Jerry wrote:

I haven't read the article, but if the guy is claiming that his "tuner'
thing is *better than a center-loaded bugcatcher or reasonable sized
screwdriver (FULL sized), I would LOVE to get in on any wagers he is
prepared to entertain! (Snickers and unintentional "razzberries" beginning
a crescendo and bursting into loud, uncontrollable guffaws and knee
slaps!)



No, it wasn't quite that bad. The author though seems to have used a tuner
to match to the antennas being tested and then coming to some conclusion
about how well said antenna radiated energy to a relatively nearby field
strength meter (360 feet). One basic problem is that you then end up with
some signal level which may or may not be equal to the original output from
the rig (apparently an ICOM 706-MKIIG) reaching the antenna. That might
make the rig happy but it does leave the antenna with an awfully funny feed
at times, one that could be oh 3 dB or so down from what the rig puts out.