My experience is that a quad is often quieter. I realize there is not a
good analytic reason for this (or, at least, none has been found yet). I
used a Cubex 5-band quad for several years and it was the best receiving
antenna I ever had. (I used separate feeds, via a 5-band coax switch.)
I have a 3-el SteppIR now; I love it for several reasons, but I still think
the quad was a slightly better receiving antenna. The SteppIR gets better
marks for apparent transmitting gain---i.e., I seem to get through pileups
a little faster----and the 180-degree switch is wonderful. The quad was
quite broad-banded; no problem covering the whole band on 20-10. Of
course, the SteppIR has no problem either, but other beams may not shine as
well in this area.
There are quads and there are quads. The Cubex model is probably the most
expensive, but it is strong. I never worried about wind or ice damage.
Why did I change? A quad is a 3-dimensional structure that is very
difficult for one person to handle. Especially when that one person is not
quite a young as he was a few years ago. If you are younger and more
active, or if you have helpers for antenna work, then a quad can be an
attractive antenna. Only a small rotator is needed; turning radius is
small; bandwidth is not a problem; no tuning adjustments needed (at least
with the Cubex) unless you want the last .1 db at a particular frequency;
it is not a heavy antenna, etc.
Bill -- W2WO
_______________________________________________
See: http://www.mscomputer.com for "Self Supporting Towers", "Wireless Weather
Stations", and lot's more. Call Toll Free, 1-800-333-9041 with any questions
and ask for Sherman, W2FLA.
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|