Imax 2000 or maco v-5/8th

[Robb]

Personal experience...
Since using the IMAX I have gotten more skip than I ever did with an aluminum 5/8 wave gp. New Zealand, S Brazil, and almost made it Tasmania the night before last. No brag; just fact.

I don't doubt that each setup is different. However one cannot so easily dismiss the difference. I can't, as I've seen/heard it firsthand. Works for me!

 

[hookedon6]

... and almost made it Tasmania the night before last. No brag; just fact...

i'm a little confused,........................ "almost"

 

[Robb]

i'm a little confused,........................ "almost"

Excuse my grammer! AS in 'Almost made the contact'. I heard Tasmania really well; but too many other stations from the US were trying to work that station.

 

[jazzsinger]

Excuse my grammer! AS in 'Almost made the contact'. I heard Tasmania really well; but too many other stations from the US were trying to work that station.

just because you heard tasmania don't mean the guy in tasmania would have heard you even without competition,theres many variables that can make propagation 1 way,not least the differing angles of radiation of both tx and rx antennas used,both due to design of those antennas,mounting height and anything else that may affect eithers radiation pattern/angle.

I almost worked china once,sadly the guy in the local cantonese takeaway wasn't for dragging a cobra 148 gtl dx on his home visit with him to activate china,but i almost managed to talk him into it.

Imax 2000 better in dx land,hmmm,that really depends on what you consider dx land,i guarantee time after time the v58 will blow the i max away on extremely distant dx contacts,sure its lower radiation angle may not be as ideally suited to the i max's higher angle for short hop/sporadic e type propagation,but as soon as you go F1 layer the maco will win hands down every time,and as shockwave says be less likely to cause rfi into the bargain.

its a no brainer if your seriously into dx'ing over ragchewing locally or working intercontinetal within north america and upper lattitudes of s america.

 

[Highlander_821]

I almost am married to Ashley Judd. I've seen her and she's really attractive, so I could have married her, except somebody else got to her before me.

 

[Highlander_821]

I find all the anecdotal "evidence" that some people employ to try to support conclusions/opinions about one omni antenna versus another to be unsound. If you take an antenna down that gave an S4 to a monitoring station a few miles away, then put up a different antenna and get an S5 at that same monitoring station, that does NOT prove that the second antenna is superior. Groundwave conditions can change just like skywave conditions can. There is a repeater on 10 meters about 40 miles from me. Sometimes I can hit it with a solid signal (not full quieting, but just a little hiss and pop) and sometimes I can't hit it at all. This is from my base with no changes between attempts. It can change dramatically over the course of a few hours.


Perhaps that explains some of the odd results people get comparing between omnis. Maybe between the time you took down the aluminum groundplane and put up the fiberglass pole, conditions changed a little.


Then to even bring DX or skip into it is even sillier. Just because you never talked to brazil on your aluminum antenna, does not mean that the fiberglass antenna you are using now is better. Maybe the SFI and the MUF are higher on average than they may have been a few months or years ago? Duh. This is why they have antenna ranges and modeling programs. I am quite sure that the Maco V58 would outperform the Imax -2000 on a real set of CONTROLLED tests. All the rest of this is nonsense.

 

[jazzsinger]

I almost am married to Ashley Judd. I've seen her and she's really attractive, so I could have married her, except somebody else got to her before me.

PMSL,bummer,but you know what they say,"if you ain't fast your last!!"

 

[Robb]

just because you heard tasmania don't mean the guy in tasmania would have heard you even without competition,theres many variables that can make propagation 1 way,not least the differing angles of radiation of both tx and rx antennas used,both due to design of those antennas,mounting height and anything else that may affect eithers radiation pattern/angle.

I have worked Australia/S Australia (on 10m no less - without having to re-tune the antenna) and New Zealand with it many times; so Tasmania isn't such a hard stretch to imagine - if you can.
:laugh:

 

[Highlander_821]

I worked Hawaii and South Africa with a homebrew 1/4 wave groundplane made of scrap wire and an 8 foot 2 by 2. I haven't worked Hawaii or South Africa with my Imax-2000.

This does not prove that my homebrew is a "better" antenna than the Imax. In fact, I am certain that the Imax has higher gain than the 1/4 wave home brew.

See how this works? It is just mental masturbation.

 

[Robb]

I can say that from my location I have certainly done better with the IMAX than my old 5/8 wave aluminum antenna ever did. That is enough for me - it is evident. I'm not saying the Maco is worse or better; I know that the IMAX has proved its worth to ME.

 

[nat19]

Locally the maco 5/8 will out talk the imax 2000. As far as shooting skip it would be almost impossible to tell, but my maco has done it's fair share whenever the skip is rolling.

 

[jazzsinger]

I have worked Australia/S Australia (on 10m no less - without having to re-tune the antenna) and New Zealand with it many times; so Tasmania isn't such a hard stretch to imagine - if you can.
:laugh:

lol,

having worked melbourne australia on a barefoot president jackson and sirio hp4000 mag mount antenna whilst static mobile doing 18w pep on 11m from norhern uk not to mention most of s america and s africa as well as usa/canada countless times on the same setup i think i can imagine how easy it is to work anywhere in the world with a base station antenna on 10m talking to someone no doubt using massive tower and beam antenna.

what really surprises me is you saying on "10m no less" as if its unheard of or any major achievement,when propagation is running at the top of hf anywhere in the world is possible even on mediocre setups.

but as highlander says how far you work in good conditions isn't a measure of an antenna,its how far you get in dismal conditions that really sets good antennas apart,and the i max isn't a good antenna,its mediocre,especially as supplied without radials.i will concede though that its second too none for causing olympic scale tvi though.

 

[jazzsinger]

I can say that from my location I have certainly done better with the IMAX than my old 5/8 wave aluminum antenna ever did. That is enough for me - it is evident. I'm not saying the Maco is worse or better; I know that the IMAX has proved its worth to ME.

that isn't surprising seeing as propagation conditions are on the up whereas when you used your 5/8 wave they were probably at their lowest,then your knowledge has probably increased since then too,not to mention your confidence has grown,which both enhance results too.

sometimes you have to look past the tress to see the forest and take in the bigger picture.

 

[1342]

I can say that from my location I have certainly done better with the IMAX than my old 5/8 wave aluminum antenna ever did. That is enough for me - it is evident. I'm not saying the Maco is worse or better; I know that the IMAX has proved its worth to ME.

i could have not said it any better! i have owned both of these antennas for several years and if the maco worked better i would put it back up but it does not hmm maybe its that extra 5 feet of length!theres a thought.

 

[hookedon6]

...I almost worked china once...

yeah, they just can't run a decent radio/amp there. the elect system in those damn ricshaws just won't cut it..... and on top of that, they have to drag their antennas upside down to work us:blink: