[TowerTalk] M2 "Skip Log" vs. SteppIR

[Bill Eisinger]

Again, one of the reasons I went with the M2 was because of the 40m
coverage.  If I were doing it today, I would most likely throw the Steppir
Monster antenna into the mix for evaluation.  It is was more expensive than
the M2 but I'm sure the comments related to performance are accurate.

By the way, I worked the KP5 guys last night on 30m and 40m both on the
M2...those pileups were about as bad as they get and I had no trouble.

73's,
Bill, AA7X

-----Original Message-----
From: towertalk-bounces at contesting.com
[mailto:towertalk-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Peter Chadwick
Sent: Saturday, December 17, 2005 8:13 AM
To: donovanf at starpower.net; towertalk at contesting.com
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] M2 "Skip Log" vs. SteppIR

 A downside to the Steppir over a log periodic if you happen to be the
military is that it won't allow wide band systems or frequency hopping. If
you don't need that facility, it must offer pretty good advantages to
military/commercial people.
For ham use (which is my only interest), I'm very impressed with the
performance of mine. Price wise, it compares reasonably well with a set of
monobanders, and offers  less wind loading and top weight.
As far as mechanical reliability is concerned, we'll have to wait and see.
So far, the reports suggest it's OK.
73
Peter G3RZP
_______________________________________________

See: http://www.mscomputer.com  for "Self Supporting Towers", "Wireless
Weather Stations", and lot's more.  Call Toll Free, 1-800-333-9041 with any
questions and ask for Sherman, W2FLA.

_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk at contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk