I've used a stack of PRO-57*A* antennas for about ten
years now. As my operating skills have developed enough,
I've been able to do fairly well in contests from my home
station. The antennas are at 60 and 100 feet, and have
been used to win or place in contests from Tennessee.
I've done pattern and F/B tests with other locals to
try to see if I was seeing any of the "negative gain"
that was reported by K7LXC and N0AX on the PRO-57*B*.
I've done comparisons to stacks of trapped and no-trap
tribanders at similar heights in the Nashville area.
We have consistently found pretty much identical signal
strengths into Europe on 10, 15, and 20 meters. I am on
a ridge, but Europe is actually my worst take-off azimuth,
with about a 50 foot rise in the ridge at 45 degrees.
Perhaps something was lost between the 57A and 57B models
on the contest bands? I believe the difference between
the A and B models was an additional trap to provide an
extra element for 12 meters? I know that my "A" models
have only two active elements on 12 meters. I truly don't
experience any of the "negative gain" on fifteen meters
reported by my old pals Steve and Ward.
Anyway, mileage always varies. Having operated from a few
different places with different antenna systems, I don't
think the PRO57 deserves the bad rap. I concur with K1AR
who said simply, "beams are good." Mine seem to play quite
well, and have lasted over a decade without any problems.
They are built to last. No boom truss is needed. Load up
the boom on 40 or 30 meters, and you've got a stout 6-band
On Tue, Aug 01, 2006 at 05:57:26PM -0400, ABowenN4OO wrote:
> Readers of the HF Tribander Performance by N0AX and K7LXC saw that
> the PRO 57 showed very poor performance by comparison to other
> tribanders. I owned one and can attest that a 5 band, 2 element quad
> at the same height was superior (and the 3 el SteppIR is better yet).
> I did not have the 40M elements.
TowerTalk mailing list