THE BEST WIRE ANTENNA

[hookedon6]

yeah, thats why i'm looking hard at this design. it's a wave on 75/80 and a 2 wave on 40 with out any external switching needed , just the shorted tuning stub. it's a BI-SQUARE on 40.

i think i'll dig out my dentron 10-80 tuner and give it a shot.

 

[bamacj]

Just build the super loop your self. The plans are on the net. I would just put up a horizontal loop in some trees and feed it where you can and go with it. I use a 75 meter full wave loop fed with coax and a tuner. Works fine. Coax fed loops will start to do strange stuff on the higher bands.

Example, dx was rolling in one morning and the upper east coast was strong on my antron, just for giggles I loaded my loop up and no east coast or atleast a very low signal......but, Europe was s5. It was strange flipping back and forth from antenna to antenna and seing such a change.

Build one and let us know your results.

 

[n8fgb]

I have used the Loopskywire several times on field day. Just take that 500 feet of wire and fold it int 4 equal lenghts. hang it as high as u can, and as square as possible. Feed it from the corner with ur 450 to the tuner, and u are good from 160 up.
Rich

 

[Captain Kilowatt]

I have used the Loopskywire several times on field day. Just take that 500 feet of wire and fold it int 4 equal lenghts. hang it as high as u can, and as square as possible. Feed it from the corner with ur 450 to the tuner, and u are good from 160 up.
Rich

Loop Skywire? wasn't he in Star Wars?




Oh, Luke Skywalker. Never mind. Different guy.

 

[W5LZ]

..that's the guy that ran around with 'Chewed-baccy' wasn't it?

 

[Captain Kilowatt]

..that's the guy that ran around with 'Chewed-baccy' wasn't it?

Yes! That's him. He also had a weird Andorran ham with him. I believe his call was C3PO.

 

[wavrider]

I played around with an 160 meter loop (diamond shape as that is where the trees were).

I fed it with 450 ohm ladder line at the highest point attached to the tower at 70 feet. It angled down to the NE to 45 feet above ground.

It was OK on 160, did good for rag chews on 75 meters. It screamed on 40 meters and worked a lot of DX off of it.

It was so so on 20 meters and above.

It was quieter on Rx than the beam.

All in all it was a decent low band antenna with better than expected performance. 20 meters and above the dipole as expected worked better than the loop.

 

[6mdx]

I run a Buxcomm 80 to 6 meter off center fed windom Flat-topped at 50 ft.
It's been up for 8 years and out-lived my 80m Zepp....I can't ask for more.

 

[mackmobile43]

In you're opinion which is the best wire antenna for 80, 40 and 20 meter ragchewing? I am using a homebrew G5RV. It performs well and excellent on 20 meters but I noticed my 20 meter aluminum dipole seemed to get a better signal on 20 than does my G5RV.

It's just like on the chicken band, if you don't have propagation no antenna will have a decided advantage over another if you do then the ladder in a near verticle position is your best bet on wire.

 

[spickus]

I have a fullwave 160 meter loop strung around my house at 25-40 feet. It is fed at a corner with 80ish feet of windowline. It works quite well and I really like it. I believe it is quieter and easier to tune across multiple bands than my old 135' doublet. Here is a very good article describing them:

http://www.users.on.net/~bcr/files/backyard wire antennaes.pdf

Another: American Radio Relay League | Ham Radio Association and Resources

"Polarity with horizontal loops depends on where you feed the thing and it's general shape."

Not to be argumentative but horizontally oriented loops are always horizontally polarized. You can feed a horizontal loop against ground and get vertical polarization. Some people do this to run their 80 meter loop on 160. The polarity of vertical loops can be varied by moving the feed point.

 

[kd-5-bgt]

Yes! That's him. He also had a weird Andorran ham with him. I believe his call was C3PO.

:blink: :laugh:

 

[W5LZ]

spickus,
"Not to be argumentative but horizontally oriented loops are always horizontally polarized."
Have to disagree with you there. I've used horizontal loops for a long time and have found that it really does depend on where they are fed. That usually means the shape of that loop has to be sort of 'regular' though. Since it tended to exhibit the same 'changes' as a real-live vertical antenna versus a real-live horizontal antenna, I figure it changes polarity. Or, it's close enough to the same thing not to make enough difference to matter much.
- 'Doc

 

[spickus]

Doc

You don't think that the changes you're seeing would be pattern changes due moving the feed point? I've seen exactly what you're describing in my vertically oriented deltas (which do indeed swap polarity depending on feed point). I also see big changes in the pattern of my horizontally oriented loop in both EZNEC and in practice. This is of course is most noticeable on the high bands. While changes in the pattern of these antennas has a dramatic effect, it does not necessarily indicate a swap in polarity.

While I cannot find a direct quote that states that horizontally oriented loops are always horizontally polarized, everything I read does mention that feed point placement is unimportant. In fact, the article that I posted previously (My five favorite backyard antennas by Cebik) describes the horizontally oriented loop as horizontally polarized (HOHP) and describes the differences in patterns due feed point placement but never mentions a change in polarity.

It sounds as if you have no small amount of experience with loops and I respect you opinion. I myself have only had 3 vertically oriented deltas, one 40, 30, 20 mag loop and of course the 160 meter full wave loop. I find the loop antenna to be fascinating and welcome your opinions and observations.

73
Steve
K2TY

 

[W5LZ]

Steve,
I wish I had the room to put up a 2 wave length loop as 'RNL' describes. For me, that would mean using my neighbor's lots and trees, which just isn't going to happen. So, the best I can manage is an 80 meter 1 wave length horizontal loop. Since everybody is always trying to make things just a little bit better, I've done the changing the feed point location thingy. And then made comparisons with an 'R-7' vertical I had at the time. There's a 'catch' in this, that horizontal loop wasn't exactly a 'regular' shape, so my findings aren't exactly dependable for all loops by any means. (It sort of tilted up at one corner, was sort of 'pointy' at one end, and I would be very optimistic if any part of it was close to 25 feet off the ground. The tilted corner was maybe 10 feet (?) higher than the rest of it, sort of.)
When fed from one corner, the loop behaved (heard things) very closely with that 'R-7' vertical. When fed from one side, it was almost the opposite of 'how' the vertical heard things. One would go 'up' with propagation changes, the other would go 'down' at the same time. It may not be a 'true' indication of polarity, but I have to say that if it isn't, it's certainly 'close enough' for me. One of those, "If it walks like a duck..." thingys, you know?
I also modeled the thing using an old program, "NEC4WIN95", which wasn't 'old' at the time, and was 'simple' enough for me to enjoy using. Did some very exacting 'eye-ball' guessing as to height, angles, etc, (including wire insulation color). Couldn't have been 'off' by more than maybe 50%, sort of. That was for 80 meters and several bands higher than that. On 80 meters, the radiation pattern was a very lovely 'ball'. The higher you went in frequency, the more that pattern changed, and the radiation patterns got really weird looking (no idea how to describe them). Somewhere around 14 Mhz it really got directional to the east. It happened to 'beat the snot' out a 3 element tribander at times (MARS and the 'Shield/Storm' time period and phone patches). I seriously doubt if I could duplicate that again, and didn't document it (no time), but it worked so who cares, right?
So, if you sort of discount all the variables, allow for a subjective opinion, I think the feed point can make a difference that corresponds to a change in polarization. Works for me!
- 'Doc

 

[spickus]

Doc

Thanks for sharing your experiences. They sound pretty typical of what I and others have observed with loops and modeling software. I didn't mean to hijack the thread. In regards to the original question, I think we'd both agree that loops of any orientation or polarization make fine antennas. I like the fact that they:

seem quieter on receive
perform well mounted close to ground
are resonant on even and odd multiples
easy to match
require no counterpoise or radials even when vertically polarized
are omni directional (with increasing lobes and nulls as the frequency rises)

In my opinion, the fullwave loop is the best wire antenna.

/My opinion and $0.75 will get you a cup of bad coffee