RadioBanter - View Single Post

January 28th 06, 01:45 AM posted to rec.radio.cb

wrote:
On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 15:31:41 -0800, Frank Gilliland
wrote:

On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 15:18:22 -0500, wrote in
:

I concur. A properly mounted 102 inch whip will and should perform
better than any loaded antenna.

In theory yes. In practice it may not. A 102" stainless steel whip can
be beat by some shorter (loaded) antennas.

Wrong. By it's very nature, a loaded antenna loses some power in the
loading coil and therefore is not as efficient as an antenna without
one. The only way a shorter antenna could outperform a full-length
1/4-wave whip is if it had some way to pull down the take-off angle.
So far, nobody has provided any theory or empirical evidence that any
such antenna exists, or is even possible.

I agree with everything that you said except the wrong sentence.

A ideal 1/4 wave length antenna can never be beat by a shorter
one. In other words a efficiently designed loaded antenna like the
X-Terminator can not beat the ideal 1/4 antenna.

Yet the X-terminator can beat a radio shack 102" SS whip.It's not that
the X-Terminator is so good. It's that the 102" SS whip is just bad
enough that the X-Terminator can beat it. In other words the radio
shack 102" SS whip is not ideal.
Do you have any hard test results to back up that claim? Has the
X-terminator been used on a side by side basis with a 102" whip on say
the Lockheed Martin ant test range or is it personal testing you have
conducted? Is it just the Rat Shack whip you are comparing it to or
other maunfacturers (like their is a helluva lot of them)?