I'll repeat. No test is necessary in my mind. I have seen the above
scenario more than once. If you don't believe it then you test it.


In your mind is exactly where -all- your tests take place.

So was the picture I posted of the antennas?

Jack O'Neill wrote:
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------040301040402070807080502
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Gen. J. O'Neill
/pre
/blockquote
pre wrap=""!----
/pre
/blockquote
font size="+1"font face="Arial" 73br
/font/font
/body
/html

--------------040301040402070807080502--

YIKES!

On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 19:08:24 -0500, wrote:

+
++Radio Shack DLX magmount .................... 0db
++K-40 .................................................. ....... .8db
++Radio Shack 4.5' center load .................. 1.4db
++5' Firestik ................................................ 3db
++6.5" Hustler top load ............................... 4db
++108' Stainless Steel whip ........................ 4.5db
++7' Firestik .................................................. . 5db
+
+Were these antennae used as the transmitting or receiving antennae?
+If transmitting antennae then what was the receiving antenna and
+receiving equiptment. Second unknown is the path loss between the
+transmiting antenna and the receiving antenna. Third item what was the
+gain(dBi) of the receiving antenna. Without the above data, the above
+results meaningless.
+
+Who's talking dbi ? I'm not. The reference was the RS deluxe mag
+mount. Referenced at 0db
+
+As I explained. The order of best to worst is accurate. Calibrating
+the results into db is as explained below. Meaningless? I don't think
+so.
+
+This test was done with an in sight very low power remote transmitter
+located about 200 yards away. A regular CB was used with low
+readings on the S-meter to give me a relative field strength. The
+exact S numbers were noted. Then next step was to calibrate the
+readings.
+
+The db calculation were computed after taking the same CB and exciting
+it with a variable power transmitter to see how the noted S-meter
+readings related to power output of the variable transmitter.
*******

Sorry I put little faith in S-meter readings. I would prefer a
spectrum analyzer, a preamp and the test antenna to determine gain of
the antenna.

james

+The db calculation were computed after taking the same CB and exciting
+it with a variable power transmitter to see how the noted S-meter
+readings related to power output of the variable transmitter.
*******

Sorry I put little faith in S-meter readings. I would prefer a
spectrum analyzer, a preamp and the test antenna to determine gain of
the antenna.

I'd prefer a Maserati

"Steveo" wrote in message
...
wrote:

On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 12:48:59 -0500, Jack O'Neill
wrote:



wrote:



Im thinking of getting a 102" whip, I dont think I need the spring
because of where im mounting it. But is it nessesary? Should I get it
with the whip ?





Hi, been on CB since 1968. If you get the spring the whip tends to
bend back quite a bit
when doing high speeds. I used the spring only once early on. I got
myself a quick connect
and replaced the spring. Its about the same length as the spring. This
way the whip does not bend back nearly as far which is better for
transmission
and reception being it remains mostly vertical. And the quick
disconnect allows you to remove the whip quickly and
put it in your trunk!! Done this for many many years!! I'm very
pleased with it!!
73

Gen. J. O'Neill



Seeing how you brought up the bending of the antenna..........
Another disadvantage of the 102" ss whip is the gain lost because of
this bending. It is significant.


That's why you don't use a spring. Also, remember, antenna height is
most of this hobby as far as how
good you get out. A 102 inch whip is pretty high. Best for transmit
and receive!
73


Does that help ya: )

wrote in message
...
O
Seeing how you brought up the bending of the antenna..........
Another disadvantage of the 102" ss whip is the gain lost because of
this bending. It is significant.


Where are your test results showing a "significant" loss of gain with
a wind-bent antenna?

Don't even need a test on this one.

1. It can be mathematically calculated. ( I'll let you do that)

2. It looses gain bad enough that you can actually see it and
hear it. Example :

Two vehicles are traveling together down the expressway at 75mph.
One uses a K-40. The other a 102" whip. Both appear to have similar
maximum S-meter readings but the 102 " whips signal fades in and out
The K-40 does some fading but not nearly as deep as the 102".

Never had that problem unless I was shooting skip.

wrote in message
...
On Sun, 29 Jan 2006 12:48:59 -0500, Jack O'Neill
wrote:

wrote:

Im thinking of getting a 102" whip, I dont think I need the spring
because of where im mounting it. But is it nessesary? Should I get it
with the whip ?



Hi, been on CB since 1968. If you get the spring the whip tends to
bend back quite a bit
when doing high speeds. I used the spring only once early on. I got
myself a quick connect
and replaced the spring. Its about the same length as the spring. This
way the whip does not bend back nearly as far which is better for
transmission
and reception being it remains mostly vertical. And the quick
disconnect allows you to remove the whip quickly and
put it in your trunk!! Done this for many many years!! I'm very
pleased with it!!
73

Gen. J. O'Neill

Seeing how you brought up the bending of the antenna..........
Another disadvantage of the 102" ss whip is the gain lost because of
this bending. It is significant.

Without the spring a good (not RS) 102" won't bend that much to make a
difference. I've always had one on my trucks over the years. We did have a
freezing rain storm a few years back, going 55 to 60mph the ice formation
had it bent pretty good.

wrote in message
...

Radio Shack DLX magmount .................... 0db
K-40 .................................................. ....... .8db
Radio Shack 4.5' center load .................. 1.4db
5' Firestik ................................................ 3db
6.5" Hustler top load ............................... 4db
108' Stainless Steel whip ........................ 4.5db
7' Firestik .................................................. . 5db

Of coarse since the time of this test I have found
and measured even better antennas. Of these the
practical ones all use large diameter masting made of
highly conductive material. A large diameter, air spaced
loading coil. This coil is always upwardly located and the
overall antenna height

Damn Tnom, a 102 on a mag mount? You should be whipped. LOL

A homebrew triple magnet 750lbs magmount. Oops, I shouldn't have
mentioned it. Next thing you know Frank will want to borrow it.

ROFLMAO

wrote in message
...

Is there .....ANYONE..... in this newsgroup who doesn't understand
what I just proposed?

They understand that your history is much more
problematic than mine,


That's an understatement! LOL

wrote in message
...
(snipped)
You have long ago lost my trust. Why should I start to
trust you now?

Don't bother answering! I can't trust your answer anyway.

I was hoping this would come to an end as I have Frank on my killfile list
and I still have to read his bull****. Unfortunately I have to swallow my
pride and agree with Frank, the 102" is king hands down. But if it makes you
feel better Frank tends to either lie to prove his point or he simply has no
clue when it comes to RF theory. He stated, and I quote "If you cannot get a
cell signal you are unable to talk on 11m with 100 watts." He will try
anything to get the bull**** started.