Dick, The 6BA I received from F12 last Nov had bolts not rivets, the paperwork
said rivets were an option.Fred KC5YN
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 12:29 PM, Dick Green WC1M<wc1m73@gmail.com> wrote:
Similar question: Which F12 antennas didn't perform well compared with which
lower priced antennas? A general comment on performance without any
specifics doesn't help much.
I have four F12 antennas: an EF-420 (4-el 20), an EF-515 (5-el 15), an
EF-610 (6-el 10) and a C4E (tribander.) They all perform well. Granted, I
bought them 15+ years ago, but at the time they were reasonably priced
compared with other options.
I very much doubt that monobanders from other manufacturers with the same
boom length and number of elements would outperform the monobanders. The
only difference might be the dual-element feed, which as far as I know is a
great way to feed a monobander. FWIW I always use current baluns on the
feeds.
At the time I bought it, the C4E was one of the only trapless commercial
tribanders (maybe the only?), and it performed as well or better on 20 and
15 than a much more expensive TH-7 I had at the time (and I had to repair
the traps on the TH-7 a couple of times.) I suppose there could be other
tribanders on the market that do better than the C4E, particularly on 10
meters, which isn't it's best band from an F/B standpoint, but I'm skeptical
that the design can be beaten with the same boom length and number of
elements on each band.
As for build quality, I've never had to repair any of the four antennas. I'm
a big fan of riveted elements over hose clamps or screws. I imagine that may
be part of why the F12 antennas cost more.
The F12 are no longer my main antennas for the high bands. I mostly use a
3-stack of 4-el SteppIRs for running in contests, and use the F12 antennas
for S&P and beaming in multiple directions. The C4E is almost exclusively
used for South, where it does an excellent job, even though it's only 48'
high. I rarely have to use one of the monobanders or the stack to work a
South multiplier.
Anyway, that's my experience with F12 antennas.
73, Dick WC1M
-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Thomson [mailto:jim.thom@telus.net]
Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2017 11:44 AM
To: towertalk@contesting.com
Subject: [TowerTalk] Force 12
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2017 15:37:14 +0000
From: william radice <k4owr@outlook.com>
To: "towertalk@contesting.com" <towertalk@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Force 12
:::: people finally realized that Force 12 antennas, while nicely built,
simply don't outperform other antennas costing half the price. I've had a
lot of them and they all performed poorly.
BILL K4OWR
## Which f12 antennas did you have that did not perform ?
## One item that F12 exceled at was their infamous Boom to mast pair of
plates. I ran with their concept, and beefed it up some with several HB
versions of it. I used .375 inch thick
6061-T6 for both the vert + Horz plate. Then used the Dx eng super jumbo
mast clamps for the vert plate to mast.... and Dx eng SS .375 inch U
bolts and solid al saddles for the
Horz plate to boom. Bomb proof. The beauty of this F12 design is.... the
boom can tilt a huge amount.
## Every other boom to mast scheme I have seen both present and past is
cumbersome and time consuming. The latest version that f12 used to mount
their eles to the boom is extremely robust.
It uses .25 inch thick wrap around plates, instead of the older f12
multi right angle version. New f12 version uses 20 x .25 inch rivets on
all 4 x sides.
Jim VE7RF
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|