| Author |
Message |
    
Admin
| | Posted on Friday, November 22, 2002 - 11:24 am: | 
|
Copper Electronics Omni/Vertical Antenna Suggestion Guideby Tech833
When choosing an omnidirectional base station antenna, several choices are available. Predicting the performance of each one is simple in theoretical circumstances, but in actual use conditions, many external situations can change the expected performance conditions greatly. In the simplest terms, there is not one perfect antenna for all situations. Taking into account the 4 biggest concerns of consumers and applying them to this purchase, we base these suggestions on the following criteria: price, power handling capability, expected mounting height over ground, and high wind survival.
The antennas are listed under each category based on expected transmit and receive performance at a distance using ground wave propagation. The antenna with the highest expected performance under a certain condition will appear on top and the antenna fitting that category with the lowest expected level of performance will be on the bottom. Obviously, the transmit and receive performance will match very closely under various conditions, so the order in which the antennas are listed remains suitable for stations only wishing to transmit (such as a beacon station) or wishing to only receive (SWL).
10 meter amateur and high power stations-
(All of the antennas in this category will handle high winds and/or high power and have wide bandwidth.)
If the tip of the antenna will be less than 30 feet above ground:
CTE Top One
Maco V-5/8
If the tip of the antenna will be greater than 30 feet above ground:
Maco V-5/8
CTE Top One
11 meter only stations-
(All of the antennas in this category will handle high winds.)
If the tip of the antenna will be less than 30 feet above ground:
CTE Top One
Shakespeare Army Big Stick
Maco V-5/8
Imax 2000 w/GPK*
If the tip of the antenna will be greater than 30 feet above ground:
Maco V-5/8
Imax 2000 w/GPK**
Shakespeare Army Big Stick
Antron 99 or Imax 99***
CTE Top One
11 meter only stations on a budget (under $50)-
(The antennas in this category not appearing in categories above will not handle high winds and/or high power.)
If the tip of the antenna will be less than 30 feet above ground:
CTE Top One
If the tip of the antenna will be greater than 30 feet above ground:
Antron 99 or Imax 99
CTE Top One
Skylab T233
Stations in areas which experience winds over 90 MPH.-
CTE Top One****
| | | | A99 | A99
w/GPK | Sky
Lab
T233 | Imax
99 | Big
Stick | Imax
2000 | Imax
2000
w/GPK | Maco
V5/8 | CTE
Top
One | | | | 11 meter | • | • | • | • | • | • | • | • | • | | | | 10 Meter | | | | | | | | • | • | | | | High Power | | | | | | | | • | • | | | | High Wind | | | | | | | | • | • | | | | Above 30' | • | • | • | • | • | • | • | • | • | | | | Below 30' | | | | | • | | • | • | • | | | | Price Range | under $50 | under $100 | under $50 | under $50 | under $100 | under $100 | under $150 | under $100 | under $50 |
Notes:
* The GPK (Ground Plane Kit) can be substituted with at least 3 bonded metallic guy wires attached to the support mast immediately under the base of the antenna measuring at least 9 feet long each.
** If the GPK is not added, the performance will not be greater than the Shakespeare Army Big Stick.
*** Adding the GPK to either the Antron 99 or Imax 99 will not improve the performance enough to change the ranking in this category.
**** When the lower hoop element is braced to the support mast with non-metallic monofilament, rope or twine. |
Ironmask
| | Posted on Sunday, December 08, 2002 - 6:10 pm: |
|
Tech 833
Thank you for a very good review. This should answer many questions that have been left unanswered. |
Marconi
| | Posted on Monday, December 09, 2002 - 5:35 am: |
|
Tech 833, I too thank you, very nice report.
Do you use some antenna software that produces vertical patterns for these antennas? Maybe you could answer a question. As you raise the I-10K antenna from say 20' to 50' do additional lobes, of any importantance, begin to pop up at higher angles, or does the ground plane help to reduce this? With this antenna, would you say there is any advantage, when DX'ing, to going from 20' to 50'?
Marconi |
Tech833
| | Posted on Monday, December 09, 2002 - 11:43 am: |
|
Marconi,
Yes, I have software for this. Remember, I do this for a living.
When raising a ground plane vertical antenna above ground, you don't always produce more lobes or suppress lobes, you simply change the takeoff angle. I have found that raising the ground conductivity can also reduce the takeoff angle quite a bit on 27 MHz.
When you get the elevation extremely low and the ground conductivity remains low, then you lose efficiency as well as raising the takeoff angle to something reaching unusable.
Does Jay pay you a commission or something? |
Marconi
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 10, 2002 - 5:16 am: |
|
We talked about his doing me some favors, but thus far I have received no renumeration for my support of his product. Actually, I don't believe that kind words should have a price tag attached. I am not a politician, a Democrat, nor a professional.
I know that Bill Clinton left us the legacy of "...let's Bull •••• them pilgrims until they believe what we say is True...", but I just don't abide that philosphy.
I only asked because you made a distinction at less than 30' and higher in your report. I have never seen the radiation patters on any of these antennas and I figured you had something to base your report on, so I asked you the question.
Do you think, if I bought an island a few miles out in the Gulf of Mexico I could improve the ground conductivity so I could talk a little skip?
Marconi |
Tech833
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 10, 2002 - 11:36 am: |
|
I think you would be better off burying a lot of copper under the land you are on now if you wanted to improve your ground conductivity. The gulf of Mexico is unpleasant at times. Also, the Mexican stations would become 'locals' to you.
The review of the I-10K is going to be published soon. The review has the field plot from the test range included. The I-10K is a good antenna for those who need something very, very strong. However, not everybody will require this kind of antenna, and will be able to get similar performance from antennas less expensive. I agree that the I-10K is one of a kind. However, I disagree that it is better than everything else in all situations. |
Marconi
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 10, 2002 - 1:08 pm: |
|
I didn't think about the weather or them guys down south, except for those in town, they are not usually a problem for me. Of course the weather always rules.
After some working time on the I-10K I am convinced that it is a very good antenna. Besides the fact of being sturdy, I think you might agree, the tune function is the best I have found. It is very responsive and almost like plug and play. Otherwise I think all around my old Starduster is probably the best antenna I have.
I currently have my I-10K at about 34' and I was going up to the 40-50 foot range, but it will take some doing with my setup. I will be installing one of my SD's in a 80' pine tree soon and I expect that to show some improvement over Jay's antenna at that height.
Thanks for the info,
Marconi |
Bullseye
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 10, 2002 - 5:43 pm: |
|
Tech 833 I was wondering if you have ever done any testing with the Signal Engineering antennas and if so what do you think of them. Would like to know about quality of construction,assembly, and especially the feed system as it does'nt look like anything I've ever seen before.I plan on ordering one in the near future and would like an informed and educated opinion of them if you can give me one.My Email address is in my profile if you can't or don't want to post an opinion on another company here. THANKS |
Speedbuggy714
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 10, 2002 - 7:09 pm: |
|
I am currently using an I 10k antenna built by Jay. I have been using this GP for about a year now. I run a CB and Antenna repair shop and I have tested, repaired and rebuilt almost all the aluminum GP antennas that have ever been manufactured by a major company. I must say, even though the Sigma 5/8's and Penatrator 500 have always been my favorite this now I 10k of Jay's totally blows them away as far as strength and durability. It also handels high power much much better then the other GP's. The impedance is perfect on them as well. This allows the power transfer from the coax to the antenna to be more complete. In other words more of your power hits the air with Jay's antenna then some of the other GP's avaliable. Just because you have a good SWR on an antenna dosn't mean the impedance is good. An MFJ antenna analyzer is needed to see this impedance. Jay's antenna can be adjusted for SWR and Impedance. I can be made to produce a perfect 50 ohm load for your radio. this will allow your radio to run cooler, save components life and most important produce more talk power. This i 10 k just laughs at 75 to 90 mph winds. Itwill not bend or break at these wind speeds. This antenna is also electrically grounded for super protection aginst lightening and this also drains off static electricty which can build up on other GP antennas with a different matching network. this static causes electrical interfierance in your recieve and can also attract lightening. In other words this I 1O K is quiter on the recieve allowing you to hear the contacts better without all the static. I could go on and on in the pro's of the construction like all hardware is stainless steel so if you take it down in 10 years it all still looks brand new. In a nut shell it's the last GP you would ever need to buy. You may pay twice the price for this antenna but your getting 5 times the antenna as others. Buy one and will it to your children then they can will it to your grand children! Make no mistake.....The I 1OK is the king in GP's. I have sold several and run one myself. Never had any complaints. Great for No TVI as well. I took down a set of 4 element Maco BEAMS and receive and transmitt reports are JUST AS GOOD with the I 1OK as with the Maco 4's aimed directly at the contact 30 miles away! I would not have believed that without trying it myself. It has to do with Jay's Beta matching network allowing beter power transfer into the antenna without power loss. It beats the Gamma rod anyday. Ok I am done rambling on but I could continue on and on describing positive points over other mass produced GP antennas.
