[Top] [All Lists]

[TowerTalk] 402-CD vs. EF-240X -Reply

To: <>
Subject: [TowerTalk] 402-CD vs. EF-240X -Reply
From: (
Date: 30 Apr 1998 12:33:59 Z
And in my unscientific observations, having had yagis and now a
5-band, 2 element quad, I will be hard pressed to ever fool with yagis
again (in my current qth, anyway).  The quad is much quieter, in
reference to both natural and manmade noise.  Insofar as
maintenance, it  has been up 2 years now, and I have not had to
touch it.  In fairness, however, I dont live in a high wind area.  It plays
the entire bandwith of all 5 bands without need of an antenna tuner,
has a small turning radius,  and it has just the right f/b ratio for my
needs in contesting.

Jim    W4LC

>>> 04/29/98 11:21pm >>>
Charles will have to speak to the TH-7, but certainly the Hy-Gain
monobanders like the 204BA, although having insulated driven
were at DC ground through the beta match attached to the boom.

Also, in my non-scientific reference to a beam being "quieter" I meant
the noise generated by atmospheric phenomena, such as
noise, rather than the man made stuff that might be avoided by an
antenna being higher in the air.

In my not so humble opinion, there hasn't been sufficient work done
the relative "quietness" of various antennas.  My own observations
told me that closed loops such as quads are *much* less susceptible
precipitation static than yagis.  And amongst yagis, DC grounded
are quieter than those with insulated elements.  This represents only a
very few data points spread out over about 45 years of playing with
antennas...and I still don't know why I observed what I observed.

I wouldn't expect Force-12, Cushcraft, or KLM to advertise that
were quieter than yagis anymore than I would expect Lightening Bolt,
Quad, or Cubex to say that quads are more trouble to maintain than
yagis.  We probably can't look for enlightenment on this subject from
the commercial sector.  It will have to come from the amateur ranks
from academia.  Or has it already been done and just not highly
publicized?  L.B., have you come across anything on the subject?

I'm not sure what good it would do if the "facts" were known.  Look at
the Double Bazooka.  Sometimes it seems to me that the relative
of antennas are more a matter of religious-like faith than hard
evidence.  Regardless of what is proved or demonstrated, I will be
pressed to ever fool with quads again.  If, however, it can be
demonstrated that grounded yagis are significantly less susceptibel
atmospheric and/or precipitation noise than those with insulated
elements, then that is something I could and would definitely make

Ken K4XL


Del Seay wrote:
> >My single band 10, 15, and 20 beams (HyGain 5 el) are much
quieter than my
> >removed TH-7.  And all the new ones are plumber's delight!  de
> So was the TH--7, wasn't it. Well, except for the DE.
> You don't suppose that pattern may be involved, do you?
> I find higher antennas to more immune from local manmade
> noise, due to the fact that the noise must travel further.
> de KL7HF

Ken K4XL
Boatanchor Manual Archive -

Administrative requests:

FAQ on WWW:     
Administrative requests:

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>