the antenna is going to perform, no matter what the wavelength.
In my last post, I was not by any means attempting to put the Wilson line of antennas down. BUT, there is no comparison between them and the 102" SS whip.
However, when comparing the Wilson and other coil-loaded 1/4 waves against one another, yes, in every test ever conducted, the Wilson has always been proven to be the better performer.
Wilson:
Perform better than a 102? No.
Perform better than their 1/4 wave competition? Yes.
Over priced? Yes.
"Not enough material there to justify the price when compared to the price of some base antennas."
Personally speaking, if I "HAD" to run a coil-loaded 1/4 wave antenna, it would definently be a Wilson with the longest whip availible and thru-hole-roof mounted.
What always impressed me about Wilson is the fact that they kept designing and testing, designing and testing. They weren't happy until they could PROVE to their competition that they had the best coil-loaded 1/4 wave CB antenna on the market. And to this day, no one questions that.
Jeff. |
Bigbob
| | Posted on Friday, October 24, 2003 - 8:47 pm: |
|
Thank you for setting me straight Jeff,obviously I know nothing about this part of the forum,so I will stay out of it permenantly,thank you.Bigbob |
Tech808
| | Posted on Friday, October 24, 2003 - 11:23 pm: |
|
Bigbob,
Do not stay out of any part of the forum.
RESPECT OF DIFFERING VIEW'S AID'S DISCUSSION's.
Lon
Tech808 |
Bullet
| | Posted on Friday, October 24, 2003 - 11:29 pm: |
|
dale,
in theory the center load should be the stronger performer over the base load.
but in the ones ive owned and those my friends have owned ive seen no real differance in performance from center to base loads in the wilson lines.
and ive personally seen no differance between the 1000's and the 5000's in performance.
i would say this about them though, i do like them for a factory made antenna there pretty good performers (abit over priced).
id never try to run the claimed power rating of 5000 watts AM or 20,000 SSB ya might not like what happens to your gear if ya do. especially using a magnet mount and the thin 58 coax. maybe with some lmr 400 and a good body mount.
ive got the base mount 1000 and the 5000 trucker. i used to have it on wilson 5" magnet mount and never lost it driving down the road at any speed that my 4x4 truck can go anyway.
i have lost it 4 wheeling before hitting tree limbs ect. this is were the 102 whip on a ball mount and spring really shines."very durable and are very good performers"
best of luck |
Wolverine
| | Posted on Saturday, October 25, 2003 - 3:45 am: |
|
KcOgxz, I did'nt misunderstand you, I know that Wilson Antennas are 1 of the best ants on the market! But, unless you're pushing a lot of power, I don't think the whip length differences between the base and center load Wilson's are going to make a difference in moving a recieving station's meter, 1/4 of an S-Unit.
Wolverine. |
Wolverine
| | Posted on Saturday, October 25, 2003 - 5:16 am: |
|
One other thing KcOgxz. You mentioned that you would run a Wilson with the longest available whip possible. I have a Stinger/Whip, that is about 4 to 5" longer than my Wilson 5000 bottom load stock whip. Can I use this non- wilson whip in the 5000 coil? And if so, would the extra 5" show any appreciable performance over the stock whip? Thanks in advance!
Wolverine. |
Wolverine
| | Posted on Saturday, October 25, 2003 - 5:42 am: |
|
Pardon me, make that non-wilson whip 9 and 1/2 inches longer.
Wolverine. |
Scrapiron63
| | Posted on Saturday, October 25, 2003 - 10:44 am: |
|
Wolverine that longer stinger would make the antenna too long electricially, it would be resonate way down below channel one.
scrapiron |
Dale
| | Posted on Saturday, October 25, 2003 - 10:59 am: |
|
thank-you two everyones opions here its been very helpful is was a good discussion and a subject not talked about that much. guess ill be happy with my wilson 5000 mag.mount. could get roof mount but dont wanna drill those holes in my truck lol |
Scrapiron63
| | Posted on Saturday, October 25, 2003 - 11:25 am: |
|
Dale when I first bought this extended cab silverado pickup new a few years ago, I couldn't bring myself to cut a hole in the roof at first, and I ran a Wilson 1000 magnet mount. Later I did cut the hole and changed to a roofmount. When I changed, I couldn't tell a lot of difference, except when I ran the amplifier with the magnet mount, it would come thur my speakers if I had the am/fm radio on. Also the swr would come up a little more when running the amp on the magnet mount. The roofmount might be a little quiter, but couldn't tell for sure about that. I didn't check them for differences in talk range, but both work very good. When an antenna works like you expect, and you talk where you want, that's all you can ask for. |
Kc0gxz
| | Posted on Saturday, October 25, 2003 - 3:02 pm: |
|
Bigbob
I am very sorry for any misunderstanding here because I just now saw your post from the other day. I obviously somehow missed it because I certainly was not trying to ignore you. I never have. And you should know by now Bob that I enjoy reading everything you put in this forum. Especially your humor.
You obviously are not afraid to crack a book. My hat is off to you for that. I too, never tire of reading anything that has to do with RF theory. But, if I've learned anything, theory is just that--theory. How things work out on paper as how they actually perform in the field can be all together different. Especially when it comes to antennas.
Take the 102" for example. In my opinion, (for what it's worth) it's up-side-down. Personally, I think this antenna would perform better if the coax could be attached someway at the top. But of course, that can't be done.
I'm not disputing the fact that a 1/4 wave antennas' coil radiates. You are right. But how a given antenna performs on paper and how it actually performs in the field is quite often a whole different ballgame.
Example, Dbd versus Dbi. Now who is going to dispute that? Or better yet, who can prove that theory to be right or wrong? As far as I'm concerned, DBi amounts to nothing more than a few figures on paper. Or put another way, it's a fact unknown because it's a theory unproven.
The Isotropic Antenna. It's nothing more than a imaginative theoretical antenna on paper that can't be built. The facts, figures and theories we see in books should not be taken as gosple. For example, according to arodynamic theory, bumble bees shouldn't be able to fly. But they do. Theory amounts to nothing more than unproven fact. But it sure is fun to dispute.
After reading your post, I realize that you may think that much of what I stated in my posts to Wolverine and Dale maybe didn't make a lot of sense. According to theory, it probably doesn't. But the real bottom line here is the end results we get when comparing these different antennas on our vehicles in the real world. CBers understand fact. All they know or want to know is what works best for THEM in their given situation. They could care less about theory. If they were to put a $60 antenna on the roof of their car/truck and then find out later that a $20. antenna out-performed it, they just chalk it up as a $60 lesson learned in their particular situation. The only thing they care about is performance.
If you could take the whips off of two different brands of coil-loaded antennas and replace them with some kind of nonradiating dummyload, the amount of radiation and its "unusable" wave pattern that is produced from the coil wouldn't amount to much anyways. If coil-radiation was really that much of a important factor in the equasion, there would be no need for the whip.
I NEVER buy into the mumble jumble claims of antenna companys because they all claim the same thing. "Theirs" is the best. I have to find out for myself because I believe none of their claims. Some people are even dumb enough to buy an antenna because of its high DBi gain rating. But what they DON'T know is the fact that this antenna that they're comparing it to doesn't even exist. PEOPLE, IT'S NOTHING MORE THAN A THEORETICAL ANTENNA DRAWN UP ON A PIECE OF PAPER THAT MIGHT WORK IN SPACE. DBI MEANS NOTHING BECAUSE THE ANTENNA DOESN'T EXIST. IGNORE DBI RATINGS!
Every antenna manufacturer has their own ideas and their own claims. So, whose claims are true or false? Personally, I don't believe any of them until I play with them myself. But I will say this, with the non-hi-tech experimentation I personally have done for antenna comparison, I believe the Wilson 1000 to be ONE OF THE BEST bottom-coil-loaded antennas ever produced. Somebody at Wilson did their homework.
If you're looking for real-world antenna facts, Tech-883 is Thee Man to talk with. This globtrotter's antenna knowledge is high in demand and can easily put the rest of us in the back seat. And I bet (maybe) he'll admit that what works in theory as compared to what works in the field are all together different.
Bob, I've been playing with this CB stuff for a long time because its been my way of life for a long time. I've also been around long enough to see many changes in the industry. Some changes I agree with and some I don't. Some fairly new stuff on todays market are purposely designed to rip the consumer off, but most are not.
