There's that "takeoff angle" again. Having a good "takeoff angle" is no
guarantee of good DX performance, and isn't a valid way to compare the
performance of two antennas.

You should model both the beam and the 4-square. Make sure you include a
realistic amount of ground loss resistance for whatever ground system
you think you can put down for the 4-square. Superimpose their elevation
patterns on the same plot, and see which really does best at low angles.
If you don't want to go to the trouble of modeling a beam, you can model
a simple dipole which has almost the same elevation pattern as a beam of
a few elements (in the forward direction) at the same height. Mentally
add the beam's gain relative to a dipole to the dipole's pattern. See if
the 4-square really is as good. It might change your mind.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

wrote:
I'm deciding to go with a 20 meter 4-square because it can hopefully
provide me with similar directivity and DX takeoff angle as a 20 meter
beam but without the hassle or height of a tower. A dipole only has
directivity in 2 directions, a 4 square can give me directivity in 4
directions with basic phasing and 8 directions high tech using ARRL
suggestions. The EZNEC plot was pretty awesome.

The Eternal Squire