Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
  • 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.
  • The Retevis Holidays giveaway winner has been selected! Check Here to see who won!

maco v5/8 vs wolf .64

the "K" Factor (0.95) which alters the free space formula of 492 (491.8) only applies to the reasonable and accurate determination of the PHYSICAL LENGTH of a 1/2 wave antenna for a given frequency, but DOES NOT APPLY to antennas longer than a 1/2 wl in length.

ref: the arrl antenna book, 15th edition, chapter 2, page 4, end of the section (not surprisingly) titled, "end effect."
 
Yeah 821, you’re right. The author in the article we were referring to earlier made the distinction about the Imax being a .64 wavelength antenna and not a 5/8 wave like advertised.

We were just discussing the more detailed aspects of why the claim was in error and so ridiculous. Some were taking the very basic CB approach to the math and others were discussing the more technical issues about the math. We talk about the same stuff when we are on the air also and you are right again, nobody can tell the difference.

Marconi
 
thanks freecell, now i have to find my old arrl book and read some explanation on end effect :wink:
 
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE!!

Test results from the comparison of a Maco V5/8 to Wolf P64.
Residential installation.


During the afternoon on 1/28/06 a fellow radio enthusiast, located 8 miles away from the shop - changed antennas. The test was conducted on 27.365mHz with a un-modulated carrier of 12 watts. Four basic readings were taken: V5/8 hi, V5/8 low, P64 low, P64 hi. The high point is 40 ft to the base, and low 18ft. Residential installation.

I was receiving with a vintage Golden Eagle MKIII (tube type) receiver, hooked to an A-99 about 20 feet high. I also had a switch-able attenuator inline. We talked by phone only -- no transmit operations occurred at my end for the duration of the test. Noise level was low and no other traffic on channel, or adjacent, etc.

Close monitoring of the signal a few hours leading up to the test showed a consistent reading of 8 S-units on the MKIII. I confirmed the final reading - exactly 8 S-units just before the change. The change was made in a short time (about 10-15 min.) and the signal was read immediately in the low position without any adjustment to match. The signal showed a clear increase of 1/2 S-unit over the V5/8 in the low position! The match was close to perfect without any adjustments so the antenna was raised into final position (40ft to base). The final signal at height was 8.5 S-units and remained consistent! I then rigorously tested the calibration of the S meter with my signal generator and found it equal to 4 dB per S-unit in that exact part of the scale.

IN THIS TEST - in both the high and low positions - the P 64 clearly showed a 2 dB increase in signal in my receiver 8 miles away.

*(With right hand raised)* “I hereby certify that the results of this test are true and accurate to the best of my technical ability and without bias.” Wolf

Having said that, I think further testing should be done. Hopefully by some others out in the field before we will know for sure, but the results are interesting.

Now where’s Jay…….… and that I-10K………….Wolf…….>>>>>>
 
Sure would be cool if Eddie would bring the .64 back into production, even if it's only on a limited basis.
 
your link did not work for me wolfradio .
also , why do you use an antenna other than your own brand ? and an a-99 at that .

one more thing . any chance of putting the wolf point 50 back into production ?
 
I miss this thing! I think I was one of the original owners of one of the first ones ever built. I won it at a picnic in 99 Its a shame I was just some punk kid back then. Picnic99f_b.jpg
 
ST, I modeled my Wolf .64 back in 2015, but I think it had some errors in how I made the two coils. The pattern looked terrible...had no gain low to the horizon...all the power went into the sky.

Back in 2010-2011, my real world experience with this tall and top heavy antenna was very good however, showing a tad better average gain results over several months of testing vs. some of my other CB vertical antennas up and testing...A to B and using a switch box. For the most part all my comparison testing was done with the antennas very close to the same tip height.

I did these tests taking RX signal reports from 5 of my buddies that I knew well. They were at various distances away at 25 - 60 miles. Below is the recap averaging from these signal reports.
 

Attachments

Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Shadetree Mechanic
Only when I did the recap was I able to see the overall results. I was surprised too.

BTW the Marconi antennas were homemade 1/4 wave GP's that looked like a Starduster. I used 5 x 102" inch SS whips, a mobile L-bracket, and a homemade hub from an A99 GPK for the 3 or 4 radials I used.

While I was testing, it was hard to evaluate much from individual differences I was seeing. One thing I did see however, was I seldom saw the big differences that many operators tended to report on the air and on the Internet. At the end of this period I decided to average the signals from a small steady group of older buddies that were basically on the radio much of the time for years like I was.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Shadetree Mechanic

dxChat
Help Users
  • No one is chatting at the moment.


      Top Bottom