Interesting, I have been feeding my 8 foot Francis a steady diet of 500+ watts pep for several years now, works just fine.
73
Jeff
-
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.
Interesting, I have been feeding my 8 foot Francis a steady diet of 500+ watts pep for several years now, works just fine.
73
Jeff
7 years since my last post and it is still working just fine.
Fiberglass is a little fuzzy, but it is still taking everything my TS 500 can feed it.
Wish they still made them.
73
Jeff
Fiberglass is a little fuzzy, but it is still taking everything my TS 500 can feed it.
Wish they still made them.
73
Jeff
Jeff...what do think it is that makes these antennas work so well? The three elements? Lower angle of radiation?
Since you bumped this thread I’ve been reading this and another on the Amazer. Very interesting stuff.
I still have not taken that picture.
I guess I need to pull it off and sand down the fiberglass shards on the outside of it and hit it with some spar urethane or something to protect it.
I had one on my ranger that I snapped off backing under a carport and I should have took a picture of that as well.
You could see the 3 copper wires inside the base of the antenna no problem.
As to why they work so well...
I can't say for sure it is the 3 wires or if it just because of the total length.
Somewhere on the forum is some watergates that Rob did one time when we were talking a good distance , 100 plus miles, while I was testing some antennas.
He was on a Flex radio and I think I was using the 2950dx with a about 300 watts, been a long time ago.
I had a couple of Francis antennas and a couple of Kales single coil antennas that I switched back and forth on my pickup.
In the end I decided that there was no " astonishingly" hugh difference in the antennas.
Sometimes I think there is more feel good in antenna results than real concrete results when we switch from one antenna to another.
It not like
" well I took of my radio shack whip and put on the snake antenna and he said my signal went up 9 s units and the audio doubled.
There is a lot of feel good in a report like that.
Copy?
73
Jeff
I guess I need to pull it off and sand down the fiberglass shards on the outside of it and hit it with some spar urethane or something to protect it.
I had one on my ranger that I snapped off backing under a carport and I should have took a picture of that as well.
You could see the 3 copper wires inside the base of the antenna no problem.
As to why they work so well...
I can't say for sure it is the 3 wires or if it just because of the total length.
Somewhere on the forum is some watergates that Rob did one time when we were talking a good distance , 100 plus miles, while I was testing some antennas.
He was on a Flex radio and I think I was using the 2950dx with a about 300 watts, been a long time ago.
I had a couple of Francis antennas and a couple of Kales single coil antennas that I switched back and forth on my pickup.
In the end I decided that there was no " astonishingly" hugh difference in the antennas.
Sometimes I think there is more feel good in antenna results than real concrete results when we switch from one antenna to another.
It not like
" well I took of my radio shack whip and put on the snake antenna and he said my signal went up 9 s units and the audio doubled.
There is a lot of feel good in a report like that.
Copy?
73
Jeff
Yes, Shockwave, I tend to agree with everything you have said. Antennas of similar OAL tend to perform very closely. My approach to get the “best” antenna for a mobile is always to select the one that allows for most favorable mounting location, and is as long as possible without destroying itself. The 10k and the Wilson have worked well for me in that regard, as have a few others over the years. Two newer antennas that everyone seems to rave about, the Sirio 4000 and the President Texas, both seem to share the fact they they’re well made and long
Lately I’ve been interested in ways (if there are any) to lower the angle of radiation in mobile antennas.
I’m very curious if the parallel radiators in this design help with that. And then I start to wonder about the “dibar” and “quad disk”, and if any of the claims about them are true. Free cell posted that four Amazers on a dibar showed an improvement of 2-2.5 s-units over a 1/4 wave whip. I have to take that with a HEALTHY dose of salt, but it sure makes me wonder. I’m half tempted to whip up a quad disk type device, and thread a bunch of 7’ fire sticks onto it. Would still be a long way to go to get to the 12 elements of four Wheeler Dealers or Amazers.
Anyway, the design of the Amazer/Wheeler dealer isn’t quite as I pictured. I expected the elements would be wound around the fiberglass, but it appears they’re straight, at least from the patent. Physically parallel, and not only in an electrical sense.
Lately I’ve been interested in ways (if there are any) to lower the angle of radiation in mobile antennas.
I’m very curious if the parallel radiators in this design help with that. And then I start to wonder about the “dibar” and “quad disk”, and if any of the claims about them are true. Free cell posted that four Amazers on a dibar showed an improvement of 2-2.5 s-units over a 1/4 wave whip. I have to take that with a HEALTHY dose of salt, but it sure makes me wonder. I’m half tempted to whip up a quad disk type device, and thread a bunch of 7’ fire sticks onto it. Would still be a long way to go to get to the 12 elements of four Wheeler Dealers or Amazers.
Anyway, the design of the Amazer/Wheeler dealer isn’t quite as I pictured. I expected the elements would be wound around the fiberglass, but it appears they’re straight, at least from the patent. Physically parallel, and not only in an electrical sense.
I've always felt that the AMAZER was the best performing mobile antenna I have ever run.
(I mentioned the following in another thread years ago.)
I was at the CES in Vegas back in the 80s. Francis had a small booth there, and I talked to Richard Francis and his engineer at length about his antennas. They said that the WHEELER DEALER and the AMAZER were both "triple quarter wave" antennas. Three quarter wave wires embedded in fiberglass resin. The three wires in the WD were all the same diameter and the same length, while the wires in the AMAZER were three different diameters and three slightly different lengths. They claimed that this gave the Amazer a greater bandwidth (????), because it was resonant at three different frequencies. They really didn't have any data to back up their claims, but my experience is that it's one hell of an antenna.
