Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+R8\s+vs\s+6BTV\,\s+etc\.\s*$/: 16 ]

Total 16 documents matching your query.

1. [TowerTalk] R8 vs 6BTV, etc. (score: 1)
Author: "Jim Lux" <jimlux@earthlink.net>
Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 12:15:36 -0800
Looking at "off the shelf" multiband HF vertical antennas (i.e. R8, 6BTV, etc.).. Are there any significant(! (>1dB)) radiation efficiency differences between them that wouldn't be swamped by such in
/archives//html/Towertalk/2005-01/msg01211.html (7,652 bytes)

2. Re: [TowerTalk] R8 vs 6BTV, etc. (score: 1)
Author: Jamesnf@aol.com
Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 16:04:43 EST
No. I have both the R8 and 6BTV. Both are good performers. The R8 is more of a mechanical challenge to put up and keep up. The 6BTV is very ground dependent requiring a radial field if ground mounted
/archives//html/Towertalk/2005-01/msg01218.html (7,435 bytes)

3. Re: [TowerTalk] R8 vs 6BTV, etc. (score: 1)
Author: Charlie <ad5th@direcway.com>
Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 15:34:14 -0600
I was in the same sort of quandary some months back that is, in choosing a multi-band vertical. I happened along to www.dxengineering.com where the 4-5-6BTV Hustlers are revered. I purchased a 5-BTV
/archives//html/Towertalk/2005-01/msg01220.html (9,766 bytes)

4. Re: [TowerTalk] R8 vs 6BTV, etc. (score: 1)
Author: doc <kd4e@verizon.net>
Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 17:05:05 -0500
Charlie wrote: I was in the same sort of quandary some months back that is, in choosing a multi-band vertical. I happened along to www.dxengineering.com where the 4-5-6BTV Hustlers are revered. I pur
/archives//html/Towertalk/2005-01/msg01221.html (9,368 bytes)

5. Re: [TowerTalk] R8 vs 6BTV, etc. (score: 1)
Author: Charlie <ad5th@direcway.com>
Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 17:18:38 -0600
Once the tuning is done the benefit of the tilt-over is during high wind advisories and for any possible repairs and periodic inspections. Also if I want to add another trap for 6-BTV I can do so eas
/archives//html/Towertalk/2005-01/msg01228.html (11,222 bytes)

6. Re: [TowerTalk] R8 vs 6BTV, etc. (score: 1)
Author: doc <kd4e@verizon.net>
Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 18:40:49 -0500
Charlie wrote: Once the tuning is done the benefit of the tilt-over is during high wind advisories and for any possible repairs and periodic inspections. Also if I want to add another trap for 6-BTV
/archives//html/Towertalk/2005-01/msg01229.html (9,157 bytes)

7. Re: [TowerTalk] R8 vs 6BTV, etc. (score: 1)
Author: "Jim Lux" <jimlux@earthlink.net>
Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 16:29:52 -0800
There was a post this morning(?) about fabricating a motorized tiltover mount for verticals to hide it from the pitchfork wielding and flaming torch carrying mobs. ___________________________________
/archives//html/Towertalk/2005-01/msg01233.html (8,513 bytes)

8. Re: [TowerTalk] R8 vs 6BTV, etc. (score: 1)
Author: Bob Nielsen <nielsen@oz.net>
Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 17:14:50 -0800
There are certainly differences in the way they are fed. The 6BTV is bottom fed with radials, while the R8 has a choke balun and matching transformer (see <http://www.iol.ie/~bravo/r7_vertical.htm> f
/archives//html/Towertalk/2005-01/msg01238.html (9,235 bytes)

9. Re: [TowerTalk] R8 vs 6BTV, etc. (score: 1)
Author: "K8RI on Tower Talk" <k8ri-tower@charter.net>
Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 20:56:53 -0500
Presumably there are mechanical differences in hardware, etc., but what I'm really looking for is any noticeable "power sucking loads" that are inherent in the design (sure, our vertical has a 2:1 SW
/archives//html/Towertalk/2005-01/msg01239.html (11,125 bytes)

10. Re: [TowerTalk] R8 vs 6BTV, etc. (score: 1)
Author: Charlie <ad5th@direcway.com>
Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 20:13:38 -0600
Bob thanks for the reference to the vertical report but the only download I can find for it is $17.00. What's with that? Charlie Ham Radio - AD5TH www.ad5th.com Live Blues Music www.492acousticblues.
/archives//html/Towertalk/2005-01/msg01241.html (11,214 bytes)

11. RE: [TowerTalk] R8 vs 6BTV, etc. (score: 1)
Author: "Joe Subich, K4IK" <k4ik@subich.com>
Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 23:14:53 -0500
Roger, Are the "radials" (counterpoise) connected to your tower? You will find that one MUST isolate the radials/counterpoise from the tower and use a good balun to decouple the feedline from the rad
/archives//html/Towertalk/2005-01/msg01243.html (9,910 bytes)

12. Re: [TowerTalk] R8 vs 6BTV, etc. (score: 1)
Author: "K8RI on Tower Talk" <k8ri-tower@charter.net>
Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 23:21:49 -0500
The antenna is installed as per the instructions. It works well on all but 20 meters. When I say it's deaf on 20, I mean you only hear a few weak signals. It's something far more than take off angle.
/archives//html/Towertalk/2005-01/msg01244.html (9,615 bytes)

13. Re: [TowerTalk] R8 vs 6BTV, etc. (score: 1)
Author: Bob Nielsen <nielsen@oz.net>
Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 22:50:13 -0800
I have an AV-640 (currently my only antenna) mounted on a 15 ft. piece of water pipe which is clamped to the eaves of my roof. It gets out as well on 20 as any other band (I've worked several countri
/archives//html/Towertalk/2005-01/msg01247.html (11,344 bytes)

14. Re: [TowerTalk] R8 vs 6BTV, etc. (score: 1)
Author: Bob Nielsen <nielsen@oz.net>
Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 22:54:07 -0800
It's quite comprehensive and I found it to be worth the price (YMMV). The results it showed for the R8 led me in that direction, but after comparing the R8 to the AV-640, including price (the AV-640
/archives//html/Towertalk/2005-01/msg01248.html (8,616 bytes)

15. [TowerTalk] R8 vs 6BTV, etc. (score: 1)
Author: "William B. Stacy" <WStacy@uwyo.edu>
Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 10:02:14 -0700
Hi, All: The vertical comparison report is a published book, which, like the tribander book, has test protocol, data, observations, and is comb bound. I bought it a while back and found the informati
/archives//html/Towertalk/2005-01/msg01251.html (9,287 bytes)

16. RE: [TowerTalk] R8 vs 6BTV, etc. (score: 1)
Author: "Joe Subich, K4IK" <k4ik@subich.com>
Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 14:18:17 -0500
The height is a compromise between ground induced losses on the lower bands and elevation issues on the higher bands. With an elevated vertical (ground plane) mounted 1/4 wave above ground the peak
/archives//html/Towertalk/2005-01/msg01252.html (9,854 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu