Buck wrote:
I have used a Hustler on 75 before. I was definitely
a weak signal station. I can only imagine that a tuned whip would
generate similar results, or more likely, poorer results.

Following are the summarized normalized combined results
of three 75m mobile antenna shootouts held in California
during the 1980's.

0 dB - (Reference) Bugcatcher or Screwdriver with large top hat

-2 dB - Bugcatcher or Screwdriver with no top hat

-5 dB - 8.5' whip with bugcatcher base loading coil

-6 dB - Bugcatcher with Stainless Steel Loading Coil

-8 dB - Hustler High Power system

-9 dB - Outbacker

-12 dB - Hamstick

-12 dB - 11.5' whip with SGC-230 autotuner

-14 dB - 8.5' whip with SGC-230 autotuner (estimated, not measured)
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

On Sat, 29 Apr 2006 07:55:47 -0400, Buck wrote:
There are a total of four antennas I have mentioned in here for
comparison sake.

Hi Buck,

They are by degrees poor, poorer and poorest.

The Hustler
You probably walked away from the best of the group here.
the 102 whip with a possible 2 foot extension
which isn't extension enough.
and two Antenna Specialists (AS)
the air-cooled resistors.

The fiberglass poles, of course, have copper wound around them
from bottom to top, above which is a whip (stinger) about the same
length as the pole.

These on something like 4 foot or longer extension poles would help
you for a cheap solution to the lower bands. Adding a top hat to the
stinger (yeah, impossible) would go further.

(I don't have the 102 whip yet.)

Get one, at hamfests they are cheaper than toilet paper.

I know others who have used the 102 steel
whip/auto-tuner combination that I have talked to never complained
that they only received s-2 signals with the system.

They would never notice on receive. The tuner made the difference.

Therefore, my
theory is that the winding of the coil on the fiberglass poles is
adversely affecting the radiation on out-of-band operation. I am
hoping that the steel whip, with or without the extension, will
perform better on all bands than any of these antennas tested.

A coil loading it halfway up would go further (AKA Bugcatcher).

I realize it is a compromise but the loss of an s-unit or two in
exchange for all band coverage for my mobile without having to switch
antennas or get out of the car and change taps is an acceptable
trade-off.

Then using a cheap tuner (with a loaded antenna), by all means, is
part of the solution.

My question is whether or not the tuner itself can hold up to
the task without being damaged.

As an all band solution, you do stand the risk of one of them being a
fire-breather. Just which is hardly predictable with any accuracy
given the vast number of variables. There is certainly a strong
correlation with longer wavelengths and short antennas. So, you might
design two systems - cheaply, of course.

Mobile quarterwave dipole?
base. The suggestion I was given was not to use the antenna tuner on
a 20 meter dipole to tune a 40 meter frequency. This would be a 1/4
wave dipole on 40 meters. I don't know what the impedance of such an
antenna would be, but I do know that a 1/4 wave vertical is a
reasonable match.

Again, you should never believe everything you hear.

A quarter wave dipole should be a snap to tune. On the other hand,
using an 80M antenna on 40M could be a bear. Also, a quarterwave
dipole is only vaguely related to a quarterwave vertical - um, let's
just say that relationship is too strained to be compared.

We never discussed the use of the tuner in the mobile.

That was the first thing you said, it would be quite close to the
proposed mount. Anyway, I have always considered it part of your
cheap solution and it has a place there.

I should have clarified that this statement. The internal inductor of
the tuner makes up the missing length of the antenna and heats up
which can cause damage to the antenna tuner's inductor. This is how
it was presented to me, or how I understood it. Again, the discussion
was using the tuner to tune short dipoles to transmit on lower
frequencies.

This is another instance of not believing everything - but it at least
this time it offers a nugget of truth. This is the spin of the wheel
of chance I mentioned above. Don't fret so much and simply try it in
the driveway. Open the tuner, fire up the rig and tune for lowest
SWR. Let go of the key and touch components to see how hot it's
gotten. You don't need infra-red analysis and toolkit of thermocouple
probes to obtain a good understanding of the situation. Repeat on all
bands.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Not counting the potential tuner problems you mention, my experience is
a 102” whip with no loading will work ok on 10-20m, but on 40m and below
it sucks.
Bob

Buck wrote:
I have a TenTec 247 manual antenna tuner. I am thinking about
installing a roof-mount over the space between the driver and
passenger in the front of my mini-van and hanging my TT tuner below
it. I understand the combination with automatic tuners works well,
but I have been warned against using the TT to tune short antennas on
low frequencies. Of course, this was in reference to dipoles and base
antennas. The problem is reportedly that the loading coil will heat
up and be damaged and have to be re-wound.

I have about a 2 foot extension that I may also use to extend the
antenna a little.

I don't have the money to spend on auto-tuners and I have everything
but the whip and mount for the antenna configuration I just described.

comments?

On Sat, 29 Apr 2006 02:06:48 GMT, Bob wrote:

Not counting the potential tuner problems you mention, my experience is
a 102” whip with no loading will work ok on 10-20m, but on 40m and below
it sucks.
Bob

with no tuning? you get acceptable match to your rig without a tuner,
would you explain more?

thanks
Buck
--
73 for now
Buck
N4PGW

On Fri, 28 Apr 2006 23:07:32 -0400, Buck wrote:

On Sat, 29 Apr 2006 02:06:48 GMT, Bob wrote:

Not counting the potential tuner problems you mention, my experience is
a 102” whip with no loading will work ok on 10-20m, but on 40m and below
it sucks.
Bob

with no tuning? you get acceptable match to your rig without a tuner,
would you explain more?

thanks
Buck


I just re-read your statement. Are you saying the whip without a
loading coil used thru a tuner? My first thoughts were you meant
without a tuner.

