Topband: What ever happened to the 160 meter "Z" antenna?

[Tom W8JI]

> Tom,  Thanks for the details on the "Z" for TB.  On a related matter I 
> have been looking for comparisons between a "L" and a "T" firmly believing 
> that a "T" would be better as in 65' up and 135' horizontal fed in the 
> exact center.  However there are so many TB'ers using "L" rather than "T"s 
> which begs the question....why? You need two supports for the "L" but how 
> much do you gain by converting this to a "T" with even a modest ground 
> plain of 6-12 radials?  Or is it just a matter of convenience and lot 
> size?

There is almost no difference between the T and L. It is mostly a matter of 
what someone can fit.

When I lived on a city lot, I had restricted antenna room. I installed a 
"G5RV" between two tall pines. I dropped the feedline vertically to the 
ground. I fed the entire thing as  T on 160, and I managed to work many 
JA's, VU, UA0's, VS6, and even a JT on 160.  An L I tried was no different, 
but too many wires cluttered an area and makes an RF mess out of things. The 
G5RV gave me a good 160 antenna (fed as a T) and a pretty good 80-10 
antenna, with just one wire and one feedline, using a tuner right where the 
feeder came to ground level.

I installed a 100 ft vertical later, and it was no better than the G5RV "T". 
As a matter of fact I just phased the 100ft tower against the G5RV to make a 
two element 160 vertical array with four patterns.

> Again my question:  How much better is a "T" over an "L" on 160?

No one would notice, it is not even worth one dB. We are actually lucky to 
notice 6 dB unless we A B test something.

You would likely notice the out and up and out half wave, though. It is far 
more like a messed up dipole than a good vertical.  The one I tried lost 
several dB on groundwave over a base loaded vertical. It kept getting better 
and better as I made it more and more like an "inverted L".