Mike sed,
Not much of a G5RV then is it, Reg?

-----------------------

Exactly !

For all-round, multi-directional, multi-elevation, multi-band working, DX
and local, there is nothing better than a random length dipole with a
random-length high-Zo feedline, which is what most people want and which
will conveniently fit into your backyard, plus a simple home-made 1:1 choke
balun on a ferrite ring from your junk box, plus a tuner of some sort.


Without any coax the G5RV fits in there somewhere. A sentiment with which
that grand old English gentleman himself, Louis Varney, would
whole-heartedly agree. Are you hearing me Louis wherever you are? Three
dots for Yes.
----
Reg, G4FGQ

Reg Edwards wrote:

Mike sed,

Not much of a G5RV then is it, Reg?


-----------------------

Exactly !

For all-round, multi-directional, multi-elevation, multi-band working, DX
and local, there is nothing better than a random length dipole with a
random-length high-Zo feedline, which is what most people want and which
will conveniently fit into your backyard, plus a simple home-made 1:1 choke
balun on a ferrite ring from your junk box, plus a tuner of some sort.

Hard to disagree, xince that's what I use!


Without any coax the G5RV fits in there somewhere. A sentiment with which
that grand old English gentleman himself, Louis Varney, would
whole-heartedly agree. Are you hearing me Louis wherever you are? Three
dots for Yes.

There seem to be many different antennae called G5RV. I wonder when the
G5RV vertical will come out? ;^)

- Mike KB3EIA -

Reg Edwards wrote:
For all-round, multi-directional, multi-elevation, multi-band working, DX
and local, there is nothing better than a random length dipole with a
random-length high-Zo feedline, ...

My non-random length high-Z0 feedline is better, Reg, i.e., NO tuner losses.
--
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! =-----

My non-random length high-Z0 feedline is better, Reg, i.e., NO tuner
losses.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

===========================

Cec, I'm very sorry to say your variable length high-Zo line never reduces
SWR down to 1-to-1 as perceived by the transmitter. It's like having a
tuner with only one knob on it.


Of course, your particular PA may have a tuned tank or pi-match in which
case you will have reduced the so-called SWR meter to nonsense for which you
deserve congratulations.


But if the long, thin, twin-wire feedline in your ingenious Z-matcher has a
higher resistance than the shorter, fat, single wire wound around the tuner
coil it replaces then you still have some explaining to do.


On the other hand, considering the economic pro's and con's, and the
poverty-stricken state of radio amateurs world wide, you undoubtably have a
winner. ;o)
---
Your's, Reg, G4FGQ

You know I've been watching the posts in this group for over a year now and
no matter what anyone says you guys always have a negative to say about
somebody elses antenna. So may you have a Happy Christmas.

I have attached the writeup from "ol' G5RV himself that was posted on
several websites.

Here is the original article and I still believe that the antenna I
described is very close if not in fact the same construction.

http://www.qsl.net/aa3px/g5rv.htm

Lloyd KD4HTW


"Reg Edwards" wrote in message
...

My non-random length high-Z0 feedline is better, Reg, i.e., NO tuner
losses.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

===========================

Cec, I'm very sorry to say your variable length high-Zo line never reduces
SWR down to 1-to-1 as perceived by the transmitter. It's like having a
tuner with only one knob on it.


Of course, your particular PA may have a tuned tank or pi-match in which
case you will have reduced the so-called SWR meter to nonsense for which
you
deserve congratulations.


But if the long, thin, twin-wire feedline in your ingenious Z-matcher has
a
higher resistance than the shorter, fat, single wire wound around the
tuner
coil it replaces then you still have some explaining to do.


On the other hand, considering the economic pro's and con's, and the
poverty-stricken state of radio amateurs world wide, you undoubtably have
a
winner. ;o)
---
Your's, Reg, G4FGQ

Lloyd Mitchell wrote:
You know I've been watching the posts in this group for over a year now and
no matter what anyone says you guys always have a negative to say about
somebody elses antenna.

That proves that no antenna is perfect for everyone.

I have attached the writeup from "ol' G5RV himself that was posted on
several websites.

Here is the original article and I still believe that the antenna I
described is very close if not in fact the same construction.

http://www.qsl.net/aa3px/g5rv.htm

What he left out is the SWR on the coax which is a killer on 30m,
17m, and 10m according to EZNEC.
--
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! =-----

Oddly enough, the full sized one I have, in addition to OK performance
on 80/75, 40 and 20 works better than anything else I've tried on 17.
It really does do poorly on 30,15,12 and 10 though. Go figure...

Jim Leder wrote:
Oddly enough, the full sized one I have, in addition to OK performance
on 80/75, 40 and 20 works better than anything else I've tried on 17.
It really does do poorly on 30,15,12 and 10 though. Go figure...

At the higher frequencies, small variations in design and environment
can cause large shifts in characteristics due to the shorter wavelengths
involved. For instance, if the dipole is a little longer than 102 ft,
the series-section transformer is a little longer than 30 ft with a
relatively low VF, the G5RV antenna system's resonant point will shift
a lot on the higher bands. Also, installing the G5RV in an inverted-V
configuration can change things considerably on the higher bands. I'm
glad it works well for you on 17m. That's a neat band.
--
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! =-----

Lloyd Mitchell wrote:

You know I've been watching the posts in this group for over a year now and
no matter what anyone says you guys always have a negative to say about
somebody elses antenna. So may you have a Happy Christmas.

Prolly because there *is* something negative to be said about any
antenna out there!

And the G5RV is an adequate antenna for what it was designed for. Some
zealot's started turning in to something that it was not.

- Mike KB3EIA -

Reg Edwards wrote:
Cec, I'm very sorry to say your variable length high-Zo line never reduces
SWR down to 1-to-1 as perceived by the transmitter. It's like having a
tuner with only one knob on it.

50 ohm SWR's on all HF bands are less than 1.6:1. The SWR on the ladder-
line is always between 7.5:1 and 19:1 so only one "knob" is needed.
--
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! =-----