I expect that 40 and below will be a bit poor. I hope to find a
compromise of sorts where I can add a loading coil, but only change it
when I want to operate 40-80 meters, sort of a switch between the
higher and lower bands as opposed to setting it for each band. The
alternative may be to have two antennas, one for the lower bands, set
as needed per band, and one for the upper bands that only needs tuning
with the tuner. If I am lucky, I may be able to have one with a
loading coil that tunes all the lower bands relatively efficiently and
the whip for the upper bands. I can deal with two antennas, I have a
switch but my problem right now is I have separate 40, 20, 11, 10, and
6 meter antennas. If I want to change bands, I have to replace each
antenna. Likewise, if I want to add a band, I have to buy more
antennas. I just want to simplify my operation for when I am mobile.
I have a 135 foot dipole with 300 ohm feed that I can toss up in the
trees for portable operation when I want to be efficient or for
emergency operations, but for moving, I don't want to pull off the
highway and get out of my car to change antennas every time I want to
change bands.

Thanks for the input.

Buck
--
73 for now
Buck
N4PGW

Used various SGC tuners and Icom AH-4. Also tried both of SGCs dual
loaded whips with varying results. The longer two piece unit worked
surprisingly well 80-10m years ago when conditions were better, even had
some fantastic 160m mobile contacts with it. The single 7ft version
lacks on 40 and especially 80m compared to the two piece whip but
compared to an unloaded 102” CB whip, it makes the CB whip look like a
dummy load on 40m and below. This is all with an SGC-230 feeding them.
Bob


Buck wrote:
On Sat, 29 Apr 2006 02:06:48 GMT, Bob wrote:

Not counting the potential tuner problems you mention, my experience is
a 102” whip with no loading will work ok on 10-20m, but on 40m and below
it sucks.
Bob

with no tuning? you get acceptable match to your rig without a tuner,
would you explain more?

thanks
Buck

On Sat, 29 Apr 2006 15:40:50 GMT, Bob wrote:

Used various SGC tuners and Icom AH-4. Also tried both of SGCs dual
loaded whips with varying results. The longer two piece unit worked
surprisingly well 80-10m years ago when conditions were better, even had
some fantastic 160m mobile contacts with it. The single 7ft version
lacks on 40 and especially 80m compared to the two piece whip but
compared to an unloaded 102” CB whip, it makes the CB whip look like a
dummy load on 40m and below. This is all with an SGC-230 feeding them.
Bob

How long is the two piece whip?
--
73 for now
Buck
N4PGW

About 8 or 8 1/2ft.
Bob

Buck wrote:
On Sat, 29 Apr 2006 15:40:50 GMT, Bob wrote:

Used various SGC tuners and Icom AH-4. Also tried both of SGCs dual
loaded whips with varying results. The longer two piece unit worked
surprisingly well 80-10m years ago when conditions were better, even had
some fantastic 160m mobile contacts with it. The single 7ft version
lacks on 40 and especially 80m compared to the two piece whip but
compared to an unloaded 102” CB whip, it makes the CB whip look like a
dummy load on 40m and below. This is all with an SGC-230 feeding them.
Bob

How long is the two piece whip?

On Sat, 29 Apr 2006 02:06:48 GMT, Bob wrote:

Not counting the potential tuner problems you mention, my experience is
a 102” whip with no loading will work ok on 10-20m, but on 40m and below
it sucks.
Bob


I would expect it to suck on the lower bands. I am trying to figure
out some form of loading that will be cheap and simple to use. I have
a 40 meter whip and I guess I could add the 102 to the top for a
stinger, but that would make for a long and weak (physically) antenna.

75 mobile sucks under the best of conditions. That much I know. I
may have to settle for a 75/80 meter antenna option. I am trying to
think of a way to add a base coil that may allow me to tune lower
bands more easily without upsetting the higher bands. I don't want to
tune the coil itself every time I change bands, but I wouldn't mind
bypassing the coil on those times I would rather not tune 80/40. I am
very interested in operating 60 meters mobile on a regular basis as
well as 20 and up.

Buck


--
73 for now
Buck
N4PGW

Yesterday I bought the whip and put it on my existing ball mount on
the back left corner of my van. I still have the coax running to it
so there is about 20 feet of RG-58 (RadioShack brand) running from the
antenna to the tuner.

My preliminary results weren't good. It tunes all ham bands from 6
thru 17 easily. 20 starts getting finicky and the bands below seem to
cause arcing.

On the receive side, I am able to receive much better with the CB whip
than with either the 40 or 20 meter AS antennas on bands other than
what the AS antennas are designed for.

On transmit, things aren't so well. On 75 meters, I was able to hear
one person acknowledge that there was a mobile calling. I heard no
other response with any other band. Mind you, I was doing this from
just about sunset until about 11 PM with a long break for supper and a
short shopping trip. This wasn't the ideal time to test the antenna
for any band other than 40 and 80.

I heard some activity on 60 but no one responded to my call.

Today, if I don't get called into work, I plan to cut the wire next to
the antenna mount and install an SO-239 so I can wire the tuner
directly to the antenna or connect the coax to run to the front of the
van where I have the radio mounted.

I will test the antenna and try to compare it to the 40 and 20 meter
as antennas.

Just for kicks and giggles, I stacked the two antenna bases for 20 and
40 meters and added the steel whip to the top of the combo (that's
about 12 feet tall plus the height on the van.) The results weren't
good. The steel whip was too heavy and caused the antenna to bow to
the ground. I will try them today with and without the stinger to see
if that is a better combination than just the one band antenna. hmm,
20 + 40, that's 60 meters, right? lol.

It's 9 am here in Charlotte. I am going to read my email and go
experiment some more.

73 for now.


--
73 for now
Buck
N4PGW