Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#13
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() wrote in message ... My take on the Ringo Ranger is that it's a tolerable design, but not the way it's being built. I think they were OK for a simple and fairly cheap design, but the Ringo Ranger 2 was a much better antenna than the regular Ringo Ranger without the lower decoupling section. I picked up a Ringo Ranger free years ago, and made my own radial set which copied the commercial Ringo Ranger 2 design. I tested it without the section, and with, and there was a huge difference in the pattern. I'm talking in the multi S units range with the local low angle signals I was testing with. So there was obviously a large amount of skewing without the decoupling section. With it, it was not a bad antenna at all, and fairly low impact visually. When the lower radials were added the Ringo was suspose to work much beter. By that time, the Ringo had fallen out of favor around here so I do not know how well they worked. Main thing is that adding the radials defeated the purpose of the antenna, which was to eliminate the radials. |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
FS Dual Band VHF UHF Base Antenna | Swap | |||
Problem with dual band antenna | Antenna | |||
What's in a dual band 2m/70cm antenna? | Antenna | |||
Flower Pot Antenna a Dual-Band (20m and 10m) 'portable' Antenna | Shortwave | |||
Need dual band mobile antenna | Antenna |