• You can now help support WorldwideDX when you shop on Amazon at no additional cost to you! Simply follow this Shop on Amazon link first and a portion of any purchase is sent to WorldwideDX to help with site costs.

maco 103c

I have a M103C, I purchased it new back the in 90's, it still works, but ditching it for a M104C or a homebrew 5 Element on a short boom (16 foot boom).

With the Beam on Vertical, sometimes stations heard me exactly the same on the M103C vs my Maco V5/8. Sometimes they said the 103C was stronger, this was with both antennas on Vertical. Not much gain over a groundplane antenna on vertical, only benefit to M103C vs Groundplane was the rejection of the M103C it does have suprising rejection, works quite well so you don't have to hear garbage coming from South of the Border.

I finally put the M103C on Horizontal, and it seemed to work much better, especially since it was only 30 feet or so above ground. For Example, If I was to talk to someone on a dual polarity beam like a Moonraker 4 on Vertical with my V5/8, and then I'd switch over to the 103C on Horizontal and they would switch over to the Horizontal side of the Moonraker 4, the signals came up dramatically, several S-units, and the "noise level" was very noticeably lower also. So I would say M103C on Horizontal, definitely worth it, thumbs up, on Vertical, Meh... Go for a M104C or bigger on Vertical if you want a Vertical Beam. The M103C might as well just be a rotating groundplane on Vertical, with the only benefit being rejection, no real gain over a 5/8 groundplane antenna as far as TX or RX strength. Someone had suggested to me once to remove the Gamma Match, as it has some loss associated with it, and break apart the driven element and drive it directly with some type of new matching system with no loss, can't remember the name now, but it's quite popular in the Ham world now, new since 1990 or so if I remember right. Anyway, they said if I did that I would pick up a little more gain because the gamma match system is lossy.

Personally I am done using HF Beams on Vertical, it's seems a waste, and from now on, if I want to talk Vertical P. I will just use my Imax 2000 or whatever groundplane antenna I am running at the time. The M104C or if I build a homebrew 5 element on this extra 16 foot boom I have laying around is definitely going on Horizontal Polarity only and tuned for 10 meters. It's nice to be able to bust up things on 10 meters when needed and any beam on Horizontal is a good start...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
Vertical antennas do see more noise because most man made noise is vertically polarized and( if my memory isn't completely failing) ground wave propagation is mostly vetically polarized. Horizontal ground waves attenuate faster than their vertical counterparts in GW prop..or something like that.
Why are all television transmissions horizontal?
 
I've notice that the guys running horizontal to horizontal can cover a greater local distance than vertical to vertical. Suggesting that horizontal is better for local TX/RX. The only problem with that is the number of locals in a mobile and/or on a vertical stick antenna.

When it comes to DX, the guys running H/V on the same beam can't really say that one is head and shoulders above the other. At any point with the same DX contact, vertical may edge out horizontal and in the next instant vise versa.

I also think that the exact same antenna, installed at 10 different stations, will react 10 different ways. So my conclusion is to mount the thing which ever way, at what ever height is easier for the guy doing the install.
 
But honestly Robb, is that monkey see monkey do logic?
Oh, absolutely . . .
More like Hammy see; Hammy do in this case. The original Yagi/Uda designers saw ground gain as well as forward gain.

I've notice that the guys running horizontal to horizontal can cover a greater local distance than vertical to vertical. Suggesting that horizontal is better for local TX/RX. The only problem with that is the number of locals in a mobile and/or on a vertical stick antenna.

When it comes to DX, the guys running H/V on the same beam can't really say that one is head and shoulders above the other. At any point with the same DX contact, vertical may edge out horizontal and in the next instant vise versa.

I also think that the exact same antenna, installed at 10 different stations, will react 10 different ways. So my conclusion is to mount the thing which ever way, at what ever height is easier for the guy doing the install.

Although horizontal antennas are generally quieter than verticals - that isn't always the case. I've gotten plenty of noise when I point my beam at horizontal power wires.

I know that when I was comparing 10m skip to 11m skip on the 4 element beam a couple of months ago, that most stations in DX land (Mongolia, Russia, Africa, Malaysia, etc) were all using horizontal beams. Very few vertical antennas at all made the trip. Of course, one must consider that polarization can change either way. After a great deal of distance, it would be hard to predict just how it ('polarization') will arrive. I think because of this added 'ground gain' off of the use of horizontal beams makes it the preferred antenna of choice for DXers.

Hammy see; Hammy do . . .

I remember that HenryHPSD made some comments about horizontal beams and the bit of extra gain they get from ground gain. Perhaps he can chime in here and fill in the blanks. Don't recall ATM just how that works.
 
ERR, see post #5

to get away from most of the man made verticle noise^^ ab v c^^

Word.

Same reason hams erect yagis flat and not vertical. It's not a matter of better for DX either. Verts have a lower rf take off angle and "alledgedly" are better DX antennas but don't offer the gain of a yagi. It's a trade off I guess.

I used a homebrew ground mounted vertical on 20m for a couple of years and was amazed at the receive capabilities with only 40 radials. Not much noise around here and al the power lines are under ground so the noise level on the vert was very low. Stiil higher than the dipole though.

I've notice that the guys running horizontal to horizontal can cover a greater local distance than vertical to vertical. Suggesting that horizontal is better for local TX/RX. The only problem with that is the number of locals in a mobile and/or on a vertical stick antenna.

When it comes to DX, the guys running H/V on the same beam can't really say that one is head and shoulders above the other. At any point with the same DX contact, vertical may edge out horizontal and in the next instant vise versa.

I also think that the exact same antenna, installed at 10 different stations, will react 10 different ways. So my conclusion is to mount the thing which ever way, at what ever height is easier for the guy doing the install.

I would think this is true. Radio waves change polarization bouncing around in the ionosphere.

For local rag chewing I had a 4 ele 10m yagi up (flat side) or a while and could chat with a buddy of mine who was about 15 miles away ( 7 element yagi ) in WV in very hilly terrain. Couldn't even hear each other above the noise on verticals.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
I need an example of this phenomena called "man made" noise.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

dxChat
Help Users
  • No one is chatting at the moment.
  • @ AWP:
    Is it possible to be on a lake and have a homing directional beam being emitted from the shore so a person could navigate to that beam's source? For example at night to a jetty.
  • @ BJ radionut:
  • @ wavrider:
    sea que sea que,
    +1