imax vs i10k

[Unit 194]

Unit 194,

Did your freind call the I10k company and ask what might have happened, I bet there is some kind of warrentee on it and if there was a bad part they would replace it. No matter what you buy best and most expensive or cheap there is always a chance of getting a bad item. Thats why there are warrentees on stuff. The 10k is stated for much higher wind survival so tell your freind to call and get fixed up.

I myself would love to hear details of exactly how it fell to pieces.

I am not a 10k owner but a maco 58 owner and cant justify buying a 10k. my maco does wonders for me at only 7ft off ground and will prob. last 20 years and at the price they sell I can buy a spare just in case.

I did own a I max 2000, after having my maco for about a year I took it down ant tried the I max in the same spot but after a 2 month period went back to my maco.I hated the noise and the lower signal reports I got when useing I max. my maco is not built as tough as the 10k but it has been holding up in high gusts and thats why I find it hard to believe it did.I am not sticking up for the 10k because I own one either.

But I can say if I spent the money on a 10k and it fell apart I would be calling someone to straighten it out, money back or new antenna if it was a part failing. I am sure they stand behind there product.Tell your freind to call them.

I am just trying to help your freind and not trying to piss anyone off.

AP

Airplane1: My friend told me the "top hat" of his antenna was blown off (he found it in his neighbors yard), and part of the ground plane radials were missing and/or damaged. But the main structure of his antenna was intact. He actually repaired the antenna himself and he is now using it again.
I would also agree that the Maco 5/8 is an excellent antenna and I'm sure it would give the I-10K a run for it's money.

Out of all the Omnidirectional Antennas I have owned (which have been many), I have found that the Imax 2000 (with the GPK) works the best for me in my application.


73's

 

[Master Chief]

Switch Kit I know you are agreeing with me. My response was aimed at the people who chose to pay $250.00 for the I-10K who probably feel an $89.99 Imax is an inferior antenna compared to the I-10K.

The iMax is inferior. There is no doubt about it. Its been proven over and over and over again. Proof trumps theory!

.....it must have been put together wrong. My Maco V58 went through gusts that high and no problem, so I think the I-10K would do even better :? .

It WAS (put together wrong) and it WOULD do better than a V58)! One thing the manufacturers have no control over is the weak link in the chain....the human element. Build it tight, build it right!

Making excuses and false accusations about my friend's application and his supposed poor assembly of the antenna is laughable.

Laughable but true.

Some other misc comments; Chill out because we don't agree with you? Your comments are your opinion but do not represent facts concering the build quality of the antenna; The Imax has an OPTION for ground plane radials and it was PROVEN that they added little to the performance of the antenna; The I-10K was tested against the Maco V58 and the Maco didn't give it a run for its money. Still, the Maco V58 is a good antenna, especially for the price! :roll: :roll: :roll:

 

[Unit 194]

The iMax is inferior. There is no doubt about it. Its been proven over and over and over again. Proof trumps theory!

As I have stated before the Imax is NOT inferior on TX when compared to the I-10K. The PROOF has been shown on my S meter over and over again.

It WAS (put together wrong) and it WOULD do better than a V58)! One thing the manufacturers have no control over is the weak link in the chain....the human element. Build it tight, build it right!

"It was put together wrong"???? How could you actually know that without physically inspecting the antenna????

 

[Master Chief]

I don't doubt that your S-meter shows the same readings using both antennas. But, does this prove what antenna is better? It is clearly obvious that the I-10K was not assembled correctly due to it falling apart. Is it possible that errors were made during the assembly that would cause the antenna to not perform as designed? As has been pointed out by you, we already see where it hasn't MECHANICALLY performed as designed due to human error. This does not mean that your "friend" is an idiot; it means that an obvious error was made.

