Look at a Sirio 827. Made from 6063 aluminium tubing which is a lot more expensive than glass fibre. 8 radials, the hub is made from some sort of alloy which is cast. The tuning coil is purpose built for the antenna. All in all it takes a little time and effort to produce such an antenna. Compare the GM with the 827, seems to me that the only purpose built parts are the plastic hub and the plate at the bottom where the feed is. The rest of it is glass fibre tube and coax. My gripe is the cost for such a simple design which is 40% more than the 827.
-
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.
Sirio engineers making antenna's from scrap materials?
- Thread starter nav2010
- Start date
I have no reason to either agree or disagree with nav's opening statement, and most since. However, I think it is excatly what he said, his opinion, to which he is entitled. However the last statement regarding cost is, in my opinion, right on the money.
No more than it is made of, and with its inherent power limitations, it far too over-priced. It's pricepoint should logically fall within the range of all the other fiberglass antennas on the market.
But I think it is a mighty fine antenna performance wise within the parameters of its design.
But i'm junk a crazy junk guy anyway . . . :blink:
No more than it is made of, and with its inherent power limitations, it far too over-priced. It's pricepoint should logically fall within the range of all the other fiberglass antennas on the market.
But I think it is a mighty fine antenna performance wise within the parameters of its design.
But i'm junk a crazy junk guy anyway . . . :blink:
Agreed, but as we all know, the price is what the market will pay for the product...., case in point when very similar ground planes range in price from $150 to upwards of $300
I remember when this model first came out it was about 30/40 bucks below what it is now, and they seem to be flying off the shelf.
I do not know if that mark up was on behalf of the Mfg, or H&Y who seem to be the sole us retailer.......
73
Jeff
I think you would be surprised how much custom telescopic fiberglass radomes actually cost. The design of the GM prevents it from being manufactured in fully conductive aluminum tubing. Interesting how you like the coil on the S-827 considering it is an open matching coil that be much more susceptible to water. Funny thing is the VSWR stay stable on that antenna too in rain, ice, and snow. Your grip with cost is understandable but another $70 for something you'll use for many years is worth the signal and lack of RFI. Besides, someone has to pay for all the engineering and international patents that a quality design carries with it.
I know H&Y can't keep them in stock. With every order for restock, they sell out very quickly and the prices hasn't changed that fact any.
Thing is, they started the cost @ $139.
Then, jumped it up to $179.
I'd still prefer the LW-150/Vector 4000 to the GM any old day.
Rant completed . . .
B
BOOTY MONSTER
Guest
the 827 has its problems too . some folks have had to take apart the coil housing and re-solder the contact between the copper coil and the shaft of the main vertical . some folks have had to fix theirs more than once . from what i saw on my antennas im not a fan of less than 1/4 wave length ground elements and 4 of them sloped gave me the best performance . 6063 aluminum is not that expensive either .
Aluminum Tubing Type 6063 - 6 ft. unslit ends
Hello All,
Ofcourse the thread starter is not entirly rigth, but heck..its his opinion.
Ive got a opinion aswell:
Sirio makes fine antennnas, not the best...but taking a look at the entire range they sell,
My mind goes out to a "overall" low price for a good antenna.
Mechanical there migth be room for improvement..for example the yagi element thickness isnt capable of handeling winds/ice at the same level as dxsr/pkw/gb/hpsd/zx etc.
Lets say it otherwise...you wont find a beam supplier in Europa selling a aluminium 3elements beam for 119 euro.
So thats a "migth be" as they dont advertise with "heavy duty" they advertise with a resonable strong yagi ..good enough...good price...simple as that.
As a manufacturer i highly support using materials wich can also be used on other models.
Than means the manufacturer buys in large quantities wich will lower the price.
ps...i would have liked to see a nice cap around the rfchoke, migth help prevent UV radiaton on the coax?....though in first place..its not electrically needed ofcourse.
However, and i just read the first page...i was already a bit dissapointed....sorry..
Now, thats the other end of the story....
Shockwave, i know you are a sirio enthousiast...but dont lower yourself to a level where your not beeing fair anymore. Didnt we had this conversation before?..
If we did..why do you ignore it? thats for me a indication your not beeing independent.
And if your not, that would question each answer youre giving.
If we didnt talked about it before...here goes:
No, i am afraid Sirio is not honest with their claims. A 4 elements yagi will not have 12dB gain.
Nor should we forget what "optimistic" gain figures they have advertised for all their antennas in the past.
And although most antennas seem to be advertised with honest gain figures nowadays, i have just proven not all.
Taking also in mind, a advertiser who has been "not honest" in the past will always have some doubts.. So yes...improvement for sure...but not there yet.
Taking a look at the beautifull "horizon" plot of the sirio GM.
(as i believe i also mentioned a couple times).
You can advertise with more gain "on the horizon" but any antenna builder can tell you:
you will never...never find such a plot in real life.
So, then were back on comparing apples to peers.
If you wanna advertise that a antenna has a lower radiation angle you have to provide real live elevation plots of both.
To mention sirio is honest and is "the most honest" you know...well, wouldnt that be a bit overstated?
We both know manufacturers who are more honest, have been more honest and therfor are much higher on the "fair"-scale.
Kind regards,
henry
www.dx-antenans.com
Ofcourse the thread starter is not entirly rigth, but heck..its his opinion.
Ive got a opinion aswell:
Sirio makes fine antennnas, not the best...but taking a look at the entire range they sell,
My mind goes out to a "overall" low price for a good antenna.
Mechanical there migth be room for improvement..for example the yagi element thickness isnt capable of handeling winds/ice at the same level as dxsr/pkw/gb/hpsd/zx etc.
Lets say it otherwise...you wont find a beam supplier in Europa selling a aluminium 3elements beam for 119 euro.
So thats a "migth be" as they dont advertise with "heavy duty" they advertise with a resonable strong yagi ..good enough...good price...simple as that.
As a manufacturer i highly support using materials wich can also be used on other models.
Than means the manufacturer buys in large quantities wich will lower the price.
ps...i would have liked to see a nice cap around the rfchoke, migth help prevent UV radiaton on the coax?....though in first place..its not electrically needed ofcourse.
However, and i just read the first page...i was already a bit dissapointed....sorry..
Now, thats the other end of the story....
Shockwave, i know you are a sirio enthousiast...but dont lower yourself to a level where your not beeing fair anymore. Didnt we had this conversation before?..
If we did..why do you ignore it? thats for me a indication your not beeing independent.
And if your not, that would question each answer youre giving.
If we didnt talked about it before...here goes:
No, i am afraid Sirio is not honest with their claims. A 4 elements yagi will not have 12dB gain.
Nor should we forget what "optimistic" gain figures they have advertised for all their antennas in the past.
And although most antennas seem to be advertised with honest gain figures nowadays, i have just proven not all.
Taking also in mind, a advertiser who has been "not honest" in the past will always have some doubts.. So yes...improvement for sure...but not there yet.
Taking a look at the beautifull "horizon" plot of the sirio GM.
(as i believe i also mentioned a couple times).
You can advertise with more gain "on the horizon" but any antenna builder can tell you:
you will never...never find such a plot in real life.
So, then were back on comparing apples to peers.
If you wanna advertise that a antenna has a lower radiation angle you have to provide real live elevation plots of both.
To mention sirio is honest and is "the most honest" you know...well, wouldnt that be a bit overstated?
We both know manufacturers who are more honest, have been more honest and therfor are much higher on the "fair"-scale.
Kind regards,
henry
www.dx-antenans.com
Last edited:
Henry, I didn't mean to suggest every antenna they make has 100% accurate specifications. My statement was that in general they are very accurate. When I see they admit their Starduster, Top one, and dipole all have 0 db gain that suggests honesty to me. Solarcon has taken an antenna with the same gain and claimed over 9 dbi at one time. I am in agreement that they missed the boat on the beam antenna but we are talking about two models they make out of over 50. Can anyone think of another manufacturer of 11 meter antennas that is publishing more accurate gain figures? I don't think I can. As much as I like working with this company, if you find a mistake, I sure am not going to lie or cover it up on anyone's behalf.
B
BOOTY MONSTER
Guest
Just to follow up on a few other things mentioned, their 4 element Yagi is rated at 11 db not 12. Yes, that's still too much. I understand your thoughts about their free space plots and that we will not see the same in real installations. But I ask you to consider the reasons for using free space. We know that ground reflections will distort any antennas radiation pattern and that this distortion varies widely with height above ground.
If they were forced to provide patterns over earth, they would have to provide a plot for all possible mounting heights and soil conditions. Nearly an impossible task. By providing free space plots, you can see how the antenna would perform before this distortion takes place. It makes it much easier to compare things like relative beamwidth and gain.
Of course when you place the antenna over ground, pattern distortion will take place. The important thing to remember is that if one antenna has a lower radiation angle or more gain in free space, it will also have these characteristics mounted over ground. Looking at any two antennas free space plots tells me a lot more about how they compare then seeing them over real ground and having to guess what the heights and conditions of the test were. Because, what are the chances that two different manufacturers are going to test their antennas in the same exact real world conditions?
I don't think anyone else should buy a gainmaster. I think everybody should buy the 827, the vector, the maco, the a99 and the imax instead.
I want to have my gainmaster up on my tower and be the only person around with one so I can have the best performance in town.
Please keep coming up with many more reasons why people should not buy the gainmaster.
I want to have my gainmaster up on my tower and be the only person around with one so I can have the best performance in town.
Please keep coming up with many more reasons why people should not buy the gainmaster.
There are a few very fair minded people who's conduct in the face of disagreement is to be commended. You know who you are.
Thanks.
NAV IMHO is entitled to a bit of poetic license considering all the nitrogen laden banter from the pro-Sirio camp.
I would love to see pictures of the engineers hard at work on the Sirio test range.
Thanks.
NAV IMHO is entitled to a bit of poetic license considering all the nitrogen laden banter from the pro-Sirio camp.
I would love to see pictures of the engineers hard at work on the Sirio test range.
Here are some photos of Sirio's R&D and test facilities. The first picture is what I call their million dollar room. The hi tech anechoic chamber. Second is the outdoor test range equipped with multiple masts in an open area. Third is an example of a VHF mobile antenna being tested (the fence and light pole are not in the near field of this antenna). Fourth is one of their R&D areas. Last is a climate controled test chamber. More to follow.
