On Mon, 04 Apr 2005 17:53:15 -0400, Vinnie S.
wrote:

OK, I purchased the Imax-2000 which is a 5/8 wave antenna. There are 2 options
for a ground plane kit:

1. First is a four fiberglass 6 foot radials, angled down (appears 45 degrees),
as seen he


http://www.durhamradio.com/s/custome...at=1684&page=1


2. This is another kit. It has four aluminum 7 foot radials. This is horizontal,
and not angeled, as seen he


http://www.majestic-comm.com/product...rsupply/Boomer


Which one would be better?


You should give Frank's suggestion a look as it does contain a lot of
information on antennas.

But to answer your question, your particular type of antenna, like the
A-99, is designed to decouple with no radials. Adding radials to this
type of antenna does very little to improve performance. It's more
about marketing hype than actual performance improvement.

Dave
"Sandbagger"
http://home.ptd.net/~n3cvj

On Tue, 05 Apr 2005 07:47:13 -0400, Dave Hall wrote:

On Mon, 04 Apr 2005 17:53:15 -0400, Vinnie S.
wrote:

OK, I purchased the Imax-2000 which is a 5/8 wave antenna. There are 2 options
for a ground plane kit:

1. First is a four fiberglass 6 foot radials, angled down (appears 45 degrees),
as seen he


http://www.durhamradio.com/s/custome...at=1684&page=1


2. This is another kit. It has four aluminum 7 foot radials. This is horizontal,
and not angeled, as seen he


http://www.majestic-comm.com/product...rsupply/Boomer


Which one would be better?


You should give Frank's suggestion a look as it does contain a lot of
information on antennas.

But to answer your question, your particular type of antenna, like the
A-99, is designed to decouple with no radials. Adding radials to this
type of antenna does very little to improve performance. It's more
about marketing hype than actual performance improvement.



I should have been clearer. I wasn't trying to improve performance, since it is
a 5/8. But from the reading I have done (no thanks to anything Frank posted), I
was simply seeing if thise would lower the angle of radiation, and reduce
potential for any king of interference. I am sorry id my lack of knowledge in
this field, insults Frank.

Vinnie S.

"Vinnie S." wrote in message
...
On Tue, 05 Apr 2005 07:47:13 -0400, Dave Hall
wrote:

On Mon, 04 Apr 2005 17:53:15 -0400, Vinnie S.
wrote:

OK, I purchased the Imax-2000 which is a 5/8 wave antenna. There are 2
options
for a ground plane kit:

1. First is a four fiberglass 6 foot radials, angled down (appears 45
degrees),
as seen he


http://www.durhamradio.com/s/custome...at=1684&page=1


2. This is another kit. It has four aluminum 7 foot radials. This is
horizontal,
and not angeled, as seen he


http://www.majestic-comm.com/product...rsupply/Boomer


Which one would be better?


You should give Frank's suggestion a look as it does contain a lot of
information on antennas.

But to answer your question, your particular type of antenna, like the
A-99, is designed to decouple with no radials. Adding radials to this
type of antenna does very little to improve performance. It's more
about marketing hype than actual performance improvement.



I should have been clearer. I wasn't trying to improve performance, since
it is
a 5/8. But from the reading I have done (no thanks to anything Frank
posted), I
was simply seeing if thise would lower the angle of radiation, and reduce
potential for any king of interference. I am sorry id my lack of knowledge
in
this field, insults Frank.

Vinnie S.

The Imax is actually longer than 5/8 wave. Like .64 wave.

How far off the ground? The lower it is the more effective the radials are
due to take off angle, the higher you get the less effective. I have heard
use them if the feed point is less than 36 feet. My Imax is less than that
and I have no radials. It performs VERY well. But new tower is being
contemplated!!!!

Damn..... BuryFlex, Imax, Sounds like we have a lot of the same stuff !!!!!!

Best
Chad

On Tue, 5 Apr 2005 08:43:41 -0500, "Chad Wahls"
wrote:


The Imax is actually longer than 5/8 wave. Like .64 wave.


Not to be a smart ass or anything, but if you convert .64 into its
fractional equivalent, what do you get?

Dave
"Sandbagger"
http://home.ptd.net/~n3cvj

On Tue, 05 Apr 2005 13:24:09 -0400, Dave Hall wrote:

On Tue, 5 Apr 2005 08:43:41 -0500, "Chad Wahls"
wrote:


The Imax is actually longer than 5/8 wave. Like .64 wave.


Not to be a smart ass or anything, but if you convert .64 into its
fractional equivalent, what do you get?

According to this, they're damn close:

http://www.shadowstorm.com/cb/CB_Myths_Exploded.html

Vinnie S.

Dave Hall wrote:
On Tue, 5 Apr 2005 08:43:41 -0500, "Chad Wahls"
wrote:


The Imax is actually longer than 5/8 wave. Like .64 wave.


Not to be a smart ass or anything, but if you convert .64 into its
fractional equivalent, what do you get?

:-)

Jeff


Dave
"Sandbagger"
http://home.ptd.net/~n3cvj

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 5 Apr 2005 08:43:41 -0500, "Chad Wahls"
wrote:


The Imax is actually longer than 5/8 wave. Like .64 wave.


Not to be a smart ass or anything, but if you convert .64 into its
fractional equivalent, what do you get?

Dave
"Sandbagger"
http://home.ptd.net/~n3cvj


..625 making the Imax longer than 5/8 wave. I know I know. Close enough.

Chad

On Tue, 05 Apr 2005 08:25:09 -0400, Vinnie S.
wrote:

But to answer your question, your particular type of antenna, like the
A-99, is designed to decouple with no radials. Adding radials to this
type of antenna does very little to improve performance. It's more
about marketing hype than actual performance improvement.



I should have been clearer. I wasn't trying to improve performance, since it is
a 5/8. But from the reading I have done (no thanks to anything Frank posted), I
was simply seeing if thise would lower the angle of radiation, and reduce
potential for any king of interference. I am sorry id my lack of knowledge in
this field, insults Frank.


Well we all can't be masters of every facet of electronics and radio.
And those who are weren't always that way. Most of us learn a few
things every day or so.

That being said, I'll have to look in the archives, but I recall a
discussion some time back about exactly what you are proposing to do.
The consensus at that time, by those who seemed to be in the know on
the topic, was that those type of "stick" end-fed radial-less 1/2 wave
and 5/8th wave antennas were designed to not need radials, and adding
them affects them very little in the areas that matter. The A-99
especially has poor decoupling which allows the feedline to radiate to
some degree, which is why people claim that the antenna "bleeds".
Simply adding radials does not seem to affect the transformer
decoupling all that much and doesn't really help the problem.

I don't know if the IMAX suffers from the same issues, but you might
want to search around for some discussions on them. You might pick up
some useful information.

Personally, I much prefer the "old fashioned" Sigma 5/8th style
antenna with radials. Jay's Interceptor 10K antenna seems to be about
the best thing going these days.

Dave
"Sandbagger"
http://home.ptd.net/~n3cvj

On Tue, 05 Apr 2005 13:22:20 -0400, Dave Hall wrote:


Well we all can't be masters of every facet of electronics and radio.
And those who are weren't always that way. Most of us learn a few
things every day or so.

That being said, I'll have to look in the archives, but I recall a
discussion some time back about exactly what you are proposing to do.
The consensus at that time, by those who seemed to be in the know on
the topic, was that those type of "stick" end-fed radial-less 1/2 wave
and 5/8th wave antennas were designed to not need radials, and adding
them affects them very little in the areas that matter. The A-99
especially has poor decoupling which allows the feedline to radiate to
some degree, which is why people claim that the antenna "bleeds".
Simply adding radials does not seem to affect the transformer
decoupling all that much and doesn't really help the problem.

I don't know if the IMAX suffers from the same issues, but you might
want to search around for some discussions on them. You might pick up
some useful information.

Personally, I much prefer the "old fashioned" Sigma 5/8th style
antenna with radials. Jay's Interceptor 10K antenna seems to be about
the best thing going these days.


I plan on being about 40 feet at the feed. I just purchased the Imax yesterday.
I never knew buying an antenna and asking questions about it, would absolutely
**** off a bunch of people. I got one guy claiming I need my hand held. I got
another guy claiming that I am only "thinking" of installing it. And then there
is George and his sexual innuendo.

Should I return it? I think the purchase has affected too many lives?

Vinnie S.

On Tue, 05 Apr 2005 14:41:07 -0400, Vinnie S.
wrote in :

snip
Should I return it?


Probably. If you want a decent antenna that you can use for both CB
-and- ham you should check out that link for the $4 cheapie (that I
provided in a post without insult). It will probably cost -you- about
$20 more because it requires a tuner which you probably don't have.
The idea is to just throw a couple wires in the trees and load them up
with the tuner -- that's it. It works better than any Imax or Antron,
it can be used for whatever power and spectrum is handled by the tuner
(usually 2-30 MHz), you can change the antenna at any time, you don't
have to worry about SWR, it's cheap, and it's so easy even a Geico
customer can do it.

Now.... are you going to take some sound technical advice? Or would
you rather keep up with the crybaby routine?






----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----