|
|
The stated objective of your tests was to evaluate and quantify the performance of various antennas, drawing conclusions that could be extended beyond your testing conditions. However, the technical level of the tests exceeded the limitations of your equipment, education and experience. Your methods were less than scientific, your data was superficial and contradictory, and your conclusions were few and highly subjective. When the data from your first test didn't meet your expectations you provided excuses. Your second test proved that your excuses were wrong, so you made new excuses. Your data could not be quantified, yet you proclaimed that x antenna was better than y antenna was better than z antenna. You clearly failed to meet the objective of your tests. You don't know why you failed, so you made excuses for your failure. When you bragged about your tests in the newsgroup I evaluated your failures one by one. You then blamed -me- because you can't accept and correct your own failures. I only stated the obvious. 1. After eliminating human error the A/B test were repeatable. 2. The SS steel whip could be beat by shorter antennas 3. The non believers could only sight theory and would never do the test themselves. OTOH, I did a simple test for fun, posted my observations, and provided my very limited conclusion WITH WHICH YOU AGREED. So according to -YOU- my test was both valid and conclusive. I only agree that if your "hair method" test is valid then my tests were even more valid. Yet your obsession with me pushed you to try -- once again -- to discredit me in a technical discussion. And once again you failed. And once again you will blame me for your failure. If anything you should be asking questions instead of trying to act like some sort of radio guru (which you definitely are not). 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. |
|
Steveo wrote in message ...
wrote: You still don't understand that a 9' SS whip can be beat by shorter antennas. Not by many. Which ones beat a 9 ft whip? |
|
In , wrote:
The stated objective of your tests was to evaluate and quantify the performance of various antennas, drawing conclusions that could be extended beyond your testing conditions. However, the technical level of the tests exceeded the limitations of your equipment, education and experience. Your methods were less than scientific, your data was superficial and contradictory, and your conclusions were few and highly subjective. When the data from your first test didn't meet your expectations you provided excuses. Your second test proved that your excuses were wrong, so you made new excuses. Your data could not be quantified, yet you proclaimed that x antenna was better than y antenna was better than z antenna. You clearly failed to meet the objective of your tests. You don't know why you failed, so you made excuses for your failure. When you bragged about your tests in the newsgroup I evaluated your failures one by one. You then blamed -me- because you can't accept and correct your own failures. I only stated the obvious. 1. After eliminating human error the A/B test were repeatable. If the "human error" is inability to read a 5-LED S-meter, sure, it's easy to eliminate the error by not reading the meter. 2. The SS steel whip could be beat by shorter antennas Only antennas that were designed using temporal physics. 3. The non believers could only sight theory and would never do the test themselves. This is not a religious debate; i.e, "believers" vs "non-believers". Your test was supposed to be a scientific experiment with conclusions based on empirical data. You formed your conclusions without that empirical data. OTOH, I did a simple test for fun, posted my observations, and provided my very limited conclusion WITH WHICH YOU AGREED. So according to -YOU- my test was both valid and conclusive. I only agree that if your "hair method" test is valid then my tests were even more valid. You said: "Such an antenna always has fields in both polarizations. I never stated it didn't". You agreed with my -only- conclusion that the antenna under test had both horizontal and vertical polarization. You therefore validated my test, my data, and my conclusion. Yet your obsession with me pushed you to try -- once again -- to discredit me in a technical discussion. And once again you failed. And once again you will blame me for your failure. If anything you should be asking questions instead of trying to act like some sort of radio guru (which you definitely are not). 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. -----= 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
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 |
|
|
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 |
|
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! =----- |
http://WWW.WEP4HAMS.COM/mobile_cb_antennas.htm
I know why its so good the x-terminator has a "NEW COMPUTER GENERATED DESIGN." lol |
|
Do your own test. I know the results. The X-Terminator and similar
antennas do match or better a 9 foot stainless steel whip. The copper, silver, or silver braided antennas of one inch in diameter at 9 feet will beat them all. Stop whining and do your own test. |
In , wrote:
Do your own test. I know the results. The X-Terminator and similar antennas do match or better a 9 foot stainless steel whip. I -have- done my own tests and I have -never- seen a loaded antenna outperform an unloaded 1/4-wave whip, stainless steel or fiberglass. That's why I am trying to duplicate -your- test -- a test where loaded antennas -can- outperform an unloaded whip. The copper, silver, or silver braided antennas of one inch in diameter at 9 feet will beat them all. Ok, so you tested 1" copper pipe, 1" silver pipe -AND- 1" braided silver? Where on earth did you find 1" silver braid? Stop whining and do your own test. As I have stated before, the purpose of -my- test is to duplicate the results of -your- test. I can't do that without the information I have requested. It is absolutely impossible to perform all the tests and calculations you claimed and -not- have that information. So are you going to provide the information or not........... Oh hell, why am I wasting my time...... of course you won't because you can't. It's obvious that you never performed any of those tests. They were probably devised and executed only in your imagination, and were nothing more than an elaborate scheme to promote your unqualified and unquantified opinions. "Let's see, I used one inch braid over fiberglass..... no, wait, I think it was silver pipe...... no, it was silver braid..... or maybe it was tinned copper braid...... oh, NOW I remember, I tested copper pipe, silver pipe, lead pipe, sewer pipe, copper braid, tinned copper braid, silver braid, braided rope, braided hair and nylon panty-hose! So there! Nyah!" LOL!!! Get bent, tnom. -----= 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 Tue, 22 Jun 2004 20:20:00 -0700, Frank Gilliland
wrote: In , wrote: Do your own test. I know the results. The X-Terminator and similar antennas do match or better a 9 foot stainless steel whip. I -have- done my own tests and I have -never- seen a loaded antenna outperform an unloaded 1/4-wave whip, stainless steel or fiberglass. That's why I am trying to duplicate -your- test -- a test where loaded antennas -can- outperform an unloaded whip. That's not my test. I specifically tested the X-terminator. Although I know there are other similar loaded antennas that should do just as well I can only make claims about this antenna. The copper, silver, or silver braided antennas of one inch in diameter at 9 feet will beat them all. Ok, so you tested 1" copper pipe, 1" silver pipe -AND- 1" braided silver? Where on earth did you find 1" silver braid? Given to me to test. ( large ground strap wrapped around a fiberglass form) Stop whining and do your own test. As I have stated before, the purpose of -my- test is to duplicate the results of -your- test. I can't do that without the information I have requested. It is absolutely impossible to perform all the tests and calculations you claimed and -not- have that information. So are you going to provide the information or not........... Give me a break..............Are you a moron? A a/b test does not take any calculations. Stop trying to make excusers. Is A stronger than B?...............If so is A stronger than C? If so is B stronger than C? Where's the calculation needed to get the relative gain order? Oh hell, why am I wasting my time...... of course you won't because you can't. It's obvious that you never performed any of those tests. They were probably devised and executed only in your imagination, and were nothing more than an elaborate scheme to promote your unqualified and unquantified opinions. No................. You'll never performed the test. That's why you won't stop whining. "Let's see, I used one inch braid over fiberglass..... no, wait, I think it was silver pipe...... no, it was silver braid..... or maybe it was tinned copper braid...... oh, NOW I remember, I tested copper pipe, silver pipe, lead pipe, sewer pipe, copper braid, tinned copper braid, silver braid, braided rope, braided hair and nylon panty-hose! So there! Nyah!" LOL!!! Get bent, tnom. Whine whine whine |
In , wrote:
On Tue, 22 Jun 2004 20:20:00 -0700, Frank Gilliland wrote: In , wrote: Do your own test. I know the results. The X-Terminator and similar antennas do match or better a 9 foot stainless steel whip. I -have- done my own tests and I have -never- seen a loaded antenna outperform an unloaded 1/4-wave whip, stainless steel or fiberglass. That's why I am trying to duplicate -your- test -- a test where loaded antennas -can- outperform an unloaded whip. That's not my test. I specifically tested the X-terminator. Although I know there are other similar loaded antennas that should do just as well I can only make claims about this antenna. You tested the X-terminator, the 7' Firestik (both of which are loaded antennas) and the 108" whip (an unloaded antenna). Your conclusions were that the loaded antennas outperformed the unloaded antennna. That was your test regardless of how you word it. BTW, I still intend to duplicate your test. Anybody got a 5'4" X-terminator they would be willing to