"Twistedhed" wrote in message
...
JerryO wrote:
It is sad that much "truth" is only a myth

promoted by crooked CB shops-like coax

length and "broad-banded" BIG coil antennas!

Those big coil antennas are for handling megawatts..something your
conventional cb antennas can not do. The antennas work exactly as they
were designed.
]
I didn't say SAY they did something they were not designed to do. What I
said was that they are NOT broad-banded unless the mfr dickers with the
impedance
to make it cover a wide range of frequencies.

If an antenna is truly efficient,


The antennas you speak of have everything more to do with power
capacity. They are designed to take a maximum load for shirt bursts of
time.

Again, I said nothing about being able to handle huge amounts of power. I am
sure they will, but how many
people USE 10,000 watts in the real world?


then its

bandwidth is actually narrow(er), but

makers "dicker" with the impedance to widen

bandwidth because it has been taught as

gospel in the CB world. It is also because the

sellers know that selling these "broad-

banded" antennas is important so the buyer

can have his cake and eat it, too!

And this broad-bandedness is a very important part of
the sales pitch to the regular CBer or trucker just trying to
get the best performance from their setup.




The big coils antennas are made more for power capacity than this
"broadband" you speak of as relating to cb antennas.

....which IS what I was talking about. The accepted "truth" amongst many CB
folks is that those big coil antennas are not only able to handle gobs of
power, but
will cover 25-29 MHZ as well. In their natural state, they
will not. But mfrs. tinker with it to "make" it cover all these 'freeband'
frequencies while the "Q", or efficiency,
suffers.



Those BIG coil antennas aren't as efficient as

the makers make them out to be,


I beg to differ. Many that say "maximum power is 10,000 watts" means
just that. I wouldn't try 15 or 20 in one of those specified for 10.

Most people don't try for such power. Most of us are happy with 2-25 watts,
or whatever is "normal".


but they sell

antennas because bigger is "better", right?



Antennas? Yea,,bigger is better.

If the only thing you are looking for is Mo Powah!


Lots of smoke and mirrors, eh?


I find more smoke and mirrors from those who have said "it can't be done
on 27" or "cb dx is only playing hammie radio", etc.. And the list goes
on.

I don't know what you mean by that. Who said it can't be done on 27? *I*
never said that, I said that there are many myths and untruths promoted by
dishonest sellers.
What's wrong with that?


One day I'll tell you the one about the mobile

antenna that had water and/or vinagar in the

lower mast.


I see no difference than the hammie
offering to renew one's call sign,,,,for a fee.

.........and those who did so met the wrath of the enforcement division in
the form of re-tests, de-certication
of VE's, and revocations and reversions. AS it should be. I fully support
Riley H's dilligence in shutting down
exam mills.

For every cb site you cite as an example, it can be countered with a
boneheaded hammie example. When y'all can live and let live, the world
will be a much better place.

Not sure what you mean. Why are you so touchy? All I
did was debunk the so-called StarGun antenna, and show that it is NOT a beam
at all.


The sales slogan was "Ever notice how much

better your signal is

over water?"



Your signal IS much better over water. I have managed to **** off an
entire contingency of holier-than-thous that thought they had it going
on,,,with nothing more than a kick-azz set up and water, water, and a
whole lot more water!

I never said it wasn't better over water. What this contraption was a
center-loaded whip. The lower mast
was filled with water or vinegar. The implication that the
antenna worked better with this "water" inside the lower
mast. No such thing. The liquid was PART of the mast
the same as if it were not solid metal. Water inside this
mast has no effect or additional gain. But that slogan implied that their
antenna would work the same as if it were beside a lake!


Honest!! Oh, I just told you!

Let the buyer beware. If if sounds too good to
be true, it probably is.

Jerry



There are ridiculous claims everywhere. Doug Smith's definitive work
with DSPs countered a few angry hammies discussions in here at several
turns, but no one bothered to point out their errors by illustrating
another hammie's proof via years of working with such processors. I
agree,,,,,Let the buyer beware,,their is tons of bull**** flying in this
forum, yet none of it seems to be said with confidence..LOL!

Jerry