-
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.
Maco VQ3 V-Quad 11 meter antenna
- Thread starter DelR
- Start date
Yes. I absolutely loved it till storm got it. There's a few different threads about the VQ3 on forum.
The M104 has far more gain. I had an M104 twice over the years, but never had a VQ3. However, I helped a buddy assemble, test and place one once. It was a real PIA to keep tuned because the wires stretched twice after we put it up (pre-stretched) the first time, and we had to re-tighten them. It did a great job for it's size and had a nice rejection lobe off the back.
I'm afraid your figures on gain are incorrect. Add in the higher take off angle the VQ3 should outperform the M104 on long distance skip.
No, the takeoff angle references the radiation pattern and the angle at which I believe it hits the ionosphere and is bounced back toward earth (someone more technically minded here correct me if I am wrong) of which the angle of the VQUAD / VQ3 series has a superior angle for longer distance per bounce, or maybe it was shorter, whichever was better the VQ3 was ahead vs a four element I beleive was how it worked out. There's an excellent thread on the VQUAD vs 3 element in antenna simulator somewhere on this forum which would be similar to VQ3 vs M104.
I'm just a layman at this, there a few seriously hardcore antenna experts on here that would explain and know far better than me.
I'm just a layman at this, there a few seriously hardcore antenna experts on here that would explain and know far better than me.
Last edited:
OK, I was following along pretty well there, but that confused me again. Height vs take off angle?
That's mounting height of the beam IE @ this height vs that chart. IDK why our experts are sitting back watching me flounder about lol
" Is this the takeoff angle you were talking about?"
Some info that might help.
Antenna take off angle is how the signal leaves the antenna.
Generally you want a low take off angle to keep the signal down on the horizon to allow the signal to travel further when working DX
Antenna modeling programs can show what the take off angle of antennas are.
The above modeling image is a 4 element Yagi antenna.
The lobe marked "B" is the dominant lobe and is down close to the horizon, that is good for long haul DX.
Generally for dx work you want low take off angles.
There are also other things that come into play, like " nulls" that can effect how your signal leaves the antenna.
There are cases were a high take off angle " can " be good if you are trying to get a signal up to a elevation above your station.
I suggest doing some research on antenna take off angles to help you to understand how this works.
There is lots of info on the web, it can get complicated with height above ground, frequency being used and more.
It takes some study to understand
73
Jeff
Some info that might help.
Antenna take off angle is how the signal leaves the antenna.
Generally you want a low take off angle to keep the signal down on the horizon to allow the signal to travel further when working DX
Antenna modeling programs can show what the take off angle of antennas are.
The above modeling image is a 4 element Yagi antenna.
The lobe marked "B" is the dominant lobe and is down close to the horizon, that is good for long haul DX.
Generally for dx work you want low take off angles.
There are also other things that come into play, like " nulls" that can effect how your signal leaves the antenna.
There are cases were a high take off angle " can " be good if you are trying to get a signal up to a elevation above your station.
I suggest doing some research on antenna take off angles to help you to understand how this works.
There is lots of info on the web, it can get complicated with height above ground, frequency being used and more.
It takes some study to understand
73
Jeff
Last edited:
One of the other perhaps benefits of the VQs are you can kind of best of both worlds with the polarization of the signal.
IE if you're trying to talk vertical / mobile or omnidirectional guys or horizontal (flat side) to yagi beam guys..... the m103/04 so on is either or (vertical or horizontal) and VQ series you can kinda split the difference and get both decently though the the m103/04 etc probably would be better if you only wanted to hit the yagi beam guys for skip. (This is not a technically informed opinion just what I have picked up over time from others and personal experience)
All this discussion and the fact my VQ was destroyed by tornado makes me want to try out the MC3 as I already have had VQ3 and VQUAD.... just not sure my cheap rotor would take the weight under wind loading ....but considering it.
If I'm off base on what I'm saying I'm sure Jeff or one of the other guys can correct me.
IE if you're trying to talk vertical / mobile or omnidirectional guys or horizontal (flat side) to yagi beam guys..... the m103/04 so on is either or (vertical or horizontal) and VQ series you can kinda split the difference and get both decently though the the m103/04 etc probably would be better if you only wanted to hit the yagi beam guys for skip. (This is not a technically informed opinion just what I have picked up over time from others and personal experience)
All this discussion and the fact my VQ was destroyed by tornado makes me want to try out the MC3 as I already have had VQ3 and VQUAD.... just not sure my cheap rotor would take the weight under wind loading ....but considering it.
If I'm off base on what I'm saying I'm sure Jeff or one of the other guys can correct me.
I had a 4 element in the 90s on 50ft and out talked a 3 element on 70ft of a buddy of mine.