let me use for the test? I'll pay shipping both ways if that's a problem, and I'll list the person's name as a contributor to the test if they want. Any takers? The copper, silver, or silver braided antennas of one inch in diameter at 9 feet will beat them all. Ok, so you tested 1" copper pipe, 1" silver pipe -AND- 1" braided silver? Where on earth did you find 1" silver braid? Given to me to test. ( large ground strap wrapped around a fiberglass form) You still haven't come clean on what exactly you tested. Was it 1" silver pipe or 1" silver braid? Was it silver or tinned copper? How was it mounted to a 3/8-24 stud using a hose clamp? How was it trimmed for SWR? How many times have I asked those questions? How many times have you dodged those questions? How long will you continue to dodge those questions? Stop whining and do your own test. As I have stated before, the purpose of -my- test is to duplicate the results of -your- test. I can't do that without the information I have requested. It is absolutely impossible to perform all the tests and calculations you claimed and -not- have that information. So are you going to provide the information or not........... Give me a break..............Are you a moron? A a/b test does not take any calculations. Stop trying to make excusers. Is A stronger than B?...............If so is A stronger than C? If so is B stronger than C? Where's the calculation needed to get the relative gain order? The average (or 'mean', as used in statistics proper) is very much a mathematical calculation. Since your tests produced three significant digits of relative gain which you claim was averaged from several measurements, the only logical conclusion is that you performed such a calculation. If you did not calculate the average then how did you come up with those numbers? Did you observe your "relative gain order" then pick some random numbers from the meter and assign them to each antenna according to your "gain order"? It certainly looks that way since you don't even know how to calculate an average. Oh hell, why am I wasting my time...... of course you won't because you can't. It's obvious that you never performed any of those tests. They were probably devised and executed only in your imagination, and were nothing more than an elaborate scheme to promote your unqualified and unquantified opinions. No................. You'll never performed the test. That's why you won't stop whining. Enough with the 'whining' dodge. Either you have the data or you lied about the tests. Which is it? "Let's see, I used one inch braid over fiberglass..... no, wait, I think it was silver pipe...... no, it was silver braid..... or maybe it was tinned copper braid...... oh, NOW I remember, I tested copper pipe, silver pipe, lead pipe, sewer pipe, copper braid, tinned copper braid, silver braid, braided rope, braided hair and nylon panty-hose! So there! Nyah!" LOL!!! Get bent, tnom. Whine whine whine Excuses, excuses, excuses. You don't have the data. You lied about your tests. The funny thing is that I -am- going to do these tests just to prove, beyond any doubt, that you are a liar and have been lying about your tests for seven years. And I am going to do these tests regardless of whether you step up to the plate and admit your fake tests. I am also going to do the tests with the cooperation of other CBers that can verify the results so nobody can claim that I fabricated the data like you did. Specifics to come at a later date, including the time and location of the test (which I have not yet set). If anybody wants me to test their antenna, contact me via email to make arrangements. Have a nice day, tnom! -----= 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 Wed, 23 Jun 2004 06:34:12 -0700, Frank Gilliland
wrote: The funny thing is that I -am- going to do these tests just to prove, beyond any doubt, that you are a liar and have been lying about your tests for seven years. And I am going to do these tests regardless of whether you step up to the plate and admit your fake tests. I am also going to do the tests with the cooperation of other CBers that can verify the results so nobody can claim that I fabricated the data like you did. Specifics to come at a later date, including the time and location of the test (which I have not yet set). If anybody wants me to test their antenna, contact me via email to make arrangements. Be sure to take plenty of pictures to document the setup and the test. Post the results on your website and it'll make for an interesting read. In all the years that I've been involved in CB there have been all sorts of wild claims made by antenna makers and other CB'ers alike. At times we've done side-by-side antenna comparisons, but these compared only relative signal differences in one or two directions only. To do a proper test with an antenna range, with the ability to raise and lower the receive antenna (to test E-Plane radiation angle) and with calibrated equipment is normally a tough thing to do for the average CB'er. But that's the only way to get the full picture. Dave "Sandbagger" http://home.ptd.net/~n3cvj |
wrote in message . ..
