I just don't get the big controversy. Many antennas are made in a way or have features that deal with wind, weather, and rain, so what is the big deal. Either they have it or they don't.
I bought a Wolf .64 ground plane that I believe is some sort of co-linear type design and maybe not specifically a .64. I paid good money for it, and it has an upside down gamma match feeder. The top or the bottom of the gamma, take your choice, for that antenna was not plugged. I didn't think a thing about it, but at some point after installing it outside it got water in it. Surprise! surprise!
Until it leaked out or dried up, the antenna didn't work too good at all. Do y'all think that was something the manufacture should have addressed. Of course it was. Common sense suggest that may have been why Wilson put a hole in the base, end of story.
The same thing with this Wilson idea, so again...what is the big deal that we have guy's arguing it is good, it is bad, it's only on older models, or the newer model are better, because it don't have a hole in it.
This ain't no big deal, but I guess it is a topic for discussion.
This ain't no big deal, but I guess it is a topic for discussion.
My thoughts exactly...a person has one bad experience and "hears" about others; and the entire product line is defective and sucks. As many as they sell, they are bound to have a problem or two?? As I stated earlier, I have owned several, they have performed very well considering their fairly inexpensive cost.
I don't understand that a single small hole wouldn't be sufficient, it allows any free water to drain and any moisture to evaporate (in the event some might actually get into the base). I also find the drill will easily sink clear into base...like its completely hollow. I also blew into the hole on both antenna bases, they hold pressure...I would expect an air leak if they were also going to leak water?
Bandit35: you act like the only opinion that matter's is yours...I find it funny how many have had zero problems, but those don't count??
I really believe that the design has changed from the original and I hope it's for the better.
Seems the older ones may have had some issues, i can't speak to that, and others have, but mine is a newer one bought in 2008 or early 2009.
It is all plastic hdpe, with no seal on the bottom, you can look back to my earlier post with picture on it and see that a seal has been formed of the actual hdpe.
The tolerances on my antenna are very tight. The mast fit's in very tight, the mast it self is very tight against the cap and I have no evidence of water intrusion at these locations that may have been a problem in the past. It does not mean it may not be a problem after wear and tear, I just have not seen it up to this point.
So I hope that Wilson has improved the design as it appears to have done. As soon as i get a chance I will take some more pics to show what i am seeing on this "newer" wilson 5k antenna of mine.
I guess Stryker has still got some of these antennas.
A few CB shops still have them in stock for $69 & shipping.
Google it if you must have one.
Bandit, is that a recent purchase you had problems with or is this an old like more than 3 or 4 years?
Cuz, i seem to think they have improved the design.
Bandit what do you like about this antenna, i think it is the same as the Wilson line you claim to have been having problems with? Just asking...
Since Bandit35 is just trying to run a product into the ground at this point (you made your point quite clear), I'm out since nothing I would say would make a difference.
as i said before i still do like the wilson antennas. however i won't spend another red cent on one, or recommend them untill the q.c. problems are addressed.
and i understand the fact that as many as they produce, there are bound to be a few that are defective......a few. with all the reserch i have done it would seem that most of the defective complaints that i am aware of have been within the last year.