On Jun 22, 6:54 am, John Smith I wrote:
wrote:

...

Hummm, I would use a slightly wider spacing with the
loading coil wires ...

The coils used were used only as a visual aid. That part is left up to
the individual experimenter ... no attempt was made to do the actual
experiments for the reader ...

I've already done the experiments.. Going on nearly 20 years ago..
I'm just telling what I see in the pix..

However, if you read Mr. Vincents data, this coil is "closely wound."

Well, if that is what he is doing, that is fine. I wouldn't though..
Just another glaring problem I see..

And, I documented the construction of the jig itself, not the individual
components to be used. The importance here is how quickly components
can be swapped in and out ...

Yea, looks like you can do that quick enough..

Low Q might be very desirable to someone valuing bandwidth over other
aspects ... not only out of the box thinking is necessary,
out-of-the-box-experimenting is accepted here ...

Low Q is not desirable with what should be a Hi-Q loading coil... :/
Well, unless you want to lose efficiency.. I don't worry about
bandwidth. I'll retune the coil, stinger, whatever if I need to QSY..

Like I say, I've already been through all of this in nearly 20 years
of building my own mobile antennas.. I really doubt you are going
to find anything that surprises me here. I've built nearly
every perversion of a short whip you can think of.
But I think it's good that you are testing the idea..
I wish some of the "inventers" would follow your lead..
MK