In , wrote:

On 21 Jun 2004 13:14:57 -0700, (I Am Not
George) wrote:

wrote in message . ..
snip
NOW do you see how this works?

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.

It only can't be beat if you're stubborn enough to never test it
for yourself. You fit that description, therefore only one thing
can be said.

Get bent

Tnom exactly how much gain from the 4 ft vs the 9 ft are you claiming

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.

I should point out that the company also makes a model called the
MTM-1 which is a center-loaded mini using Litz wire in the loading
coil, totally ignoring the fact that Litz wire offers no advantage
when used at frequencies higher than a couple MHz. Also note that the
prices of these antennas have hit bargain-basement levels (even lower
than Radio Shack cheapies) reflecting the slumping demand for these
supposedly 'superior' products. People are finally learing that the
company has no clue regarding antenna design -- they cater to the
George Jetson types who respond to sci-fi aesthetics and internet
propaganda.


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?
2. SWR?
3. Field strength relative to 9' SS and at what distance?
4. What was used for a FSM?
5. What was the vehicle used and the location of the antenna mount?
6. What was used to couple the pipe to the mount?






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

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?

A Tentec radio

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

On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 21:36:24 -0400, wrote:


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.

14 miles

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?

A Tentec radio

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

In , wrote:


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


.....uh huh. Why am I not suprised?


2. SWR?

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


Ok..... so how did you adjust it?


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.


It would be nice to try this with an X-terminator, except I'm not
going to waste my money. Is there anyone in Spokane with one of these
and is willing to let it be used for this test, as well as corroborate
the test results?


Multiple a/b comparisons to determine the gain order.


???????


A consistent gain order was evident.


"Evident" requires "evidence". Where is the data? Was it even
recorded?


The numerical values were obtained by averaging.


Averaging what? Did you get enough fluctuation between seperate
key-ups that the data required averaging? How many times was each
antenna keyed-up? Better yet, since you averaged the readings they
must have been recorded, so where is that data?


4. What was used for a FSM?

A Tentec radio


Tentec has made lots of radios with different signal-strength meter
circuits. I can't quantify (and therefore validate) your meager data
without knowing the model.


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

On the roof of a pickup. (quick disconnects)


Make & model? In case you haven't noticed, pickups come in different
lengths, and the length can have a significant influence on SWR. I may
not be able to obtain the same make and model, but I'm sure I can come
close (unless it's an old Datsun, Chevy Luv, Dodge D-50, or some other
kiddie-truck).


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

Hose clamp


...........ok, I'll bite: How do you use a hose clamp to mount 1" pipe
to a 3/8-24 stud?






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

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?

A Tentec radio


baaaaawwaaaahhahahaha

Relative field strength doesn't lie. Even if it's your radio.

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

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.

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.

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!!!!

In , wrote:

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


I already have:

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
radios. And this discrepancy was not just in your 'averaged' results
but also in your "gain order". Your first test had the following
'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
your radio." How do you justify your inconsistent results when, by
your own admission, "relative field strength doesn't lie"?

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
duplicate your test.






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