Remember Me?

#132
June 22nd 04, 02:36 AM
 [email protected] Posts: n/a

snip
Further tests showed that if you replace the 9 foot stainless steel
whip with a 9 foot one inch silver pipe then the full length silver
pipe would beat all others tested. Including the X-terminator

I don't think anyone, including you, keeps a stock of 1" silver pipe
laying around just waiting to be cut and tuned for a CB antenna. But
oddly enough, I do. So after all your whining about me doing my own
tests, I'll repeat your test with the silver pipe. Now I'll need the
parameters of the test:

1. What was the final trim length/frequency of that pipe?

I don't remember

2. SWR?

I don't remember but the lengths were adjusted for best SWR.

3. Field strength relative to 9' SS and at what distance?

3 s units for the SS whip............ 3.05 s units for the
X-terminator .......... 3.1 s units for the silver pipe.

Multiple a/b comparisons to determine the gain order.

A consistent gain order was evident.

The numerical values were obtained by averaging.

4. What was used for a FSM?

5. What was the vehicle used and the location of the antenna mount?

On the roof of a pickup. (quick disconnects)

6. What was used to couple the pipe to the mount?

Hose clamp

#135
June 22nd 04, 10:08 AM
 [email protected] Posts: n/a

On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 22:38:37 -0500, itoldyouiamnotiamnotgeorge
wrote:

wrote in :

3 s units for the SS whip............ 3.05 s units for the
X-terminator .......... 3.1 s units for the silver pipe.

roflmao, how do you distingusih between 3.05 and 3.10 on a s meter that
has absolutly no resolution? Please i need a good laugh.

It's called taking the numbers given and then averaging them. The
numbers mean nothing being so close, however with a/b comparisons
it was easy to establish a gain order of the antennas.

4. What was used for a FSM?

baaaaawwaaaahhahahaha

#136
June 22nd 04, 01:21 PM
 Dave Hall Posts: n/a

On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 16:07:13 -0700, Frank Gilliland
wrote:

Yes I do. You still don't understand that a 9' SS whip can be beat by
shorter antennas.

It can't. Not unless it is has multiple elements or it's made from a
superconductor. Also, check out Landshark's link.

I never claimed any numbers expressed in db. I only tested
specific antennas side by side to get a relative gain order.
One of the better antennas tested was (there are others)
the X-terminator. The X-terminator is a five foot antenna
that would barely outdo a 9 foot stainless steel whip. The
X-terminator would consistently show a higher reading on
different S meters.

All the Xterminator antennas are loaded 1/4-wave verticals. The fact
that the radiating element (whip) is smaller than a full-size 1/4-wave
vertical necessarily means that they are less efficient -- that's just
simple physics.

While I tend to agree with you (and all the conventional theory I've
been taught) that a full length 1/4 wave antenna will have more total
GAIN than an electrically shortened 1/4 wave antenna, there are other
factors to consider which could explain a slightly better signal from
the shortened antenna. The biggest of these would be radiation angle.
If the shortened antenna concentrates its gain at an angle which is
more favorable to the distant station, it will produce a stronger
signal, even if its total gain is slightly less.

Dave
"Sandbagger"
http://home.ptd.net/~n3cvj
#137
June 22nd 04, 07:38 PM
 I Am Not George Posts: n/a

Dave Hall wrote in message . ..
On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 16:07:13 -0700, Frank Gilliland
wrote:

Yes I do. You still don't understand that a 9' SS whip can be beat by
shorter antennas.

It can't. Not unless it is has multiple elements or it's made from a
superconductor. Also, check out Landshark's link.

I never claimed any numbers expressed in db. I only tested
specific antennas side by side to get a relative gain order.
One of the better antennas tested was (there are others)
the X-terminator. The X-terminator is a five foot antenna
that would barely outdo a 9 foot stainless steel whip. The
X-terminator would consistently show a higher reading on
different S meters.

All the Xterminator antennas are loaded 1/4-wave verticals. The fact
that the radiating element (whip) is smaller than a full-size 1/4-wave
vertical necessarily means that they are less efficient -- that's just
simple physics.

While I tend to agree with you (and all the conventional theory I've
been taught) that a full length 1/4 wave antenna will have more total
GAIN than an electrically shortened 1/4 wave antenna, there are other
factors to consider which could explain a slightly better signal from
the shortened antenna. The biggest of these would be radiation angle.
If the shortened antenna concentrates its gain at an angle which is
more favorable to the distant station, it will produce a stronger
signal, even if its total gain is slightly less.

Dave

if a shortened antenna has a lobe that favors dx then it is only good
during dx conditions and only in the direction of that one lobe. the
rest of the time it is not performing as good as a 9 ft whip.
#138
June 22nd 04, 08:56 PM
 [email protected] Posts: n/a

If you have any other question just do a google search.

The bottom line is that there is only one way to determine
what antenna will outperform another antenna when we
know the results will be very close.

When the results are very close the only way to determine
the best antenna is by the use of a side by side comparison.

