Hi Brian

There are two legs, only one is shown as the other is identical to it.

The closer you bring the ends the more directional the antenna
becomes. I had my legs 80 feet apart on one system and only 25 feet
apart on another system, both worked equally well, except the one with
the smaller spread was considerably more directional.

In my response I had asked if the poster could eke out another 6 to 8
feet, making that 17 feet dimension possibly 23 to 25 feet wide.
Because at under 20 feet of spread, it begins to loose some
functionality and noise levels increase exponentially. At least where
mine was installed that is.

I had tried all kinds of antennas for 160 in my small backyard and
this one worked the best for me in my situation. Many others have
used it, most with great success, but in some locations it worked
worse than other designs they were using.

When I moved the legs from the northern facing backyard to the
southern facing front yard, the antenna did not work very well at all.
Probably because of the many obstructions around it when situated in
that direction.

It's cheap, easy to assemble and try, if it doesn't work, you still
have your two 130 feet sections of wire to try something else.

TTUL
Gary

Gary V. Deutschmann, Sr. wrote:
I had my legs 80 feet apart ...

Ouch!



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

am (Gary V. Deutschmann, Sr.) wrote in message ...
Hi Brian

There are two legs, only one is shown as the other is identical to it.

The closer you bring the ends the more directional the antenna
becomes. I had my legs 80 feet apart on one system and only 25 feet
apart on another system, both worked equally well, except the one with
the smaller spread was considerably more directional.

In my response I had asked if the poster could eke out another 6 to 8
feet, making that 17 feet dimension possibly 23 to 25 feet wide.
Because at under 20 feet of spread, it begins to loose some
functionality and noise levels increase exponentially. At least where
mine was installed that is.

I had tried all kinds of antennas for 160 in my small backyard and
this one worked the best for me in my situation. Many others have
used it, most with great success, but in some locations it worked
worse than other designs they were using.

When I moved the legs from the northern facing backyard to the
southern facing front yard, the antenna did not work very well at all.
Probably because of the many obstructions around it when situated in
that direction.

It's cheap, easy to assemble and try, if it doesn't work, you still
have your two 130 feet sections of wire to try something else.

OK, thanks for the clarifications Gary.

TTUL
Gary

w3rv

Any designs for a small antenna to work on 160M? My garden is approx 40ft
x
17ft.
=====================================

Hi, M3,

The following set-up will work okay. Been there, done that. Height is the
critical dimension. It will be about 2 S-units worse than ideal.

Inverted-L antenna. Vertical section = 40 feet. Put a pole on house
chimney to increase height. Horizontal section 40 feet. You can extend
length at far end by making it an Inverted-U.

A sytem of ground radials is essential. 8, 12, 16 shallow-buried radial
wires at least 25 or 30 feet long in ordinary, damp garden soil.
Important - connect the domestic plumbing pipes and incoming water main to
the ground radial system.

A tuner is essential. The average commercial tuner will NOT cope. You will
need a home brew tuner. Wind some tapped coils on toilet roll tubes using
20 or 22 gauge wire. Inductance values up to 100 uH. See program SOLNOID3.

Tuning capacitor = 500 pF maximum, 750 volts working, not particularly wide
spaced plates. A LARGE old-fashioned receiving-type capacitor would be OK.
Also obtain a few fixed-value, mica capacitors. Be prepared to experiment
with tuning capacitor and coil values.

If you like playing with a few numbers, download in a few seconds program
ENDFEED from website below and run immediately. This program computes
performance and also provides values of T-match and L-match components for
given antenna wire dimensions.

160 meters, 50 miles groundwave in daylight with 100 watts. Transatlantic
on CW, if you try hard, on long, very quiet, winter nights.

It will be also be usable at high efficiency on higher frequency bands. For
practical purposes, taking one band with another, it will be
omni-directional.

Get program ENDFEED from -
.................................................. ..........
Regards from Reg, G4FGQ
For Free Radio Design Software go to
http://www.btinternet.com/~g4fgq.regp
.................................................. ..........

How about the isotron antenna. take a look at:
www.rayfield.net/isotron


"M3" *** wrote in message news:4081ab53.0@entanet...
Hi,

Any designs for a small antenna to work on 160M? My garden is approx 40ft
x
17ft.

Post links here.

Thanks.

K1SWR wrote:
How about the isotron antenna. take a look at:
www.rayfield.net/isotron

Sounds ideal, any one used/using one do they really work. I'm only looking
to work local not really bothered with DX as such.

Cheers all for your replies so far.

M3 wrote:

K1SWR wrote:
How about the isotron antenna. take a look at:
www.rayfield.net/isotron

Sounds ideal, any one used/using one do they really work. I'm only looking
to work local not really bothered with DX as such.

Save your money. An Isotron for 160m is simply a very bad idea.
The best idea so far is a vertical, as tall as you can make it,
with a radial system as extensive as you can make it, with a
top hat as big as you can make it, matched at the base of the
antenna.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp




-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

On Sun, 18 Apr 2004 15:45:13 +0100, "M3" *** wrote:

K1SWR wrote:
How about the isotron antenna. take a look at:
www.rayfield.net/isotron

Sounds ideal, any one used/using one do they really work. I'm only looking
to work local not really bothered with DX as such.

Cheers all for your replies so far.

I used an isotron 160 antenna for a short time. Working local stations
it worked great but I was never able to work any DX.

Edward Lewis wrote:
I used an isotron 160 antenna for a short time. Working local stations
it worked great but I was never able to work any DX.

I'll bet most of your radiation was from your feedline.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

I'll bet most of your radiation was from your feedline.
--
73, Cecil

But it worked, didn't it!