Well DB, I can't argue with your conclusions here, it just seems to make sense that Jay's I-10K and the Shockwave are similar, but still different in design only.
We have discussed this already, but I don't understand your application and I don't know how I could apply my source differently, but you could be right. I would feel better about my model if it produced results that are closer in the match to what I see with my real antenna.
IMO, it makes little difference my using Eznec and you using 4NEC2. The software should show us all that...results can be very still similar. So I'm not so sure, as you that we would see differences in results. I will give you credit for the fact that you understand how this software works.
If you figure out how I could do what you did with your source...then let me know, and I will attempt to fix my model accordingly. I would love to have my model show the nice match that you get. I would also like to see a better bandwidth than my model currently shows.
I'm open to discussing how Eznec applies the feature that inserts the source on my end, but I'm not pressing for that to happen, so don't get upset with me over this issue.
IMPO, I would expect our source to be located at the same point in our models, the AG results be close to the same, and of course the performance results be close to the same, but I don't know the science or math.
Thanks for your discussion on the subject.
