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.
The Feb 2025 Radioddity Giveaway Results are In! Click Here to see who won!

Reply to thread

Message

I certainly don't see any difference other than the animation and the Vector with two in-phase current lobes vs. the GM that has only one lobe with its center fed 5/8 wave radiator that benefits from its ingenious and maximum full use of the capture area of a 5/8 wave radiator. This is not typical for the end fed 5/8 wave which seems to waste capture area and some RF due to the bottom 1/8 wave section being out of phase.

All the maximum radiation lobes noted on method of moment modeling software produce antenna images showing the primary lobe as a 1/2 wave or portions of the 1/2 wave. I think it's just like ole' Jack the "FreeCell" has always told us...when we got corn'fused.

Personally I believe the big difference in performance we all would hope to see here is due to improvements in "capture area." For me, that seems to be evident among the group of antennas we typically use, the Vector, the Sigma4, the Gain Master, and the 5/8 wave ground plane, and the 1/2 wave, and maybe even in that order of effective gain.

Since I can't explain why my antennas do not seem to indicated the remarkable differences others see, I can only assume that the location is king and the soil and topography differences...rules the success or the lack off success. Personally I think there might be some differences to be noted to be due to good, better, or bad symmetry in design as well. That said however, I think the Sigma4 due to design and length is somewhat superior to all other models thus far produced for CB.

<blockquote data-quote="Marconi" data-source="post: 254132" data-attributes="member: 903">I certainly don&#039;t see any difference other than the animation and the Vector with two in-phase current lobes vs. the GM that has only one lobe with its center fed 5/8 wave radiator that benefits from its ingenious and maximum full use of the capture area of a 5/8 wave radiator. This is not typical for the end fed 5/8 wave which seems to waste capture area and some RF due to the bottom 1/8 wave section being out of phase. &nbsp;All the maximum radiation lobes noted on method of moment modeling software produce antenna images showing the primary lobe as a 1/2 wave or portions of the 1/2 wave. I think it&#039;s just like ole&#039; Jack the &quot;FreeCell&quot; has always told us...when we got corn&#039;fused.&nbsp;Personally I believe the big difference in performance we all would hope to see here is due to improvements in &quot;capture area.&quot; For me, that seems to be evident among the group of antennas we typically use, the Vector, the Sigma4, the Gain Master, and the 5/8 wave ground plane, and the 1/2 wave, and maybe even in that order of effective gain. &nbsp;Since I can&#039;t explain why my antennas do not seem to indicated the remarkable differences others see, I can only assume that the location is king and the soil and topography differences...rules the success or the lack off success. Personally I think there might be some differences to be noted to be due to good, better, or bad symmetry in design as well. That said however, I think the Sigma4 due to design and length is somewhat superior to all other models thus far produced for CB.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Marconi, post: 254132, member: 903"] I certainly don't see any difference other than the animation and the Vector with two in-phase current lobes vs. the GM that has only one lobe with its center fed 5/8 wave radiator that benefits from its ingenious and maximum full use of the capture area of a 5/8 wave radiator. This is not typical for the end fed 5/8 wave which seems to waste capture area and some RF due to the bottom 1/8 wave section being out of phase. All the maximum radiation lobes noted on method of moment modeling software produce antenna images showing the primary lobe as a 1/2 wave or portions of the 1/2 wave. I think it's just like ole' Jack the "FreeCell" has always told us...when we got corn'fused. Personally I believe the big difference in performance we all would hope to see here is due to improvements in "capture area." For me, that seems to be evident among the group of antennas we typically use, the Vector, the Sigma4, the Gain Master, and the 5/8 wave ground plane, and the 1/2 wave, and maybe even in that order of effective gain. Since I can't explain why my antennas do not seem to indicated the remarkable differences others see, I can only assume that the location is king and the soil and topography differences...rules the success or the lack off success. Personally I think there might be some differences to be noted to be due to good, better, or bad symmetry in design as well. That said however, I think the Sigma4 due to design and length is somewhat superior to all other models thus far produced for CB. [/QUOTE]

Top Bottom