On Tue, 22 Jun 2004 20:20:00 -0700, Frank Gilliland wrote: In , wrote: Do your own test. I know the results. The X-Terminator and similar antennas do match or better a 9 foot stainless steel whip. I -have- done my own tests and I have -never- seen a loaded antenna outperform an unloaded 1/4-wave whip, stainless steel or fiberglass. That's why I am trying to duplicate -your- test -- a test where loaded antennas -can- outperform an unloaded whip. That's not my test. I specifically tested the X-terminator. Although I know there are other similar loaded antennas that should do just as well I can only make claims about this antenna. The copper, silver, or silver braided antennas of one inch in diameter at 9 feet will beat them all. Ok, so you tested 1" copper pipe, 1" silver pipe -AND- 1" braided silver? Where on earth did you find 1" silver braid? Given to me to test. ( large ground strap wrapped around a fiberglass form) Hey tnom I think you meant to say 1" tinned copper braid it just looks like silver but it is not made of real silver. also I see a big problem with your tests is that they are secret tests done by anonymous cbers who cannot be contacted or confirmed or documented i.e no names since one or more of you are probably involved with illegal operation etc. |
snip
Given to me to test. ( large ground strap wrapped around a fiberglass form) Hey tnom I think you meant to say 1" tinned copper braid it just looks like silver but it is not made of real silver. It was silver also I see a big problem with your tests is that they are secret tests done by anonymous cbers who cannot be contacted or confirmed or documented i.e no names since one or more of you are probably involved with illegal operation etc. Yes, they were top secret. The tests were documented on special self destruct paper. The results were never suppose to fall into the hands of common people like yourself. |
|
|
|
Chris wrote:
Here are some pictures http://home.earthlink.net/~cjohnson1379/ "Chris" wrote in message nk.net... I have constructed a homeade antenna that is mounted on a trunk-lip mount on a Nissan Sentra. The bottom is 18" of 1/2" copper pipe with a 3/8" theaded adapter soldered in the bottom. There is a 9" long peice of pvc with a 2" diameter 6ga. copper coil around it. Then there is 4" more copper pipe with a 3ft' stainless tip on top. The problem is that it would be too easy to bend the trunk with copper pipe. I thought about a spring but then the whole thing would bend too much when the trunk is opened. If I move the coil down below roof level, the SWR goes way up. I thought about using pvc for the lower part but I can't quite figure out how to construct it. I may take some pictures of what I have. Stay tuned...... I saw a guy that built a mobile antenna out of copper pipe for his pickup he had a 2x4 set in the stake hole on the front passenger side of the bed, it was capacitive fed The pipe was capped at the top and held to the 2x4 with pipe anchors. Not sure how well it performed,but for a home brew job, it was rather interesting. Please forgive my crude representation, my ASCII art skills have not been used in quite a few years heheh. | | | | | | | | | | |___| |___| -------- capacitor | | | | | | ________________________ |_______| |_______coax_____________ 73 de Keith KC8TCQ Know thyself. If you need help, call the C.I.A. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:34 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com