Base Can you measure your I- Max 2000

[Marconi]

Glad you posted that. My box said MAX 2000 purchased 2019. Will be awhile before I can get it down to measure. SWR is higher than the 30yo IMAX.

Thanks Robert. If you have a New Imax that is actually shorter, you may be the first to post the New Imax dimensions, from the bottom of the mount to the tip, that we are talking about.

In the meantime, and if your radio can go well above the CB band maybe to 30 MHz, maybe you could check your match up around the top of 10 meters and report back.

 

[Recon]

Recon, good point Recon.

In my efforts to measure my old Imax I measured and recorded the individual element lengths for all individual parts from top to bottom.

I was only interested in the radiator length to use with my Eznec model of the Imax. I took my measurements with the antenna fully assembled, but I found it difficult to measure the overall length accurately with a tape measure.

So, I recently used my element length measurements and added them up. I could have made a mistake in adding or leaving a small measurement out. I no longer have my Imax. A Ham buddy I sold it too is recovering from a stroke...so he is not able to help me with measurements.

I also used the information in the images and text of the document below. Note here that Tech 833, the author, shows different dimensions that I recorded on my Imax. It is true we find different measurements from different folks. IMO, this is not quite the same as the recent questions raised about the Imax being noticeably shorter than in the past.

Click below for link to article "Imax 2000 Exposed":

http://www.copperelectronics.com/discus4/messages/7750/10782.html?1011570399

Take good note of the images to get the parts in mind. Also check the Schematic #1 closely as well. I see the bottom end of the Imax radiator wire near the middle of the brass capacitor and from there down it is 16" inches to the coax connector.

I also have the matching section including the wire inside the base section from the connector to the tip of the wire. I find the length of the area from the connector to the center of the capacitor is about 16" inches. So, if one wants the length of the Old Imax radiating element, just take the overall length of 288" - 16" = 272" inches as measured from the bottom of the mounting bracket at the coax connector to center of the capacitor where the Imax radiator starts. The Imax radiator seems to be just floating above ground. Inside the capacitor the two PVC insulators are end to end with the wire plugs in the plastic. This places the radiator wire and the matching section wire close together with a small gap. This is my opinion.

My 27.205 MHz model I posted earlier uses the overall length dimension of 284.75" - 16" = 268.75" inches for the Imax radiator length. Here the model shows resonance with the value of (R) resistance = 38.02 ohms and the value of (X) reactance = +J 1.501 ohms at 27.205 MHz, and SWR = 1.318. I tweaked the length to get the reactance as low as possible while maintaining the maximum gain possible. This is how I come to an overall length of 284.75" inches.

Wow! Great info! The article was written and posted in 2002!
Hats-off to Tech 833 for the doing the difficult and tedious task of removing the internal wiring from inside the fiberglass rods, especially the top section. I was curious if there would be an advantage of adding the ground plane kit to the MAX 2000 and as per the article, there is an advantage. After reading the article and viewing the photos, I understand how the tuning rings affect the VSWR.
Are we to assume that the length and components of the base / coil section of the newest and shorter MAX 2000 is the same as always and the difference is in the length of the wiring in the fiberglass rods?

 

[Marconi]

Are we to assume that the length and components of the base / coil section of the newest and shorter MAX 2000 is the same as always and the difference is in the length of the wiring in the fiberglass rods?

Good question Recon.

Check out the link below where I posted my Eznec modeling idea for a matched Imax at 24' feet long and tuned at 27.205 MHz as compared to the New Imax at 22' feet long that shows us resonance results at 29.743 Mhz...just like the Old Imax Manual suggest.

New Imax wont tune 11m....this sucks

Here I simply shortened the original CB antenna by 24" inches in another thread discussing the New shorter Imax. This was done to see how the new length effects the results on shortening the radiator length.

 

[Recon]

Good question Recon.

Check out the link below where I posted my Eznec modeling idea for a matched Imax at 24' feet long and tuned at 27.205 MHz as compared to the New Imax at 22' feet long that shows us resonance results at 29.743 Mhz...just like the Old Imax Manual suggest.

New Imax wont tune 11m....this sucks

Here I simply shortened the original CB antenna by 24" inches in another thread discussing the New shorter Imax. This was done to see how the new length effects the results on shortening the radiator length.

Wow! This stuff is all new and confusing to me because my background and expertise is far away from radios and electronics, but......it appears to me that the 22' MAX 2000 isn't worth a darn for 11 meters.

 

[Marconi]

After reading the article and viewing the photos, I understand how the tuning rings affect the VSWR.

When you get time maybe you can describe your thinking here.

Are we to assume that the length and components of the base / coil section of the newest and shorter MAX 2000 is the same as always and the difference is in the length of the wiring in the fiberglass rods?

I did my model to see how shortening effected the performance and the results show the frequency is virtually what the Imax Manual Trimming Chart suggest on shortening by 24" inches. All this has to be tested in the Real World however, if we want to be sure.

I was curious if there would be an advantage of adding the ground plane kit to the MAX 2000 and as per the article, there is an advantage.

As yet I have not posted my models over Real Earth, but when I removed the radials, similar to what you suggest. the match went bad, as one might expect. However, the gain, angle, and pattern remained close to the same values as the model with radials. The matching feature I used only allows me to show a workable SWR so I can scan the bandwidth. This SWR scan does not reflect the predicted wide bandwidth the Imax is know for...so in that regard the matching was done for convenience.

I will also post this model with no radials along with the models over Real Earth.

Thanks for the questions.

 

[Marconi]

Wow! This stuff is all new and confusing to me because my background and expertise is far away from radios and electronics, but......it appears to me that the 22' MAX 2000 isn't worth a darn for 11 meters.

As least you see what the models are suggesting. This is what this whole discussion is all about...the Imax is apparently not a CB antenna any more... unless maybe your have a tuner in-line.

I'm curious to see if some ham operators are still able to work this new Imax as a multiband of sorts anymore.

 

[Recon]

As least you see what the models are suggesting. This is what this whole discussion is all about...the Imax is apparently not a CB antenna any more... unless maybe your have a tuner in-line.

I'm curious to see if some ham operators are still able to work this new Imax as a multiband of sorts anymore.

The way I see it, it is a "win-win" for the manufacturer and they can't lose.
The shorter antenna meets the shipping requirements and it will also cater to 10 meter guys/ gals.
If the short antenna works best and only for the 10 meter band and is no good for 11 meters, then why keep the tuning rings? Why not design a shorter antenna without tuning rings?
As stated on a previous post, new potential CB radio antenna buyers must ask the seller to measure the MAX 2000 antenna prior to ordering it. The folks who have / are receiving, assembling and installing the shorter antennas may have a difficult experience returning the antennas after disturbing the packaging and hardware and scratching the metal surfaces.

 

[techradioman]

I use a tuner with mine and although I have other antennas for the other bands the IMAX is a great antenna on 10 thru 20 meters so i'd say for the performance of this antenna just use a tuner and be done.

 

[Recon]

Recon, good point Recon.

In my efforts to measure my old Imax I measured and recorded the individual element lengths for all individual parts from top to bottom.

I was only interested in the radiator length to use with my Eznec model of the Imax. I took my measurements with the antenna fully assembled, but I found it difficult to measure the overall length accurately with a tape measure.

So, I recently used my element length measurements and added them up. I could have made a mistake in adding or leaving a small measurement out. I no longer have my Imax. A Ham buddy I sold it too is recovering from a stroke...so he is not able to help me with measurements.

I also used the information in the images and text of the document below. Note here that Tech 833, the author, shows different dimensions that I recorded on my Imax. It is true we find different measurements from different folks. IMO, this is not quite the same as the recent questions raised about the Imax being noticeably shorter than in the past.
If the new size requirement for shipping was the primary reason to shorten the antenna, it would be an easy modification for the manufacturer. Remove the treaded chrome caps / ferrules from the top of bottom and top of the middle fiberglass masts, trim back the fiberglass, trim-off the required amount of the center wire, reattach the wire and chrome caps / ferrules with new resin sealing compound.
They probably made the new and shorter shipping boxes first and then instructed the assembly folks to modify the antennas to fit into the boxes, and whatever the final lengths of the sections were, "it is what it is"!

Click below for link to article "Imax 2000 Exposed":

http://www.copperelectronics.com/discus4/messages/7750/10782.html?1011570399

Take good note of the images to get the parts in mind. Also check the Schematic #1 closely as well. I see the bottom end of the Imax radiator wire near the middle of the brass capacitor and from there down it is 16" inches to the coax connector.

I also have the matching section including the wire inside the base section from the connector to the tip of the wire. I find the length of the area from the connector to the center of the capacitor is about 16" inches. So, if one wants the length of the Old Imax radiating element, just take the overall length of 288" - 16" = 272" inches as measured from the bottom of the mounting bracket at the coax connector to center of the capacitor where the Imax radiator starts. The Imax radiator seems to be just floating above ground. Inside the capacitor the two PVC insulators are end to end with the wire plugs in the plastic. This places the radiator wire and the matching section wire close together with a small gap. This is my opinion.

My 27.205 MHz model I posted earlier uses the overall length dimension of 284.75" - 16" = 268.75" inches for the Imax radiator length. Here the model shows resonance with the value of (R) resistance = 38.02 ohms and the value of (X) reactance = +J 1.501 ohms at 27.205 MHz, and SWR = 1.318. I tweaked the length to get the reactance as low as possible while maintaining the maximum gain possible. This is how I come to an overall length of 284.75" inches.

 

[ENC Pirate]

Are there ads somewhere for the 22 foot max? Just curious, Like I said most ads still say 24 feet , and I still dont believe radio antenna manufacturers build antennas to fit in a certain size box , a box about 8 inches shorter? huh? I dont doubt some company said that though. Unless I see mass sales of these listed at 22 feet,I'll go with the thought, these antennas were butchered to make use of Ham Bands and were not successful and returned. Was the 22 foot version in a 8 foot box?, if so case solved !This is more interesting than a Big Foot sighting,lol 73's
Ocean One Cape Hatteras

 

[Recon]

Are there ads somewhere for the 22 foot max? Just curious, Like I said most ads still say 24 feet , and I still dont believe radio antenna manufacturers build antennas to fit in a certain size box , a box about 8 inches shorter? huh? I dont doubt some company said that though. Unless I see mass sales of these listed at 22 feet,I'll go with the thought, these antennas were butchered to make use of Ham Bands and were not successful and returned. Was the 22 foot version in a 8 foot box?, if so case solved !This is more interesting than a Big Foot sighting,lol 73's
Ocean One Cape Hatteras

It was back in November when Bell's CB Radio had published a statement that they would not sell the I MAX 2000 antennas because their personal inspections and measurements had verified thirteen out of fourteen antennas were much shorter than 24'.
You may be correct about the new antennas being butchered. No one knows when Solarcon sold-out and maybe the work force left and new workers came in. If the antennas were mass produced on an assembly line, having a fabrication jig is a must so as just about anyone can build and assemble the antennas. We will never know the truth why the antennas are shorter.

 

[Cam Tetzlaff]

Is everyone measuring from the coax connector to the top of the top section with all sections assembled with the lockwashers?

Recon you bring up a great point and it made me re-think my previous measurements. Now.... I do have a disclaimer on this info I'm providing as I'm very sleep deprived from snow plowing streets. As I was in my previous post.

I remeasured tonight. Previously I measured to the end of the threads on each section. And for the base of the antenna I measured to the bottom of the aluminum plate. Probably not accurate measurement points. So tonight I measured each section without taking the threaded portion into account and the bottom section I measured to the end of the SO-239. The 3 pics I'm posting are in order of top first, middle second and bottom last.

Top section: 94"
Middle section: 91.5"
Bottom section: 94.625"

 

[Cam Tetzlaff]

Also the Max2000 box my antenna came in measured out at 96" +/- a half inch for cardboard flex/movement.

 

[Recon]

Recon you bring up a great point and it made me re-think my previous measurements. Now.... I do have a disclaimer on this info I'm providing as I'm very sleep deprived from snow plowing streets. As I was in my previous post.

I remeasured tonight. Previously I measured to the end of the threads on each section. And for the base of the antenna I measured to the bottom of the aluminum plate. Probably not accurate measurement points. So tonight I measured each section without taking the threaded portion into account and the bottom section I measured to the end of the SO-239. The 3 pics I'm posting are in order of top first, middle second and bottom last.

Top section: 94"
Middle section: 91.5"
Bottom section: 94.625"

Total length equals approximately 23 feet and 3/8 inches.
When a manufacturer advertises an antenna is 24' long, we believe it is the total length from end to end and nothing else.
The confusing part of this mess is that the Owner's Manual states that the tuning rings have been set at the factory. Yeah, but for what frequency?
If I lowered my 24' MAX 2000 and measured the location / position of the tuning rings and passed-on the information to this forum, the only guys who could use the measurements would be the guys having an antenna with the exact length as my antenna.
Your antenna is about 5/8" shorter than my antenna, which tells me that the tuning rings are not at the same position.

 

[Cam Tetzlaff]

Total length equals approximately 23 feet and 3/8 inches.
When a manufacturer advertises an antenna is 24' long, we believe it is the total length from end to end and nothing else.
The confusing part of this mess is that the Owner's Manual states that the tuning rings have been set at the factory. Yeah, but for what frequency?
If I lowered my 24' MAX 2000 and measured the location / position of the tuning rings and passed-on the information to this forum, the only guys who could use the measurements would be the guys having an antenna with the exact length as my antenna.
Your antenna is about 5/8" shorter than my antenna, which tells me that the tuning rings are not at the same position.

Right now I have the tuning rings locked in the position they were in out of the box. After work tomorrow I can take a measurement from the tip to the top ring, then put the rings in the actual middle and measure again.