As far as the DIBAR and QUAD DISC goes ... back in the day I tried running a dibar setup on my mobile for a while and really couldn't tell any difference over a single. All it really did was to stress my antenna mount to the max from the increased wind resistance.
- 399
BTW ... I would like to get hold of the threaded mount end of a WD or Amazer. If anyone has a junk one of these antennas laying around and you're willing to sell it, please give me a price with shipping to Miami. Thanks. -399
(I mentioned the following in another thread years ago.)
I was at the CES in Vegas back in the 80s. Francis had a small booth there, and I talked to Richard Francis and his engineer at length about his antennas. They said that the WHEELER DEALER and the AMAZER were both "triple quarter wave" antennas. Three quarter wave wires embedded in fiberglass resin. The three wires in the WD were all the same diameter and the same length, while the wires in the AMAZER were three different diameters and three slightly different lengths. They claimed that this gave the Amazer a greater bandwidth (????), because it was resonant at three different frequencies. They really didn't have any data to back up their claims, but my experience is that it's one hell of an antenna.
As far as the DIBAR and QUAD DISC goes ... back in the day I tried running a dibar setup on my mobile for a while and really couldn't tell any difference over a single. All it really did was to stress my antenna mount to the max from the increased wind resistance.
- 399
BTW ... I would like to get hold of the threaded mount end of a WD or Amazer. If anyone has a junk one of these antennas laying around and you're willing to sell it, please give me a price with shipping to Miami. Thanks. -399
The patent shows some interesting reading on the design objectives and construction.
As I understand it, by having multiple elements the impedance can be closer to 50ohms at resonance and increase efficiency over a straight quarter wave. The part that stymies my thoughts on home brewing, is that they say both diameter and spacing controls impedance.
The patent also describes how they easily made 3 different lengths. The wires are parallel and off-center in the Fiberglass, so that when ground (more or less like a pencil) you end up with 3 different lengths.
Your observation matches with that...and Francis can have antennas coming down the assembly line, grind some and call them Amazers, cut the others to length and call them Wheeler Dealers, all with the same manufacturing process and tooling.
The dibar/quad disk sounds like an impractical nightmare to run in a mobile environment. I can’t imagine that many people would want to run one when one antenna works well and the cost to run a quad disk would be at least 4 times that, plus the disk, and likely a tougher mount.
But...if used static for dx...that’s where I’m headed with my thoughts.
As I understand it, by having multiple elements the impedance can be closer to 50ohms at resonance and increase efficiency over a straight quarter wave. The part that stymies my thoughts on home brewing, is that they say both diameter and spacing controls impedance.
The patent also describes how they easily made 3 different lengths. The wires are parallel and off-center in the Fiberglass, so that when ground (more or less like a pencil) you end up with 3 different lengths.
Your observation matches with that...and Francis can have antennas coming down the assembly line, grind some and call them Amazers, cut the others to length and call them Wheeler Dealers, all with the same manufacturing process and tooling.
The dibar/quad disk sounds like an impractical nightmare to run in a mobile environment. I can’t imagine that many people would want to run one when one antenna works well and the cost to run a quad disk would be at least 4 times that, plus the disk, and likely a tougher mount.
But...if used static for dx...that’s where I’m headed with my thoughts.
JJ, I've made similar claims about the Francis antenna. For me, 1st impressions always seemed to be the lasting recollections.
I may have previously told my story about my 1st experience when I bought two Francis whips on the forum. There is more, but One was Gray and the other was Red or Orange. Based on the ad sheet in the CB Shop, I thought they were the same antenna...just different colors. So, I bought both antennas cheap.
This is why I always thought the antennas were the same, just different colors to satisfy the different colors in automobiles.
I didn't find this out until years later...when somebody posted a link to the Patent 3541567, posted above.
I ran the Wheeler Dealer for a few years until I gave up working mobile and setup my base station. I never had any problems either, and I never used the gray antenna. I also never really compared antennas until the Internet started up, and I was reading folks comments about their antenna experiences and mostly about guys that could not get their 102" whips to tune right.
Today, I think maybe my 1st impression with my Red Francis WD talking DX to a guy 1000 miles away who was listening in...while a buddy and I were checking out my new installation between our mobiles about 5 miles apart.
I'm going to redo my Francis model and set it up as a mobile, rather than as a base antenna like I did maybe 5 years ago or longer.
Last edited:
Back in the late 70s, when the CB boom was at its peak, Both PAL and Francis made mounts for multiple antennas. Pal called theirs the "V-Bar," and Francis called theirs the DI-BAR M20.
I ran the V-bar with two Amazers when I was parked atop Saddleback mountain in South Orange County (Ca). They were mounted on the mount on my truck's rollbar. Great for DX. Very directional. Looked ridiculous on the truck, but who cares when you're parked. I believe that the V-bar would be a better choice for Dxing than the DI-BAR, if only because of the directional factor. If you're running a big linear it has to help because you're doubling the antenna radiating area.
I've always suspected that removing the radiating element from an A99 and replacing it with a pair of steel whips on a V-Bar would improve the performance and actually make it somewhat directional. Never did try it though/
- 399
I ran the V-bar with two Amazers when I was parked atop Saddleback mountain in South Orange County (Ca). They were mounted on the mount on my truck's rollbar. Great for DX. Very directional. Looked ridiculous on the truck, but who cares when you're parked. I believe that the V-bar would be a better choice for Dxing than the DI-BAR, if only because of the directional factor. If you're running a big linear it has to help because you're doubling the antenna radiating area.
I've always suspected that removing the radiating element from an A99 and replacing it with a pair of steel whips on a V-Bar would improve the performance and actually make it somewhat directional. Never did try it though/
- 399
Last edited: