Jim Hackett wrote:
Help! I can't decide which to try. There are many preselectors to choose
from. Even MFJ has several from which to choose:
956....looks simple. inexpensive. work well????
1040C..looks complicated. more$$. amplified
1045C..don't see much if any difference than with 1040C
1046...passive not real cheap
Then there's the 1020C ACTIVE antenna that Passport says makes a dandy
preselector if you take off the whip.

SHEESH! I don't have a clue which to try.
What I am attempting to accomplish is to weed out the 50kw blowtorch down
the street and keep out unwanted 2nd and 3rd order images out of my beloved
but cheaper single conversion valve jobs.

I feel the need to cross-post this to a few places to get multiple opinions.
YOURS would be appreciated...

Regarding the passive units, I've used both. I like the 1046; it's a
nice unit. A bit more fussy to get on the sweet spot than the 956,
since the bandwidth is narrower on the 1046.

The 1040C and 1045C are similar in that they're both amplified
preselectors. The 1040C allows for use with a transceiver (hence, the
delay knob on the front). Also, the 1040C, unlike the 1040C, allows
for use with two separate antennae and two different receivers, with
buttons on the front for switching between antennae 1/2 and receiver
1/2. The 1045 does not allow for a two antennae & two receiver set-up
that way, although I believe that some of the online descriptions
wrongly state that it does. One nice thing: the 1045 allows for
battery operation with a 9V battery. I use my 1045C fairly frequently.
The amplifier is fairly decent...it actually does produce a better
signal to noise ratio from time to time, and can also attenuate a
signal (that is, attenuate the signal from the strength level it would
be if the unit were bypassed altogether) when turning the gain knob
from the 12 o'clock position in the counter-clockwise direction.

I've called MFJ before and asked if there was much of a difference
between the 1045C and the 1020C active antenna. From appearances, they
seem much alike, with the exception of the fact that the 1020C has
coverage from 0.3 to 40 MHz and includes a whip, while the 1045C has
coverage from 1 to 54 MHz and no whip. From what I was told by the MFJ
fellow, it's advisable to get the 1020C if you're primarily wanting an
active antenna, but that if you're specifically needing a preselector,
the 1045C better performs this function (well, I guess that's why one
is marketed as an active antenna and the other a preselector, huh?)
:-)
In any case, I find that the 1045C can work just as well as an active
antenna if you give it a decent length of wire (20 feet or so...kinda
like what PWBR suggests for the 1040C...it's a pity that PWBR doesn't
do some reviews of these sorts of accessories, along with the receiver
and antenna reviews).

Regards,

Junius

Thanks Junius. You have been VERY helpful.



"junius" wrote in message
oups.com...

Jim Hackett wrote:
Help! I can't decide which to try. There are many preselectors to
choose
from. Even MFJ has several from which to choose:
956....looks simple. inexpensive. work well????
1040C..looks complicated. more$$. amplified
1045C..don't see much if any difference than with 1040C
1046...passive not real cheap
Then there's the 1020C ACTIVE antenna that Passport says makes a dandy
preselector if you take off the whip.

SHEESH! I don't have a clue which to try.
What I am attempting to accomplish is to weed out the 50kw blowtorch
down
the street and keep out unwanted 2nd and 3rd order images out of my
beloved
but cheaper single conversion valve jobs.

I feel the need to cross-post this to a few places to get multiple
opinions.
YOURS would be appreciated...

Regarding the passive units, I've used both. I like the 1046; it's a
nice unit. A bit more fussy to get on the sweet spot than the 956,
since the bandwidth is narrower on the 1046.

The 1040C and 1045C are similar in that they're both amplified
preselectors. The 1040C allows for use with a transceiver (hence, the
delay knob on the front). Also, the 1040C, unlike the 1040C, allows
for use with two separate antennae and two different receivers, with
buttons on the front for switching between antennae 1/2 and receiver
1/2. The 1045 does not allow for a two antennae & two receiver set-up
that way, although I believe that some of the online descriptions
wrongly state that it does. One nice thing: the 1045 allows for
battery operation with a 9V battery. I use my 1045C fairly frequently.
The amplifier is fairly decent...it actually does produce a better
signal to noise ratio from time to time, and can also attenuate a
signal (that is, attenuate the signal from the strength level it would
be if the unit were bypassed altogether) when turning the gain knob
from the 12 o'clock position in the counter-clockwise direction.

I've called MFJ before and asked if there was much of a difference
between the 1045C and the 1020C active antenna. From appearances, they
seem much alike, with the exception of the fact that the 1020C has
coverage from 0.3 to 40 MHz and includes a whip, while the 1045C has
coverage from 1 to 54 MHz and no whip. From what I was told by the MFJ
fellow, it's advisable to get the 1020C if you're primarily wanting an
active antenna, but that if you're specifically needing a preselector,
the 1045C better performs this function (well, I guess that's why one
is marketed as an active antenna and the other a preselector, huh?)
:-)
In any case, I find that the 1045C can work just as well as an active
antenna if you give it a decent length of wire (20 feet or so...kinda
like what PWBR suggests for the 1040C...it's a pity that PWBR doesn't
do some reviews of these sorts of accessories, along with the receiver
and antenna reviews).

Regards,

Junius

Thanks for the suggestion Baldy.


On Thu, 27 Apr 2006 12:31:54 GMT, Carter-K8VT
wrote:

junius wrote:

I've called MFJ before and asked if there was much of a difference
between the 1045C and the 1020C active antenna. From appearances, they
seem much alike, with the exception of the fact that the 1020C has
coverage from 0.3 to 40 MHz and includes a whip, while the 1045C has
coverage from 1 to 54 MHz and no whip. From what I was told by the MFJ
fellow, it's advisable to get the 1020C if you're primarily wanting an
active antenna, but that if you're specifically needing a preselector,
the 1045C better performs this function (well, I guess that's why one
is marketed as an active antenna and the other a preselector, huh?)


If you'd like to see the actual differences between the two units, I
suggest you go to the MFJ web site and download the free .pdf manual for
each.

http://www.mfjenterprises.com/manuals.php


It’s Christianity vs. Islam. Let’s get this party started!

Do u want a excellent usenet filter?
Then add these folks to yours.
---------------------------------
mII
Dave Stinson
John Barnard
Greg
David
Peter Wieck
Steven Dinius
Sylvain Vanier