I agree Bob, that absolute gain is likely not likely what matter as much as we think, but we do use it as a gauge for comparisons even if we don't test under idea situations.
Until I could model and see what a science type application might show for gain, about all I could do otherwise, would be to get my gain information off of Joe Gunn's website or the like. However, I still can't tell, or even get close to telling what the actual gain or angle is for any of my antennas. I do try and use a little common sense though and I tend to read a bit regarding what others have to say on the subject.
You and I both know that my models show and have shown that the S4/NV4K antenna should show more gain at a bit lower angle than a 1/4, 1/2, or 5/8 wavelength vertical antenna. IMO, science also shows this to be a fact. The only thing I don't see...is the amount of differences that most report.
I think I will make a new effort to see how Eznec predicts this now...as I think I know a bit more about modeling in Eznec now and might be able to consider more in the process. At the very least I know now how to make sure my models are consistent in setting within the 500 segments available to me with my version of Eznec.
I never tested during DX unless I wanted to make spme comparisons for some special reasons. I did it mostly, because most of my old radio buddies...went into hibernation during previous DX periods and I have no body dependable to check signals with.
Well, even if the 1/2 wave you have shows to be less efficient due to a lossy matcher...it might still demonstrate some ideas for the difference you're looking for...as compared to your Vector Hybrid on raising to some discrete heights. IMO, efficiency is one thing, but effectiveness is another and can produce completely different results. IMO, tt depends a lot on what we're looking for.
I've heard this story before Bob. You just made a similar comment about what some claim regarding the use of a gamma matcher. How do we tell if a matching system is lossy or efficient or not? I think, at best, we can get a sense for effectiveness...but that is about it as CB'r go.
If the ratio of db's to Sunits is truly 6 db's like most report...then I find it had to believe this claim, but instead consider this much difference has more to do with some natural condition that makes the difference noted. IMO, 9 db's is a big difference. Plus we constantly hear that radio meters are almost as useless as tits on a boar hog at giving us accurate information.
Bob, I'm sorry, but all my days in experiences in radio have shown me that much of the differences seen and reported in comparing radio operations...is much less of a difference than typically reported.
I guess I'm just too cynical to believe much anymore. I still believe most folks see what they claim, but common senses sometimes appears to be absent in my eyes, so my cynicism is not meant to be personal.
Good luck with your new work on your station. After several years feeling like crap most of the time...I too have a new spirit to get back into some antenna work again. The only problem is today...I find few folks on the air to test with, and when local traffic begins to dominate again...I don't look for CB to resume as in the past...with plenty of signals to consider in my hobby.
Good luck in you efforts for more input Bob,
Keep us posted.
