"DrDeath" wrote:
"Steveo" wrote in message
Snipped

The 102" rocks, except for its tree pruning and over-hang scraping
qualities..oh and it's a bit on the odious side appearance wise. I have
that mount and a Wilson 1000 on one of my trucks, I rarely put the 102"
on because of the noise it makes banging off of things, and it's
somewhat directional mounted on the step bumper. (good dx shooter)

The Wilson 1000 mag mount is hard to beat for most practical
applications.

I have mine mounted in the center of my truck box, puts it pretty close
to center. I have to tie down for the drive through.

The 102?

wrote:
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.

Not if the truck can turn.

"DrDeath" wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 12:10:41 -0600, "DrDeath"
wrote:

wrote in message
. ..

Let the games begin.

Mounted properly the 102" is king.

King of what?


Of mobile antennas of course. Unless your participating in a keydown
and need some oil cooled coil, you will get the best results with a
102" and they are good (most of them) to 1kw.

You will get good results but not necessarily the best results.

How so? Give me an example. Unless Jay wants to put an I10K on his truck.
Out in the desert he could weld 20 foot of tower in the bed. LOL

F that, Jay's gonna make a pdl2 clone before he dick's with those portable
antennas..we already have that 10K stuff swinging in the breeze.

Right, J? hehehe

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.

The 102 is the best portable antenna you can buy, bottom line. (cheap too)

It takes a real CBer to drive around with one every day tho.

wrote:
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.
Do you have any hard test results to back up that claim? Has the
X-terminator been used on a side by side basis with a 102" whip on say
the Lockheed Martin ant test range or is it personal testing you have
conducted? Is it just the Rat Shack whip you are comparing it to or
other maunfacturers (like their is a helluva lot of them)?

Steveo wrote:
F that, Jay's gonna make a pdl2 clone before he dick's with those
portable antennas..we already have that 10K stuff swinging in the breeze.

Right, J? hehehe

Hey Frank G, you're sharp enough to make a clone of that pdl II, improved
model! (the initial alum cost might be killer)

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.
Do you have any hard test results to back up that claim? Has the
X-terminator been used on a side by side basis with a 102" whip on say
the Lockheed Martin ant test range or is it personal testing you have
conducted? Is it just the Rat Shack whip you are comparing it to or
other maunfacturers (like their is a helluva lot of them)?

You don't need a antenna test range to determine relative gains.
I can only confirm the antennas I have tested. The R-S 102"ss
and the Workman X-Terminator are two of them.

On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 19:49:29 -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?

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.


Send me an antenna and I'll do the test. Well?






----== 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 =----

Send me an antenna and I'll do the test. Well?

Are you on welfare? I owe you nothing.

wrote:

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.

Do you have any hard test results to back up that claim? Has the
X-terminator been used on a side by side basis with a 102" whip on say
the Lockheed Martin ant test range or is it personal testing you have
conducted? Is it just the Rat Shack whip you are comparing it to or
other maunfacturers (like their is a helluva lot of them)?


You don't need a antenna test range to determine relative gains.
I can only confirm the antennas I have tested. The R-S 102"ss
and the Workman X-Terminator are two of them.
Maybe so but what would convince an operator who has never used either
to pick your choice of an ant over the other? Just because you said so?
Nothing you have posted has proven the relative worth of an X-terminator
being a better ant than any 102" whip. General consesus on this board
claims the 102" whip is superior to anything else. Not saying you are an
agent for the X-terminator but where are the hard facts?