I do not get any money or discounts for these words. These are just plain facts from my own experiances with this antenna.
Mike |
Tech833
| | Posted on Tuesday, December 10, 2002 - 11:48 pm: |
|
Bullseye,
Yes, I have done some testing on the S.E. quads (it was like more than 15 years ago).
The engineering is very solid. The construction is average. The instructions were poor to average. The performance was extremely good. Buy with confidence.
FYI : I have been given the freedom to discuss products other than those Copper carries. If I suggest an antenna, you can be sure that I am not doing so because of profit motive. I care a great deal about the forum members here and their stations. I would not tell you something was suited to your situation if I did not believe so. |
Forummaster
| | Posted on Thursday, December 12, 2002 - 12:24 am: |
|
I would like to make something clear. We(Copper) encourage the discussion of any product on the forum. We want to carry the best products available and one of the ways we find out about new products to consider is from our customers. |
Galileo
| | Posted on Sunday, December 15, 2002 - 12:50 pm: |
|
Thank You for the report..I sure look forward to them...Tom Shaw |
Mikefromms
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 10, 2003 - 10:03 pm: |
|
Looks like Top one Astroplane takes the cake for the under 30' catagory for performance and wind.
MikefromMs |
Tech833
| | Posted on Sunday, June 15, 2003 - 11:27 am: |
|
"Looks like Top one Astroplane takes the cake for the under 30' catagory for performance and wind"
For now..... |
Tech833
| | Posted on Monday, June 16, 2003 - 12:50 am: |
|
Oh, that's right... You are 'in' on it, aren't you? That WOULD be a funny statement knowing what is about to happen! And here I thought I was the only one who was going to laugh my head off!!
Kudos to you, Lon. |
Mikefromms
| | Posted on Monday, June 16, 2003 - 9:36 pm: |
|
Ok, ok...at least I ordered the Top one from you guys.....Sorry I repeat myself...could have bought elsewhere $4 cheaper.
Mikefromsms |
Mikefromms
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 24, 2003 - 1:41 pm: |
|
Let's say the I-10 will give you one s-unit improvement in your signal and receive locally at over and under 30' over other antennas. Let's all run out and get it, right? Well, when you factor in the fact that the I-10 ground plane will cost 3 to 5 times as much as the current best performers over and under 30 feet, is this little bit of improvement really worth it at all? At this cost, is this improvement?
To me, either the Top One Astroplane or Maco V 5/8 will be good choices since they get a point in every catogory tested. They were the only two to get points in "every variable tested." When price is factored in, maybe the Top one is really the best of all.
Now, somebody may be laughing because they spent $300 and got the greatest ground plane, but I'm not crying because I don't have it. I'm very happy knowing I spent just $50 for one of the two antennas that outperformed the rest of the bunch at under $100 in every catogory under 30'. That, my friend, is a smart purchase. And so what if it blows down or breaks?--look how few $ it takes to replace it.
I'm interested in seeing how the Anntron 305 will do when tested in these above 30 and under 30' test. If someone implies it has been tested because Top one beats A-99; then, I won't take a second look at it.
Love this site.
Mikefromms |
Tech833
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 24, 2003 - 10:42 pm: |
|
The 305 performs almost equally to the A99.
I have one that just broke in the wind and I am dismantling it for some inside photos and comparisons. So far, it looks almost identical to an A99 inside, except that the soldering is much better. |
Mikefromms
| | Posted on Saturday, June 28, 2003 - 10:42 am: |
|
I won't take another look at it.
Mikefromms |
Mikefromms
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 02, 2003 - 10:08 pm: |
|
I promise you I'm not retarded, but is there enough difference among these antennas to turn them around?
mikefromms |
Tech833
| | Posted on Wednesday, July 02, 2003 - 11:39 pm: |
|
What do you mean 'turn them around'? |
Mikefromms
| | Posted on Thursday, July 03, 2003 - 7:16 am: |
|
That's an old expression meaning to take the time to turn them around and look them over. Is there really enough difference to really sweat over which one would work best? They are all good antennas. The article is really good.
mikefromms |
Tech833
| | Posted on Friday, July 04, 2003 - 12:58 pm: |
|
I would not have watsed my time. Starting at $140 an hour, my time is not very wasteable. |
Mikefromms
| | Posted on Friday, July 04, 2003 - 8:10 pm: |
|
It would be very difficult to keep the tip of I-max 2000 under 30' from the ground. All it would take 6 feet of pole with antenna on it to make the tip reach 30' with the pole set in the ground. To truly be under 30' the base of the antennas would have to extremely low. Great article and really get you to thinking.
