[Top] [All Lists]

[TowerTalk] Re: Low beam vs. higher dipoles? (QUAD?)

To: <>
Subject: [TowerTalk] Re: Low beam vs. higher dipoles? (QUAD?)
From: (Bill Gode)
Date: Fri, 09 May 1997 09:17:52 -0500
>But even a small tribander at 25 feet
>will be more fun than you can believe.

Don't forget the 2 element Quad when considering low-height antennas.
You can put up a single quad that will cover 20-17-15-12-10 meters.

At least from my experience, the quad will out-perform a triband yagi,
especially at lower antenna heights.  You have to work a little harder
to extract optimum performance out of a quad vs. a tribander, but the
results should be well worth the effort. 

I'm currently considering replacing my KLM 7 element Log Periodic with
a 20 meter monoband yagi at 75 feet and adding a 2 element quad for
17-15-12-10 meters on a side mount at around 50 feet.  Anyone have
any thoughts, or suggestions?  It's been 20 years since my last quad
and I still remember how well that antenna performed.

I would like to improve performance primarily on 20 meters and feel
that a second antenna to cover the higher bands would add flexibility
to my two-transceiver station.  The Log Periodic has been a good antenna,
but performs no better than an average 3 element yagi with fair F/B.


Bill, WA9NHQ 

FAQ on WWW:     
Administrative requests:

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • [TowerTalk] Re: Low beam vs. higher dipoles? (QUAD?), Bill Gode <=