80% increase in performance?

[rabbiporkchop]

It sounds logical if you add up all the little numbers and look at the bigger picture.

 

[nomadradio]

So, twenty plus twenty percent is A 40-percent advantage, eh?

Uh, if your signal is 40 percent better, that would be about a 1.4 db difference.

If one S-unit on the meter at the far end is six db, this would be more or less the width of the pointer on the meter, right?

Big difference.

73

 

[dave457]

Just another plug for you know who.....

 

[Captain Kilowatt]

So, twenty plus twenty percent is A 40-percent advantage, eh?

Uh, if your signal is 40 percent better, that would be about a 1.4 db difference.

If one S-unit on the meter at the far end is six db, this would be more or less the width of the pointer on the meter, right?

Big difference.

73

But it's twice that since it is on both ends on the contact so that makes 2.8 dB. If only it really worked that way.

 

[bob85]

what happens on the bench with sig gens & sinad meters is not what happens in real life when you have band noise way above the noise floor of almost any cb radio,

his rigs or my own aligned with test gear won't have any more range than one i aligned using just my ears in real life off the bench.

theres a sucker born every minute.

 

[rabbiporkchop]

what happens on the bench with sig gens & sinad meters is not what happens in real life when you have band noise way above the noise floor of almost any cb radio,

his rigs or my own aligned with test gear won't have any more range than one i aligned using just my ears in real life off the bench.

theres a sucker born every minute.

Although Freecell did excellent work, his radios lost each other at half the distance. Not sure how not sending him more business makes me a sucker.

 

[bob85]

Can you explain how aligning radios so that they lose each other at half distance could be described as excellent work ?

or explain how that chart sounds logical & adds up to 80% improvement,
Mr spock would not agree with your logic & mathematics,

maybe you mean he aligned them to legal specs where others clip & crank up the power,
that won't cause anything like half the range,

detuning the receiver so its as deaf as a post would work,
so would turning the rf gain way down and its free,

at least one of the freecells that used to post on here under the same name took people for suckers and got away with it .

 

[rabbiporkchop]

Can you explain how aligning radios so that they lose each other at half distance could be described as excellent work ?

or explain how that chart sounds logical & adds up to 80% improvement,
Mr spock would not agree with your logic & mathematics,

maybe you mean he aligned them to legal specs where others clip & crank up the power,
that won't cause anything like half the range,

detuning the receiver so its as deaf as a post would work,
so would turning the rf gain way down and its free,

at least one of the freecells that used to post on here under the same name took people for suckers and got away with it .

Considering the work he did was on par with a factory alignment as well as on par with some of the best techs in the country, I think that would qualify his work as excellent. Being a dishonest businessman doesn't negate his technical abilities.

 

[bob85]

"his radios lost each other at half the distance"
that does not sound excellent to me,

all else been equal you need 4x the output power to have the same signal at double the distance,
no aligment / peak n tweak of a cb gives 4x stock output,

if freecell did dead balls on stock alignments, only managing half the distance of a peak n twaek rig is not possible,

you would have to detune the receivers or detune the transmitters at both ends for that scenario to work,

it would be more accurate to refere to freecell as them not he.

 

[rabbiporkchop]

"his radios lost each other at half the distance"
that does not sound excellent to me,

all else been equal you need 4x the output power to have the same signal at double the distance,
no aligment / peak n tweak of a cb gives 4x stock output,

if freecell did dead balls on stock alignments, only managing half the distance of a peak n twaek rig is not possible,

you would have to detune the receivers or detune the transmitters at both ends for that scenario to work,

it would be more accurate to refere to freecell as them not he.

since Freecell is a single individual by the name of Jack Thurston it seemed appropriate to refer to him as a single individual instead of multiple people.
Since the output power of all 4 radios was relatively equal it only makes sense to look at the receivers of all 4 to see what the differences were.

 

[bob85]

Must have not been aligning the receivers correctly,
you can't tweak the receiver of a cb to allow a double in range if it started out correctly aligned,

any of the popular radios have more than enough sensitivity, its band noise that limits range.

 

[rabbiporkchop]

Must have not been aligning the receivers correctly,
you can't tweak the receiver of a cb to allow a double in range if it started out correctly aligned,

any of the popular radios have more than enough sensitivity, its band noise that limits range.

In all fairness, Jacks radios did not include the Sanyo 2SC2999.
The results were virtually the same within 2 or 3 miles when comparing the same two radios tuned by David Bupp at DTB Radio and Russell Clift AB7IF rodehog radio, neither of which included the Sanyo 2SC2999.

 

[543_Dallas]

The operator's perception of how well a receiver works can be way off. I used to install a 2999 and schottky diodes in all my radios. I was not able to realign the rx at the time was amazed at how low the noise floor was and how much better it was.

The more radios I did this to the more inconsistencies I saw and wasn't sure why. Once I learned how to align the rx I realized I had just been fooling myself. I was desensitizing the receiver. Since I heard less noise I was convinced I did something good. I'm not arguing the effectiveness of that mod but the point is I was doing it all wrong and thought I was making miracles happen.

I'm with bob on band noise. I'm sitting at the desk now looking at the noise floor on 11 meters. It is -114dbm and that's about as quiet as it gets here. The receiver couldn't hear anything below that no matter what you do to it. Just as a comparison I have -135dbm with the coax disconnected. It would be easy to hear a tone at those levels on the bench. That all goes to hell when you connect an antenna

 

[rabbiporkchop]

The operator's perception of how well a receiver works can be way off. I used to install a 2999 and schottky diodes in all my radios. I was not able to realign the rx at the time was amazed at how low the noise floor was and how much better it was.

The more radios I did this to the more inconsistencies I saw and wasn't sure why. Once I learned how to align the rx I realized I had just been fooling myself. I was desensitizing the receiver. Since I heard less noise I was convinced I did something good. I'm not arguing the effectiveness of that mod but the point is I was doing it all wrong and thought I was making miracles happen.

I'm with bob on band noise. I'm sitting at the desk now looking at the noise floor on 11 meters. It is -114dbm and that's about as quiet as it gets here. The receiver couldn't hear anything below that no matter what you do to it. Just as a comparison I have -135dbm with the coax disconnected. It would be easy to hear a tone at those levels on the bench. That all goes to hell when you connect an antenna

What's the frequency of that noise?
I suspect it's pretty low and if we generate tones at a higher frequency than the noise itself it should be very easy to overcome the noise even at a distance without compromising transmitter efficiency.

 

[Captain Kilowatt]

What's the frequency of that noise?
I suspect it's pretty low and if we generate tones at a higher frequency than the noise itself it should be very easy to overcome the noise even at a distance without compromising transmitter efficiency.

The frequency of the noise would be broad spectrum from DC to daylight. Background noise is essentially noise from the sun mostly. It is comprised of ALL radio frequencies. That is the limiting factor in receiver sensitivity.You seem to be thinking about audio frequencies.