B
BOOTY MONSTER
Guest
ok , thanks for the fun folks .
i really think its silly to think that one test under any conditions is any proof of one antenna consistently doing better than another . it may be best in that particular installation , but that doesn't mean it will be best in the majority (or minority) of typical user installations . from what i can tell what is under antenna (type of earth , structures and such) greatly effect how they perform . many folks got equal or better performance with a starduster than a big 5/8 . and i would consider a 70 ft feed-point to definitely be in a very small minority of typical real world CB base installations .
there's also the argument/opinion/evidence that tip height is what matters most , that even a vector will do no better than a dipole at the same tip height . thats assuming the antennas are properly constructed and tuned and that the coax/mast isn't radiating .
what's your thoughts ?
i really think its silly to think that one test under any conditions is any proof of one antenna consistently doing better than another . it may be best in that particular installation , but that doesn't mean it will be best in the majority (or minority) of typical user installations . from what i can tell what is under antenna (type of earth , structures and such) greatly effect how they perform . many folks got equal or better performance with a starduster than a big 5/8 . and i would consider a 70 ft feed-point to definitely be in a very small minority of typical real world CB base installations .
there's also the argument/opinion/evidence that tip height is what matters most , that even a vector will do no better than a dipole at the same tip height . thats assuming the antennas are properly constructed and tuned and that the coax/mast isn't radiating .
what's your thoughts ?