Mikefromms |
Tech833
| | Posted on Saturday, July 05, 2003 - 12:30 pm: |
|
My lips are sealed.
But it is going to be worth it.
M.O.A.A. |
Mikefromms
| | Posted on Saturday, July 05, 2003 - 7:15 pm: |
|
Looks like another antenna on the horizon. I hope something comes along that is reasonable in cost and blows every antenna already in existance away in performance! Don't let us keep buying what we may not want to keep. Tell us plainly, is there a new antenna about to be released we will all be able to afford and will want to buy to replace our old-fashioned systems?
mikefromms |
Mikefromms
| | Posted on Saturday, July 05, 2003 - 7:23 pm: |
|
I have a question for Tech 833: The article is very enjoyable and informative. I guess I really didn't let it sink in good about the "tip" being over 30 feet as a comparison and not the base of the antenna. What I didn't grasp is it wouldn't take much elevation above the ground to get the tip of the I-max over 30 feet. If my Astro plane is 25 feet at the tip and an I-max 2000 is 37 feet at the tip in the same spot which would out transmitt and out receive the other? I don't mean to waste your time, really, but which would you put up if your tip was 25 to 29 feet for AP and the tip of the I-max would be 37 to 41 feet in the air if placed on the same pole and location?
And the answer is.......
mikefromms |
Tech833
| | Posted on Sunday, July 06, 2003 - 6:04 pm: |
|
Mike,
If the tip of the Imax was 41 feet and you had the GPK on it, it might possibly work better. It would also be a lot bigger. Before you bought your Top One, you said that the tip of the antenna could not be more than 25 feet high. In that situation, your Top One is the solid performer. Now, if your situation has changed, and you can have a taller antenna, then that may or may not be different.
I have an idea, rather than second guess your antenna choice, just keep using your Top One and enjoy it! Even at slightly higher elevations, it is not much different from the Imax 2000. Not enough that you would notice. The critical test for a CB antenna is low elevation takeoff angle performance. Not 100 feet up on a tower performance. |
Mikefromms
| | Posted on Sunday, July 06, 2003 - 6:20 pm: |
|
I promise you I'm not retarted--retarded.
mikefromms |
Mikefromms
| | Posted on Monday, July 07, 2003 - 6:18 pm: |
|
Thanks for the feedback. The Top one is a good antenna. It is only 12'tall. The I-max is 24' tall. Let's see, there's 4 ft of antenna that goes above the pole using the AP, but an entire 24' of antenna going up above the pole using the I-max. The total difference in the tips would be 20 feet.
Mikefromms |
Mikefromms
| | Posted on Tuesday, July 08, 2003 - 12:57 pm: |
|
No, not again!
mikefromms |
Twa77
Intermediate Member
Username: Twa77
Post Number: 112
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Monday, April 12, 2004 - 7:32 pm: |
|
wheres the jay in the mojave review |
Tech808
Moderator
Username: Tech808
Post Number: 2121
Registered: 8-2002
| | Posted on Monday, April 12, 2004 - 8:25 pm: |
|
Twa77,
Go to the area's below to read it.
» Subscriber (Preview)
» Product Reviews
» I10K
» Review
Hope this help's.
Lon
Tech808 |
Mrhydone
Junior Member
Username: Mrhydone
Post Number: 18
Registered: 7-2005
| | Posted on Friday, December 09, 2005 - 1:06 pm: |
|
I have a 102" steel whip on a 4" spring mounted
on back center of bed rail right behind the back
sliding glass window on f150 yr 2000 p/u antenna
whip is approx 6" from glass swr readings are
approx 1.5 and i have grounded (braided strap)
everything any other additional ideas or tricks
to get lower swr's? Running a Mag s6 barefoot
and want to add some power..just want to make sure
the swr's are at its lowest..
any info ideas would be appreciated |
Bruce
Senior Member
Username: Bruce
Post Number: 3301
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Friday, December 09, 2005 - 3:06 pm: |
|
under 1.5:1 don't worry your at 4% reflected. |
852
Junior Member
Username: 852
Post Number: 25
Registered: 3-2006
| | Posted on Friday, March 10, 2006 - 8:02 am: |
|
simple question for Tech 883, a Imax, no GP mounted 36 foot to the tip(top of antenna). And a Top One AP mounted on 20 foot of mast. Which would perform better? |
Tech833
Moderator
Username: Tech833
Post Number: 1265
Registered: 8-2002
| | Posted on Friday, March 10, 2006 - 10:31 am: |
|
Top One. |
852
Junior Member
Username: 852
Post Number: 27
Registered: 3-2006
| | Posted on Friday, March 10, 2006 - 6:33 pm: |
|
Being in a mobile home, do you think the top one would perform to standards being just 4-5 foot above the roof? Cause if I go out away from the mobile home the yard slopes off, putting me in that much more of a hole, and I wouldn't be able to clear the roofline on 20 foot of mast. <confused> |
Tech833
Moderator
Username: Tech833
Post Number: 1269
Registered: 8-2002
| | Posted on Saturday, March 11, 2006 - 9:58 am: |
|
Be it next to the home or far away, it will make no difference at all, Unless- you have some noise generators in the house, then moving the antenna farther away will quiet your receiver a bit more. |
852
Junior Member
Username: 852
Post Number: 28
Registered: 3-2006
| | Posted on Saturday, March 11, 2006 - 10:11 am: |
|
So what you're saying is this ant. would work fine in the yard about 20 foot from the home, even if it didn't clear the roofline?? |
852
Junior Member
Username: 852
Post Number: 29
Registered: 3-2006
| | Posted on Saturday, March 11, 2006 - 11:35 am: |
|
Thanks Lon, Sorry for the repeated questions. Just wasn't real clear on things. Things sure have changed alot about antennas and radio stuff in general since the early 80's. I'll be quite now... |
Streaky
New member
Username: Streaky
Post Number: 2
Registered: 3-2006
| | Posted on Thursday, August 10, 2006 - 11:02 pm: |
|
would there be an optimum height for the imax 2000 or should it be as high as i can get it (ground plane kit included
Answer from tech 833---- As high as you can get it. |
Mtn_man_754
Junior Member
Username: Mtn_man_754
Post Number: 21
Registered: 2-2007
| | Posted on Thursday, January 10, 2008 - 8:48 pm: |
|
If the tip of the antenna will be greater than 30 feet above ground:
Maco V-5/8
Imax 2000 w/GPK**
I need a new antenna -the tip of my antenna can see as far as the eye can see, about 20-25 miles in each direction .It will be about 55 feet high
about how much better will the maco do in s- units compared to the Imax at a distance of about 25 miles. ? |
Captian_radio
Intermediate Member
Username: Captian_radio
Post Number: 319
Registered: 9-2004
| | Posted on Friday, January 11, 2008 - 12:17 am: |
|
I always measure the height of my antennas from ground level to the base of the antenna.Mtn_man if you can see 25 miles in any direction I would say that you have a super location.As Tech 833 stated height is the key,higher the better.Higher will mean a lower take off angle, ideal for skip and long haul ground wave communications
Bob CEF451/VE1CZ
Robert L. Spicer The days of radio are just beginning!
|
Unit199
Advanced Member
Username: Unit199
Post Number: 587
Registered: 8-2003
| | Posted on Friday, January 11, 2008 - 12:38 am: |
|
Not enough, if any to even notice.
HARVE
UNIT199
CEF210
CVC#18
|
Walterb
Junior Member
Username: Walterb
Post Number: 24
Registered: 12-2007
| | Posted on Sunday, May 04, 2008 - 12:47 am: |
|
Since I have lived where I am only 4 years I started out with a A99 at 18' it worked but did not have much range, 1-10 is about 12 to 15 miles from my QTH so up'ed the A99 to 36' to the bottom that helped but brought in a lot more noise in the receiver, then when to a MACO 5/8s at 18' to the bottom of the antenna,the MACO helped both transmit and receive over the A99 on AM a lot. But last week the wind did my MACO some harm, So I called Jay and he is sending me a I-10K but am going to have to beef up my mast some, so it will hold the 10k. Am going to mount the 10K at 36' to the bottom for a while to make sure the mast can handle the wind loud and see how it compairs with the MACO which is at 33' now,am getting just some little lines of my test TV with the MACO, Whished the winds were not so strong around here, O well, that the way it is for sure.................walterb |
