Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+2\s+telrex\s+6m624\'s\s+versus\s+M2\s+6m9khw\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+2\s+telrex\s+6m624\'s\s+versus\s+M2\s+6m9khw\s*$/: 4 ]

Total 4 documents matching your query.

1. [TowerTalk] 2 telrex 6m624's versus M2 6m9khw (score: 1): Author: "Joe Barnes" <n4jbk@comcast.net>; Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2010 15:39:44 -0400; I have 2 telrex 6m624's ( 6 elements 24 foot boom) that I am planning to stack with a tennadyne t10 between them. The Telrex's will be stacked 14 or so feet apart per telrex's instructions. My questi; /archives//html/Towertalk/2010-08/msg00281.html (6,810 bytes)
2. Re: [TowerTalk] 2 telrex 6m624's versus M2 6m9khw (score: 1): Author: "K1TTT" <K1TTT@ARRL.NET>; Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2010 20:45:56 +0000; In my opinion any old telrex should be run through an optimizer before being put back up on a tower. I tested and retuned 3,4,and 6 ele 20m, 8ele 15m, and a big 10m one... they all needed major retun; /archives//html/Towertalk/2010-08/msg00284.html (8,961 bytes)
3. Re: [TowerTalk] 2 telrex 6m624's versus M2 6m9khw (score: 1): Author: Hector Garcia XE2K <j_hector_garcia@sbcglobal.net>; Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2010 14:00:34 -0700 (PDT); Joe Will recommend a computer Modeled antenna, the 6M9HKW is a modern antenna with tested performance Take a look at this site if you want the top performance antenna , you can build it with the part; /archives//html/Towertalk/2010-08/msg00287.html (9,383 bytes)
4. Re: [TowerTalk] 2 telrex 6m624's versus M2 6m9khw (score: 1): Author: <john@kk9a.com>; Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2010 17:59:40 -0400; I concur regarding the Telrex design. They are old designs with equally spaced elements and unfortunately since the elements go though the boom, they are difficult to optimize. I sold all of mine yea; /archives//html/Towertalk/2010-08/msg00289.html (8,646 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 4
Page: [1]