A side by side comparison can only be done by physically
having the antennas and testing them. It can't be done here.

Conclusion. If you really are interested in the truth, you'd just
do the test yourself.
#139
June 22nd 04, 09:14 PM
 WA3MOJ Posts: n/a

In article , itoldyouiamnotiamnotgeorge
says...

wrote in :

On Tue, 15 Jun 2004 16:52:36 -0500, itoldyouiamnotiamnotgeorge
wrote:

wrote in
:

Not really, have you tested any antennas?

I have tested many antennas , have you?

I must butt in now........Just what antennas did you test?
Name them.

Do you want CB antennas or all antennas I have tested, I also have a
indoor antenna test area where I scale all antennas down 20x and can
test them on a scaled down vehicle. If you have the know how and
decent test equipment suprising what you can do. And the results are
repeatable.

Stay on topic......What CB mobile antennas have you tested?

wilson 1000, wilson 5000, Firestick,dr.crow, 10k, 102 whip. workman, big
momma, mr.coily, golden rod, homebrew, 55, aluminum 1/4 wave. these are
off the top of my head.

I use the tin foil hat on the top of my empty head works great!!!!

#140
June 22nd 04, 11:24 PM
 Frank Gilliland Posts: n/a

In , wrote:

If you have any other question just do a google search.

http://tinyurl.com/2qg7k
http://tinyurl.com/3xpvc

For starters, you claimed that you tested a 1" silver pipe, but in
your previous tests you claimed no such thing -- the closest thing to
a 1" silver pipe would have been the "one inch wire braid covering a
fiberglass rod 9' tall" that you used in your first test. So which was
it; a 1" braid, a 1" silver pipe, or both? And if you went through the
effort and expense to test a 1" silver pipe, why was that not reported
in any of the previous test results? And whether it was pipe or braid,
how did you mount it to a 3/8-24 stud using a hose clamp? How was it
tuned and/or pruned?

In posts previous to the first test you claimed that the 7' Firestik
outperforms the 108" whip. The first test mentions that both a Tentec
-and- a Kenwood were used as receivers for the test, but the data
shows a discrepancy in the received signal strength between the two
'averages' from the Tentec:

1" braid -- 3.1 s units
5'4" X-terminator -- 3.05
108" SS whip -- 3
7' Firestik -- 2.65

From the Kenwood:

1" braid -- 2.3 s units
5'4" X-terminator -- 2.2
7' Firestik -- 2.15
108" SS whip -- 2.1

Your second test yielded a consistent "gain order" of:

1. X-terminator
2. Firestik
3. 108" whip

Just recently you claimed:

silver pipe -- 3.1
X-terminator -- 3.05
108" SS whip -- 3

These latest figures are consistent with your first test with the
exception of the silver pipe (it seems that 1" silver pipe is just as
efficient as 1" braid over fiberglass, huh?) Yet I can't help but
notice that these results have one, and -ONLY- one thing in common:
the X-terminator outperformed everything except the pipe/braid.

Now since ALL the other data was contradictory, how did you justify
the validity of the ONE and ONLY thing that was consistent? Less than
24 hrs ago that "Relative field strength doesn't lie. Even if it's

Back to your 'averages'; In order to calculate an average you must
have a set of data. Unless you have a photographic memory, you must
have written down this data in order to calculate the average. That
means the data was recorded. Where is that data? And if you didn't
save the data (which means you didn't save the video tape from the
second test), then what was the standard deviation for each antenna?
This information is not in your previous posts but is required to
duplicate your test, because if I have a standard deviation that is
higher than yours then my conditions are fluctuating and my results
would be invalid.

I also require the make/model of the vehicle for reasons already
stated. This information is also not available in your previous posts.

The bottom line is that there is only one way to determine
what antenna will outperform another antenna when we
know the results will be very close.

"We" know no such thing.

When the results are very close the only way to determine
the best antenna is by the use of a side by side comparison.

The only way to validate -your- results is to duplicate -your- test.
If I do a test -my- way you will have room to whine about variables
between the methods. In order to eliminate those confounds, my test
must be done as closely as possible to the original test. I can't do
that without the information I am requesting.

A side by side comparison can only be done by physically
having the antennas and testing them. It can't be done here.

Where is "here"? The newsgroup? Of course it can't be done on the
newsgroup. It -can- be done in Spokane, but not without the
information I have requested in order to eliminate any significant
confounds.

Conclusion. If you really are interested in the truth, you'd just
do the test yourself.

That's what I am trying to do. Provide the information so I can

-----= 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! =-----

 Posting Rules Smilies are On [IMG] code is On HTML code is OffTrackbacks are On Pingbacks are On Refbacks are On

 Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post Serge Stroobandt, ON4BAA Antenna 8 February 24th 11 10:22 PM Ralph Blach Antenna 11 August 19th 04 12:27 AM Ben Equipment 0 January 1st 04 02:55 PM Craig Buck Antenna 3 August 10th 03 03:49 PM Norm VE3CZI Antenna 4 July 18th 03 10:44 PM

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:09 AM.