-
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.
Base New Imax wont tune 11m....this sucks
- Thread starter 357
- Start date
Where's you hear this? SHIT SAKES I knew it.
I was debating a stainless whip and trim it to size but....going to measure the box
From Bells CB Radio site: "We no longer sell this antenna because Solarcon decided to shorten the antenna so that it would ship easier. They did this without changing the tuning of the antenna so now it comes tuned for 10 meter Ham band and not CB radio".
S&W357
$upporting Member KO4RJD....WDX-556
Probably has something to do with those pencil neck pointy head dudes in Washington, D.C.
I'm disappointed to hear this. Maybe I should buy a spare from a local shop. Hmm
I've had mine up 22 months now and its been a good performer. It replaced an old A99 that snapped like a twig when Hurricane Irene passed by.
I've had mine up 22 months now and its been a good performer. It replaced an old A99 that snapped like a twig when Hurricane Irene passed by.
Last edited:
ya everyone said it was me or my coax or I'm an idiot. well well well....
Anyone have a original box before they shortened it?
Looks like its about a inch short if the threaded studs are 3/4 inch
What I'm reading is the box should be 8ft 1 inch, and its now short of 1 inch
Looks like its about a inch short if the threaded studs are 3/4 inch
What I'm reading is the box should be 8ft 1 inch, and its now short of 1 inch
Isn't the total assembled length of the 2000 suppose to be 24'? If it is, I would think an 8' box would be the correct size. I did not measure each section of my 2000 prior to assembly, but I am curious if maybe the first section is longer than 8' than the other two sections but the total assembled length would still be 24', which would require a longer shipping container. Maybe now, all sections are 8' and that is the answer to the shorter shipping box? Maybe the longer shipping box had additional packing one each end?
If two sections are 8'-3/4" due to the external 3/4" threaded studs, the shipping carton would have to be a minimum of 8'-3/4" long.
Could it be that Solarcon has shortened the antenna sections and revised / modified the wiring in the antenna sections to compensate for the shorter antenna sections?
It is hard to believe that Solarcon would shorten the antenna sections without compensating for the decrease in length for the sole purpose of shipping.
Maybe 8' length is the magic number for cartons and there is an extra (ridiculous) surcharge in excess of 8'.
Would the adjusting rings have enough range to compensate for a shorter antenna? There is more to this story and only Solarcon has the answer.
Had my IMax 2000 for 7 years.. Saturday night i was talking to some guy on FM 29.600 just 50w good thing i was watching my meters as my SWR whet from 1:1.2 to 1:3.5 and after that would not work at all even with the tuner.. 
i would key up and it would creep from 2.2 to 3.5 taking it down next Saturday need a friend to bring a latter
i would key up and it would creep from 2.2 to 3.5 taking it down next Saturday need a friend to bring a latter
Last edited:
Here is the link to Bells claim about the Solarcon Imax.
https://www.bellscb.com/products/antennas/solarcon/solarcon_IMAX2000.htm
Some years ago I bought a Solarcon I-MAX 2000 from a local CB shop and it was in a Solarcon Box. However, I can't tell if it looked like the box that 357 posted above. I recall there was not much space at the ends of the box for each of the 3 parts of that antenna. If the claim here is, that the IMax is now shorter, then based on my antenna, that would suggest that all 3 parts had to have been made shorter? If so, that should be easy for several folks to figure out if they just set their minds to the task.
I did not measure my IMax until a while later when I started modeling antennas in early 2009. At that time my Solarcon Imax measured overall as noted below.
I measured from tip down to the hub for the top section, and from hub to hub for the second section, and the bottom section from the top of the hub to the top of the 12" inch metal mounting bracket, plus I added 0.25" inches for the two lock washers together.
Tip = 95"
Middle = 93.5"
Base = 84.5"
Mount = 12"
2 Lock washers = 0.25"
Total overall 285.25" inches = 23.77' feet
Does anyone have an Imax 2000 or Max 2000 with different dimensions. I seem to recall numerous reports for Imax dimensions over the years and most did not agree. I always wondered about that.
I mounted the Imax 10' feet high and did not touch the tuning rings per instructions in the manual. I tested the match with my Autek VA1 at the feed point. I made a bandwidth curve on my Antenna Work Sheet. I had the step rate set in 5 channel increments...starting at 26.855 to 27.555 MHz. This is by no means a chart with lots of detail frequency information, nor was it close to the band width for this antenna, but it did produce a notion of a curve.
Unfortunately I was not able to go lower or higher in frequency. That could have possibly indicated where all the bandwidth <2.00:1 SWR was...that we don't see here in the charts.
I recorded the values of R = resistance, X = reactance, SWR, and Z = complex match...using the VA1 right below the frequencies as noted.
Later I went inside and checked the SWR bandwidth on my inline Daiwa H801 meter while using my TS50. I added those results at the bottom of the charts. This also included the feed line noted on each chart.
These old charts were done in pencile, and don't copy well, but here we see the Imax showing, back then, the antenna tending to show a better match a little higher in frequency than the CB band. CB operators using CB radio and a SWR meter would never see this...just using their radio. It might help using the PDF file Zoom feature to see this a little closer up.
So, I wonder if the idea for making the antenna shorter was to appeal more to the Ham Operator in the market...while IMO we are seeing CB becoming pretty much irrelevant.
All a man has to do, maybe, in order to help prove the Imax is currently shorter than the one above would be to check this out, using an antenna analyzer, and report the results over a broader bandwidth than my old reports show.
https://www.bellscb.com/products/antennas/solarcon/solarcon_IMAX2000.htm
Some years ago I bought a Solarcon I-MAX 2000 from a local CB shop and it was in a Solarcon Box. However, I can't tell if it looked like the box that 357 posted above. I recall there was not much space at the ends of the box for each of the 3 parts of that antenna. If the claim here is, that the IMax is now shorter, then based on my antenna, that would suggest that all 3 parts had to have been made shorter? If so, that should be easy for several folks to figure out if they just set their minds to the task.
I did not measure my IMax until a while later when I started modeling antennas in early 2009. At that time my Solarcon Imax measured overall as noted below.
I measured from tip down to the hub for the top section, and from hub to hub for the second section, and the bottom section from the top of the hub to the top of the 12" inch metal mounting bracket, plus I added 0.25" inches for the two lock washers together.
Tip = 95"
Middle = 93.5"
Base = 84.5"
Mount = 12"
2 Lock washers = 0.25"
Total overall 285.25" inches = 23.77' feet
Does anyone have an Imax 2000 or Max 2000 with different dimensions. I seem to recall numerous reports for Imax dimensions over the years and most did not agree. I always wondered about that.
I mounted the Imax 10' feet high and did not touch the tuning rings per instructions in the manual. I tested the match with my Autek VA1 at the feed point. I made a bandwidth curve on my Antenna Work Sheet. I had the step rate set in 5 channel increments...starting at 26.855 to 27.555 MHz. This is by no means a chart with lots of detail frequency information, nor was it close to the band width for this antenna, but it did produce a notion of a curve.
Unfortunately I was not able to go lower or higher in frequency. That could have possibly indicated where all the bandwidth <2.00:1 SWR was...that we don't see here in the charts.
I recorded the values of R = resistance, X = reactance, SWR, and Z = complex match...using the VA1 right below the frequencies as noted.
Later I went inside and checked the SWR bandwidth on my inline Daiwa H801 meter while using my TS50. I added those results at the bottom of the charts. This also included the feed line noted on each chart.
These old charts were done in pencile, and don't copy well, but here we see the Imax showing, back then, the antenna tending to show a better match a little higher in frequency than the CB band. CB operators using CB radio and a SWR meter would never see this...just using their radio. It might help using the PDF file Zoom feature to see this a little closer up.
So, I wonder if the idea for making the antenna shorter was to appeal more to the Ham Operator in the market...while IMO we are seeing CB becoming pretty much irrelevant.
All a man has to do, maybe, in order to help prove the Imax is currently shorter than the one above would be to check this out, using an antenna analyzer, and report the results over a broader bandwidth than my old reports show.
Last edited: