Hi all; My current E-mail address is dennisgp@muscanet.com rather than the
juno address.
As for the CTSVR vertical antenna; and I am by no means comercializing
or
advertising for the Uni-Hat corporation, I feel this antenna has everything
going for it that is described in the advertising and in the included
manuals with the antenna. I have had mine up for nearly 8 months now and
in comparing it to the 75 foot vertical I had in Seattlem, WA "THERE SIMPLY
ISN'T ANY COMPARISON" especially when you look at the figures for DX
worked. Yes, I worked 82 countries from the Pacific Northwest and
confirmed 75 or so of them before leaving in May of 1996. But that also
was in a span of 15.3 years. Since relocating to Iowa in May of 96 and
getting back on the air September 25, 96; I've worked 65 countries of which
28 are new ones. I have yet to work a JA or VK from Iowa on 160. I do
work both the east coast and west coast quite regularly with 100 watts or
less. Ask the guys on 1850 and 1930 if in doubt. That's not too bad for
an antenna that I was told wouldn't work on 160 unless it was a quarter
wave vertical or some comprimise thereabouts. Well, for a 30 footer with
only 6 each 32 foot radials underneath I don't think you can argue with
success or performance. Especially when you compare 65 countries worked in
7 months versus 82 in 15 years. There just isn't any comparison. This
is on a city lot in a very busy neighborhood close to schools, hospitals,
municipal power, local radio station 1 mile away and power lines parallel
to the property lines. Plus the fact of having a 50 foot Civil Defense
Siren warning system only 40 feet away from the vertical antenna. If you
want to see coupling to an antenna this was just the surprise from Murphy.
I've had 5 Butternuts and they worked very well for the design they were
intended. I've had 2 GAP antennas and again for the money and design it
worked well. Neither antenna was what I would call a screamer on 160. I
personally feel that the CTSVR for the money invested along with the
manufacturers design efforts, their personal investment, and the time
involved in putting an antenna on the marketplace that does everybit of
what they say; ONE CAN'T GO WRONG WITH THIS ANTENNA". I have said for
many years that an antenna is only as good as it's design characteristics
as well as it's efficiency of operation. You get out what you put in.
Plain and simple. If you only play with 40-60% effiuciency how can you
expect anything more? If you want compromise, continue spending the
small bucks every two or three years; They love you for it. If you want
Results and Performance along with Efficiency and Reliability then go get a
CTSVR. You get what you pay for and you are what you eat. I hope this
bandwidth is appreciated and co-incides with topband related material.
I AM NOT AN EXPERT by anymeans of the hobby; but I learned along time
ago;
to take bits and pieces of what I heard and learned and put them together
under my particular type of operating conditions and make them work for ME.
What works for another operator doesn't necessarilly mean that it will
work for the next; however, you won't know unless you try. Then if it
doesn't work doesn't mean you should give up. I worked for two years on
the SWA antenna in Seattle before I got it to work as the book explained.
Now I use a micro version of the same and it worked the first time after
implementation. 73s and good DXing to all de N7CKDennis in Muscatine, Iowa
along the banks of the Mississippi River.
--
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/topband.html
Submissions: topband@contesting.com
Administrative requests: topband-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems: owner-topband@contesting.com
|