When it comes to advertising, I've learned never to believe everything I read or only half of what I see. You must be something like that too because you seem to question many things. You're not afraid to crack a book open. You obviously have a hunger for knowledge. I can't do anything but respect you for that. And personally, I think you are waisting your time and knowledge playing with CB. You should really consider getting into Ham radio. There's a whole new world out there waiting for guys like you.
This CB stuff is nothing more than fun and games. But it does serve it's purpose as an entry into radio communications. Since you don't have a problem with reading books to expand your knowledge in the field of electronics, let your radio hobby grow with you.
There's one more thing I feel that I need to touch on. I AM NOT ALWAYS CORRECT. But I DO stand by my statements or claims until I'm proven wrong. I don't know it all and I know I never will. There are a few very educated guys on this forum that could blow my 30 + years of knowledge and experience right out of the water. I also know very well that I am not always right. And if I come across to you or others as a know-it-all, I apologize for that. I don't mean too. I'll be the first to admit that my social skills are poor. And I apologize for that also. People-communications, skills, or what ever you wish to call them, has never been one of my plus sides. If and when I come across to you or someone as a know-it-all, I don't mean to and I am very sorry for that. This forum has turned into a vent for me. And since being on here, I feel that I should share every little thing I know about radio communications with others. Right, wrong or indifferent, I attempt to share with others what I know or have learned from experience.
Again Bob, I missed your post and I'm sorry that you thought I was ignoring you. I was NOT ignoring you. To be honest with you, I look forward to your posts because I enjoy your wit and humor.
Jeff. |
Bigbob
| | Posted on Sunday, October 26, 2003 - 1:18 am: |
|
Ok,I'm having trouble posting this,my foot in my mouth keeps getting in the way,I must take myself to seriously,I keep finding myself apologising to forum members,sorry Jeff,sorry Tech808,sorry Forummaster and I apologise to the rest of you guys,I just don't know why I get so wrapped up in this stuff and take it so personal,maybe I should see my doctor and see if he'll prescribe some prozac or something.bigbob |
Alsworld
| | Posted on Sunday, October 26, 2003 - 1:29 am: |
|
Hey Bigbob,
you have one of the coolest sense of humor I have ever seen (or read I guess). Plus, you have an awesome database of knowledge in that head of yours.
Don't let nothing get you down, especially words on an internet forum. Being we all correspond so much on and off the forum, I can see where it's easy to take things personal. Kind of like family. However, even in family we argue (or debate) things sometimes. Because of this, we all can learn things.
I know Jeff and I can go round and round talking coil antennas, much like Bruce and Jo Gunns LOL! Heck, it was you who got me thinking about those 5/8ths wave mobile antennas that got me and Jeff eating up quite a bit of Coppers dataspace questioning what is best. Heck, we will probably always debate that because we have differing opinions on subjects (such as CB in general), but it's all okay.
In this crazy world we live in, letting CB antenna discussions get us down is just not that important.
Think big, argue points, discuss theory, but in the long run whether you are right or wrong, as long as the sun and moon rise as they are supposed to, not much else matters.
I'll keep and ear out for you Sunday. I always appreciate your input Bigbob, hang tough my brother.
Alsworld |
Scrapiron63
| | Posted on Sunday, October 26, 2003 - 11:03 am: |
|
Bigbob, like he said, your sense of humor is one of the best on this forum. You put the crowning touch on lots of these threads. Don't worry about it, we all get too caught up in this thing sometimes, we're just posting opinions anyway. I bet if we could all meet in person, we would all be instant friends and have no misunderstandings. Now no doubt there would be plenty of B.S.'ing. In person its so much easier to communicate than on a forum. Its hard, for me anyway, to really get my meaning across in typed words. I look at my posts sometimes and think, heck thats not what I meant. scrapiron |
Wolverine
| | Posted on Sunday, October 26, 2003 - 1:46 pm: |
|
Thank You Much, KcOgxz, and Scrapiron63.
Wolvie. |
Kc0gxz
| | Posted on Monday, October 27, 2003 - 3:25 am: |
|
Bigbob
I think you're right Bob. We probably do get too serious sometimes. I follow a lot of these posts and at times it does seem to get quite serious often. Then all of a sudden you throw a funny one or two liner in there that seems to break the tention.
Also, it is nice to see that you aren't afraid to show us both the serious and humorus side of you. But right, wrong or indifferent Bob, contrary to what you may think, I DO respect your thoughts and opinions.
And then there's GI Al. I sometimes think he was built from a kit and came with the optional diplomatic mind. You just can't help but love this guy and his writings. If and when he ever retires from the service and runs for public office, he'd have my vote because he's so damn thorough in his tasks it's almost scary.
Just so you know, I have a great deal of respect for the both of you. If our posts happen to clash from time to time, so be it. But my respect and thoughts of you don't change. Do you realize how boring Coppers Forum would be if everyone agreed with everyone else on everything?
We're all here to learn and share with one another. And we're not always right. Including me. If I thought for one minute that I knew everything and was a master at this stuff, I wouldn't feel the need to be here. I'm here to learn. And I'm also here to share what I've learned about radio in the last 30 plus years.
73s for now Bob.
Jeff. |
Pig040
| | Posted on Monday, October 27, 2003 - 10:25 am: |
|
Jeff,
Give me a break on the price thing, just what in this hobby is not overpriced for what you actually get?? These radios are not worth the prices we pay for them either!! One of my pet gripes about the mobile antennas is the silly little allen adjustment screws, they are cheap, and have a tendancy to round out after awhile, when you pay the money we pay, and get the quality we get, it is a joke! Take for example that 4900B That is new, is junk, and I will probably use for trade bait, what a joke that radio is, that is why a lot of radio people have a love for the older radios, it seems like they were built so much better. |
Bigbob
| | Posted on Monday, October 27, 2003 - 8:55 pm: |
|
Pig040,I just read your profile,by your username I figured you were a stock hauler,gosh was I wrong.I put a grade 8 hardened allen screw in place of original,it never came out again rusted tight,those soft screws are stainless,I went to hardware and got an easy-out and a bunch of replacement screws,it's a cinch now.Bigbob |
Bigbob
| | Posted on Monday, October 27, 2003 - 8:58 pm: |
|
I really appreciate you guys,I had no idea,thanks,thank you very much,Bigbob |
Kc0gxz
| | Posted on Monday, October 27, 2003 - 10:33 pm: |
|
Pig040
I'm going to do something in my post that I rarely do. I am going to agree 100% with what you just said. You couldn't be more right.
Over priced? You bet they are. All of them. But believe it or not, from the time the radios are shipped to a distributor (who marks them up dramatically before they are then sold to a dealer), there isn't much room left for the dealer to play with.
The dealer HAS to sell quite a few radios just to keep his head above water. And to stay on top of the competition, that dealer has to sell his/her radios CHEAPER than anyone else.
For example. Enter Copper Electronics. Copper will sell at rock-bottom prices just to take a sale away from a competitor. The prices that you see in Coppers advertisements are NOT echted in stone. If you show them a current ongoing add for a particular radio that you want, chances are good that you are going to get that radio from Copper because they claim they WILL NOT BE UNDERSOLD!
This CB and 10 Meter radio business is just down right vicious. Copper is not here to be good friends with their competition. They're here to give the consumer the most for his/her money. If Copper happens to make enemies by selling radios cheaper than their competition, I'm sure they're not loosing sleep over that.
And yes, that 4900B definetly is a cool looking radio but it's a shame that its performance doesen't match its appearance. I would have loved to have seen a RF Limited DeltaForce or better yet the Omega board go in that box. But, oh well, that's the way it goes.
Mobile antenna screws? I understand your frustration with those Allen screws. Here's what I do with them.
I put a little Anti-Seize on the threads before I snug them down for the last time. After that, I make a couple of wraps around the shank with black tape where the adjusting screws are. The screws then will never freeze or rust to the threads after you make your final SWR adjustment.
Jeff, kc0gxz. |
Pig040
| | Posted on Tuesday, October 28, 2003 - 9:47 am: |
|
Thanks, appreciate it BIGBOB, Sounds like getting the better scews, AND doing the ainti-seize thing is a good idea, I will definitely do both. Thanks |
|
