Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+C3E\s+vs\s+EF\-420S\s+or\s+EF\-420\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+C3E\s+vs\s+EF\-420S\s+or\s+EF\-420\s*$/: 3 ]

Total 3 documents matching your query.

1. [TowerTalk] C3E vs EF-420S or EF-420 (score: 1): Author: "Dana Roode" <dana.roode@gmail.com>; Date: Sat, 11 Aug 2007 09:43:24 -0700; Towertalkans - I'd be interested in your experience or thoughts related to the following antenna options. I currently have a Force-12 C3E at 65'. I have other antennas for 15 and 10 and I am debating; /archives//html/Towertalk/2007-08/msg00313.html (7,214 bytes)
2. Re: [TowerTalk] C3E vs EF-420S or EF-420 (score: 1): Author: K7LXC@aol.com; Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2007 15:33:58 EDT; and 10 and I am debating replacing the C3E with either a Force-12 EF-420 (4 element 30' boom) or a EF-420S (4 element 24' boom). To grossly over-simplify, the 420S has about .7 db gain over the C3 an; /archives//html/Towertalk/2007-08/msg00570.html (8,024 bytes)
3. Re: [TowerTalk] C3E vs EF-420S or EF-420 (score: 1): Author: "Dick Green WC1M" <wc1m@msn.com>; Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2007 23:02:21 -0400; change. I must respectfully disagree. I've had a C3E and an EF-420 for quite a few years and would, without hesitation, recommend the EF-420 over the C3E. It always seems like there's a lot more tha; /archives//html/Towertalk/2007-08/msg00592.html (8,496 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 3
Page: [1]