On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 18:47:12 -0500, wrote in
:

On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 15:31:41 -0800, Frank Gilliland
wrote:

On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 15:18:22 -0500, wrote in
:


I concur. A properly mounted 102 inch whip will and should perform
better than any loaded antenna.

In theory yes. In practice it may not. A 102" stainless steel whip can
be beat by some shorter (loaded) antennas.


Wrong. By it's very nature, a loaded antenna loses some power in the
loading coil and therefore is not as efficient as an antenna without
one. The only way a shorter antenna could outperform a full-length
1/4-wave whip is if it had some way to pull down the take-off angle.
So far, nobody has provided any theory or empirical evidence that any
such antenna exists, or is even possible.

I agree with everything that you said except the wrong sentence.

A ideal 1/4 wave length antenna can never be beat by a shorter
one. In other words a efficiently designed loaded antenna like the
X-Terminator can not beat the ideal 1/4 antenna.

Yet the X-terminator can beat a radio shack 102" SS whip.It's not that
the X-Terminator is so good. It's that the 102" SS whip is just bad
enough that the X-Terminator can beat it. In other words the radio
shack 102" SS whip is not ideal.


We've been through this before, tnom -- chrome-plated anything isn't
much better than stainless steel, and any difference isn't going to
make a lick of difference when length and loading are much more
significant. Even if the whip is sold by Radio Shaft. After all, the
design isn't very complicated.....








----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-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 =----

We've been through this before, tnom -- chrome-plated anything isn't
much better than stainless steel, and any difference isn't going to
make a lick of difference when length and loading are much more
significant. Even if the whip is sold by Radio Shaft. After all, the
design isn't very complicated.....

Yes, we have been through this before, and I never made a definitive
conclusion as to why I got the results I got.

Yes, we have been through this before and no one has ever done the
side by side comparison that would duplicate my results.

Yes, we have been through this before and will again because no one
will admit that the only way to find the truth is by a side by side
comparison.

On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 19:13:49 -0500, wrote in
:


So how do YOU find the truth? You must make a side by side comparison
as I have. Any claims based on anything less than that is just a waste
of discussion.


By your own words, "we should never trust the claim of others".
Therefore, we shouldn't trust your claim to have made a "side by side
comparison" with this mystery antenna. Ok, we won't.

I said you don't have to believe me, but it is easier to believe
someone who has actually stated that he has made the comparisons
and has posted the details.


......clickity-clickity-clickity..... (the sound of backpedalling)


What you really should do is make the comparison yourself. We would
never believe you, but at least you'd know the truth.


That would be the ideal scenario. However, it requires that I purchase
one of these antennas that you are selling, and I don't care to risk
my money on an antenna that purportedly defies the laws of physics
with only marginal benefits, especially when my 102" whip does the job
quite nicely and for a fraction of the cost. But you go right ahead
and preach your version of "the truth" and I'll keep preaching common
sense, ok?









----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-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 =----

I said you don't have to believe me, but it is easier to believe
someone who has actually stated that he has made the comparisons
and has posted the details.


.....clickity-clickity-clickity..... (the sound of backpedalling)

I have always been up front and consistent with the specifics of this
discussion. If you think I'm back pedaling it is most likely caused by
your less than stellar reading comprehension.

What you really should do is make the comparison yourself. We would
never believe you, but at least you'd know the truth.


That would be the ideal scenario. However, it requires that I purchase
one of these antennas that you are selling, and I don't care to risk
my money on an antenna that purportedly defies the laws of physics
with only marginal benefits, especially when my 102" whip does the job
quite nicely and for a fraction of the cost. But you go right ahead
and preach your version of "the truth" and I'll keep preaching common
sense, ok?

Well, I once believed just as you do until I did take the time and
spent the money to check things out myself. Tell me, who went farther
to seek the truth?

On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 19:24:36 -0500, wrote in
:


We've been through this before, tnom -- chrome-plated anything isn't
much better than stainless steel, and any difference isn't going to
make a lick of difference when length and loading are much more
significant. Even if the whip is sold by Radio Shaft. After all, the
design isn't very complicated.....

Yes, we have been through this before, and I never made a definitive
conclusion as to why I got the results I got.


Well, aren't you persistently making the claim that this antenna
you're selling is better than a 102" whip? I would call -that- a
definitive conclusion, wouldn't you?


Yes, we have been through this before and no one has ever done the
side by side comparison that would duplicate my results.


Ever think it's because bogus results can't be duplicated?


Yes, we have been through this before and will again because no one
will admit that the only way to find the truth is by a side by side
comparison.


I agree 100%. But once again, since nobody should take anyone else's
word on the subject, it requires a person to buy -both- antennas. Good
way to sell antennas to morons; bad way to sell antennas to people
with more than half a brain.

Now if you are willing to refund the purchase price and shipping if
your antenna doesn't meet or exceed the performance of a 102" whip, be
it SS or glass, then send me an order form. Otherwise, your sales
pitch is lame.









----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-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 =----

On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 19:31:34 -0500, wrote in
:


I said you don't have to believe me, but it is easier to believe
someone who has actually stated that he has made the comparisons
and has posted the details.


.....clickity-clickity-clickity..... (the sound of backpedalling)

I have always been up front and consistent with the specifics of this
discussion. If you think I'm back pedaling it is most likely caused by
your less than stellar reading comprehension.


Once again, you said "we should never trust the claim of others". But
after that backfired in your face you qualified it with, "but it is
easier to believe....." Correct me if I'm wrong here, but "never"
doesn't include "easier", does it?


What you really should do is make the comparison yourself. We would
never believe you, but at least you'd know the truth.


That would be the ideal scenario. However, it requires that I purchase
one of these antennas that you are selling, and I don't care to risk
my money on an antenna that purportedly defies the laws of physics
with only marginal benefits, especially when my 102" whip does the job
quite nicely and for a fraction of the cost. But you go right ahead
and preach your version of "the truth" and I'll keep preaching common
sense, ok?

Well, I once believed just as you do until I did take the time and
spent the money to check things out myself. Tell me, who went farther
to seek the truth?


Yet you can't account for the results. Looks like you didn't go far
enough.







----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-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 =----

We've been through this before, tnom -- chrome-plated anything isn't
much better than stainless steel, and any difference isn't going to
make a lick of difference when length and loading are much more
significant. Even if the whip is sold by Radio Shaft. After all, the
design isn't very complicated.....

Yes, we have been through this before, and I never made a definitive
conclusion as to why I got the results I got.


Well, aren't you persistently making the claim that this antenna
you're selling is better than a 102" whip? I would call -that- a
definitive conclusion, wouldn't you?

Reading comprehension mistake on your part. Hint - the use of the word
"why"

False conclusion on your part. Hint - You believe I sell antennas.

Yes, we have been through this before and no one has ever done the
side by side comparison that would duplicate my results.


Ever think it's because bogus results can't be duplicated?

You would never know unless you'd try. Have you ever tried???

Yes, we have been through this before and will again because no one
will admit that the only way to find the truth is by a side by side
comparison.


I agree 100%. But once again, since nobody should take anyone else's
word on the subject, it requires a person to buy -both- antennas. Good
way to sell antennas to morons; bad way to sell antennas to people
with more than half a brain.

Now if you are willing to refund the purchase price and shipping if
your antenna doesn't meet or exceed the performance of a 102" whip, be
it SS or glass, then send me an order form. Otherwise, your sales
pitch is lame.


If you agree that a side by side comparison is best then why not
do it. I'll tell you the answer............ You'd rather argue with un
provable hypothesis than seek the real truth by your own
test.

I have always been up front and consistent with the specifics of this
discussion. If you think I'm back pedaling it is most likely caused by
your less than stellar reading comprehension.


Once again, you said "we should never trust the claim of others". But
after that backfired in your face you qualified it with, "but it is
easier to believe....." Correct me if I'm wrong here, but "never"
doesn't include "easier", does it?

Again your reading comprehension is flawed. The other poster said
never. I said "you don't have to believe me"

What you really should do is make the comparison yourself. We would
never believe you, but at least you'd know the truth.


That would be the ideal scenario. However, it requires that I purchase
one of these antennas that you are selling, and I don't care to risk
my money on an antenna that purportedly defies the laws of physics
with only marginal benefits, especially when my 102" whip does the job
quite nicely and for a fraction of the cost. But you go right ahead
and preach your version of "the truth" and I'll keep preaching common
sense, ok?

Well, I once believed just as you do until I did take the time and
spent the money to check things out myself. Tell me, who went farther
to seek the truth?


Yet you can't account for the results. Looks like you didn't go far
enough.

I've suggested reasons for the results, but admitted that I don't have
a definitive conclusion as to WHY the results were as is,nor do I have
to in order to post the results.

WOW! 40 something posts on this thread without swearing.

40 something posts without name calling.

40 something posts without perverse comments

"DrDeath" wrote:
"Big Rich Soprano" wrote in message
...
Mounted properly the 102" is king.


King of what?


King of beers?

That would be Budweiser!

Hiccup, nope that's rolling rock!