Quick story.....
A local here in Southern CA installed an I-10K and could not get it to work. Since I AM a Southern CA EXPERT when it comes to the I-10K (and the Avanti/Maco lines too), I was asked to come in and find the problem. The antenna swore up and down that he measured everything twice. When I couldn't get it to match, I brought it down and found that the top element was 10" off! OOPS! So much for measuring twice. It was a simple human error, we fixed it, and it worked great after that.

I have owned 6 I-10Ks and had input in the design in the late 90's during a number of e-mail exchanges between Jay and I. I have assembled, TIG welded, rivited, tuned, installed, removed, demonstrated, consulted, etc with more I-10Ks than anyone other than Jay and Steve.

I won't say the I-10K is perfect, but it does everything the manuafacturer says it will and it IS the best antenna on the market today. Now, to be fair, I haven't seen Coily's antenna yet. My experience with the coil configuration he is using tells me that the open architecture of the trombone on the I-10K is superior. Does the Coily work? Yep! I'm confident that it does.

 

[Unit 194]

And your comments and so-called facts are your opinion since you have shown no scientific data to back up your facts.

 

[Moleculo]

Let's assume for a second that 194's friend did assemble the antenna correctly and the parts still blew off. In that case, there were faulty components. One antenna with a faulty component does not constitute bad product or bad product design in the context of the hundreds or thousands that have been sold.

And as long as your only comparison is CB S-meter readings, then you can't possibly complain about anyone else's "scientific" data and expect anything better. Don't argue and ask for "scientific" proof, when you have nothing scientific offer to the discussion in the first place.

 

[Master Chief]

Never mind..... Moleculo covered it nicely!

 

[Unit 194]

Let's assume for a second that 194's friend did assemble the antenna correctly and the parts still blew off. In that case, there were faulty components. One antenna with a faulty component does not constitute bad product or bad product design in the context of the hundreds or thousands that have been sold.

And as long as your only comparison is CB S-meter readings, then you can't possibly complain about anyone else's "scientific" data and expect anything better. Don't argue and ask for "scientific" proof, when you have nothing scientific offer to the discussion in the first place.

I never said the I-10K was a bad product or that it had bad product design. What I did say was that in a 65 MPH wind storm my friends I-10K broke down while my Imax didn't in the same storm.

And far as "scientific data" is concerned, I never said my S-meter readings were "scientific". But then again I'm not stating that

The iMax is inferior. There is no doubt about it. Its been proven over and over and over again. Proof trumps theory!

The Imax has an OPTION for ground plane radials and it was PROVEN that they added little to the performance of the antenna".

The I-10K was tested against the Maco V58 and the Maco didn't give it a run for its money.

Where is the "scientific data" to support these claims????? My S-meter readings are more scientific than hearsay.

 

[Michael Bravo]

More "he said she said" quotes?????? You are definitely the master of "contradiction".

Since you are NOT the Administrator and/or Moderator of this forum, I would appreciate if you would refrain from telling me what subject matter that I may or may not discuss on this forum. 73's!

You need to come back to reality, the fact of the matter is the I-10k is far superior to a silly little piece of fiberglass wrapped peice of metal and you cannot dispute that fact.

 

[FL Native]

You need to come back to reality, the fact of the matter is the I-10k is far superior to a silly little piece of fiberglass wrapped peice of metal and you cannot dispute that fact.

over a stock Imax definatley. but even modded imax to do it right will still run you into the $200 range. and then you still have a flopping fishing pole. i know i own one.

if it last thru this years hurricaines season i will be amazed. when/if it doesnt i will purchase an I10k. im sure it wont be a drastic gain over MY Imax. but just by design it will be better tx/rx and definately out last this Imax.

and dont ask whats done. its all here on the forum search HEHEHEHEHEHE :scter

 

[Master Chief]

Where is the "scientific data" to support these claims????? My S-meter readings are more scientific than hearsay.

I have to say, I'm getting tired of having to edit your posts so they appear correctly on the forum! Please take a little bit of care during your future posts!

As far as the data you are requesting, I'll dig out the IMax 2000 Expose article, but then again, its just someone's opinion, right?

The tests I've performed with the I-10K and the V58 were not scientific. We built them, put them on the air, and had no less than 5 other locals note the differences. Guess who won every time!

Are you implying that the I-10K performs the same as the Imax 2000?

 

[351_bear]

antennas

i got a good price on my i maxx never had any problems with it one thing you dont have to worry about the i maxx is tree branhes snapping off radails i have no problems with any other of the antennnas in this conversation but im always afraid of a maco or 10k falling over with the mast and snapping the radials not cheap to replace parts on those antennas

 

[Unit 194]

Why is there such a "double standard" on the I-10K vs. Imax 2000 discussion??

When a poster claims that they replaced their Imax with the I-10K and their signal strength has increased 1-3 S-units this claim is never challenged. A 3 S-unit gain in signal strength is a ridiculous claim to make when replacing one 5/8 wave antenna with another 5/8 wave antenna. If one were replacing their 5/8 wave antenna with a "directional antenna" (beam), then their increased S-unit claims would be much more credible.

But don't you dare post a "true" story that the Imax is comparable on TX with the I-10K or that your friends I-10K "broke down" in a wind storm. You will then be mis-quoted called stupid and your story will be analyzed to death.

 

[Unit 194]

The following is a direct quote from Master Chief:

I have owned 6 I-10Ks and had input in the design in the late 90's during a number of e-mail exchanges between Jay and I. I have assembled, TIG welded, rivited, tuned, installed, removed, demonstrated, consulted, etc with more I-10Ks than anyone other than Jay and Steve.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

After reading your quote, I think it is fair to say you would be "biased" against the Imax 2000 or any other competing 5/8 wave antenna.

Do I smell a "conflict of interest"???????

 

[bob85]

194 heres where you dropped a bollock

"I have to disagree with you on the I-10K being < much stronger-bends less in the wind >."

you were doing ok untill ya fingers allowed ya to type that statement, thats where the shit hit the fan,

i dont dispute your claim that you see no difference between the two antennas and i stated that even though thats what i saw and what was reported to me i know the gain difference is not 3db, working conditions ie antenna height soil conductivity local topography and surrounding manmade obstacles and the relative height of the stations doing the test can have a huge effect on antenna pattern and its ability to deliver a signal to a certain location, imho thats the difference i saw, one antennas abillity to work under a given set of circumstances better than another and yes it was close to 3db on my own meter not a pos cb meter that goes up 3 pound good buddy when i double my tx power, i have done more antenna tests over the years than you have had hot dinners and imho errecting two antennas to compare has its own set of drawbacks, they always seem to interact with each other unless the spacing is large, spacing them out defeats the object of the exercise as they are no longer in the same place, whenever i tested two antennas in that way i always swapped the positions round and tested again then averaged the results best i could,again this is not scientific just an observation from many tests in open ground over a clay soil, imho the best way to test is to swap antennas on the same pole within a very short time span and retest which is what i did, took some readings then swapped to imax while i measured the 10k then swapped back, the results i posted are as stated "not scientific" but true as you breathing air, if you dont like that i guess its tuff shit, if the imax had beaten the 10k i would have posted that and argued with all these other guys, read my other posts on the sigma4/coily dx mobile antennas you will see i blow nobody elses trumpet for them just report as i find, its clear for all to see we each get different results, i dont suggest for a moment that these other guys are making shit up to rubbish my findings,

getting back to signal meters lets go, no cb meter i ever used was even close to been linear reading and most modern hf sets aint worth a toss either, my jrc meter as tested by me with my own precision attenuator gives fairly linear readings of very close to 3db per s unit over a wide range of signals which is the best i have ever seen on any radio i have owned, people dont go from 10w to 100w and jump from s3 to 9+ like they do on most cb and a lot of modern hf gear, whenever i am giving a report on an amplifier they are always shocked at the low increase on my meter because they expect cb meter kinds of increase which i dont see on the jrc, one s unit on my meter is a significant increase