C
-
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.
If it was me for me, yagi. Simple by design and construction.
The quad has a reputation that is blown out or proportion. Yes it is an exceptionally good antenna but so is a yagi. The gain difference between a quad and a yagi of the same number of elements is very slight. In fact it cannot be seen on air but only seen when tested using the proper gear. A yagi however is a lot easier to construct and maintain especially in high wind or ice conditions. there are only two types of quad owners BTW. Those who have had to maintain broken wire elements and those who WILL have to maintain broken wire elements. For anything lower than VHF I would go with a yagi simple because of the wind and ice loading. If I were to build an antenna for VHF I would build a quad as it is easy to construct on those frequencies and wire is easier to come by than aluminum tubing.
Quad...best reason? Dual Polarity...Can't have that with a Yagi...With the quad, you flip a switch for vertical (local talk) then flip the switch to horizontal for DX...
Not all quads have dual polarity tho...Cubex quads are "either or"...Lightnings have both horizontal and vertical, you will need two coax runs to the antenna, and a switch box at your station.
I'm sure eventually I will have to do some repairs on mine, but so far I've had no problems and the antenna has been threw two ice storms, and a couple of thunderstorms that were packing 75-80mph wind gusts...I'm sure first Texas Twister that hit's it, it will be history, but so would any other antenna...
Not all quads have dual polarity tho...Cubex quads are "either or"...Lightnings have both horizontal and vertical, you will need two coax runs to the antenna, and a switch box at your station.
I'm sure eventually I will have to do some repairs on mine, but so far I've had no problems and the antenna has been threw two ice storms, and a couple of thunderstorms that were packing 75-80mph wind gusts...I'm sure first Texas Twister that hit's it, it will be history, but so would any other antenna...
Those single loop type quads can be a real PITA to tune for both vert and horz however. Hygain made one with dual loops spaced about 3-4 inches apart and it worked great: no interaction. As for not having dual polarity with yagis, well yes you can if you have crossed yagis like the Moonrakers did or the Maco line. They used a quad reflector element but that is all.The only problem is that all those types, like the quad, have vert and horz. cross arms ro catch the wind and ice. I f I were to go that route I would want something like the Moonraker style because it has about the same wind and ice loading as a quad but no wires to deal with. In fact that IS what I did 35 years ago after a lot of thought and research. Dual polarity is nice but it comes with a price and every location and installation is different.
Man a 5 element quad is a huge antenna .! It's easy to look at it on paper and think it's not so bad. But it has height and two sets of spreader on every element, visually it looks two or 3 times bigger than a yagi, Truth is it's got a lot of wind loading , hard to erect, tune and maintain.
After saying that I will tell you from experience, in the average suburban back yard at modest height ,it will outperform the same size yagi hands down. On a 100 ft tower in a rural setting you wont see any difference between the two .It all comes down to your location, how much experience you have with beams ,what you are trying to do and how much inconvenience you are prepared to put up with
After saying that I will tell you from experience, in the average suburban back yard at modest height ,it will outperform the same size yagi hands down. On a 100 ft tower in a rural setting you wont see any difference between the two .It all comes down to your location, how much experience you have with beams ,what you are trying to do and how much inconvenience you are prepared to put up with
exactly correct, Quads are known to both open and close the band when compared to Yagi's at "reasonable" heights.
There I fixed that for you.
Take a look at the elevation profiles of each antenna at the same height and you will see that that theory is mostly hype. A few degrees will not make that much difference. I have run them both and the difference is not as much as is usually claimed. Most claims are the result of switching to a quad from a much inferior antenna.
go yagi quad over rated you can build a nice 5 element dual polarity yagi from parts purchased from Maco antenna co.
Another thing with the quads v.s the Moonrakers or maco line is the weight. A Lightning L4 like I have only weighs 22 pounds and has a wind load of 4.2 sq.ft. compared to a Maco Shooting Star that weighs in at 31 pounds and has a surface area wind load of 8.91 sq.ft.
The Shooting Star also has a 28X power magnification, where the L4 has 30X...(agree tho these numbers maybe allot of hype by the manufacturers)
The quad is also advertised as being a true-wave length antenna compared to the Maco's which I think are 1/2 wave...
The quads do require a little more room in the back yard to get them up in the air and may or may-not require a little moor maintenance over the years with the wires, but if you have a tower that can easily be lowered to do that, then no biggie...My tower is a fold-over type that I can just loosen a few bolts at the base, and hand crank down, then back up with no extra help from anyone...
Price tag on a quad is quite a bit more than the yagi's too which is something to consider, which is why allot of guys would rather home-brew one instead of buying from a manufacture.
Biggest reason I went with the quad tho was the weight, and wind surface rating...By going with the quad I was able to get more antenna, than I would have if going with a yagi, since my tower was only rated for a wind surface area load of about 8 sq. ft. The Shooting Star would have been right at the limit, and you would still need a figure in the weight of the rotor and cables, which would have put it way past the towers rating. ( this is a free-standing tower)
The original Wilson Shooting Stars were speced at 28 pounds and only 6 sq.ft which is more in-line with what the Avanti Mookrakers were at 5.0 sq.ft. but the moonrakers had stainless steel whip type ends on the elements to reduce wind loading.8.91 seems off base despite what Maco says unless they failed to apply the 2/3 rule for round loads versus flat plate loads which seems about right. Round members have only 2/3 the windloading as a flat member and I suspect the difference here is due to that. The numbers work out about right as 8.91 x 2/3= 5.94. Just like gain figures you have to know how the wind loading is rated.
http://www.cbtricks.com/ant_manuals/wilson/shooting_star/ad/index.htm
Not much difference in gain.
Marketing hype. Means nothing in the real world. A parabolic antenna is a 1/2 wave dipole or even a 1/4 wave element in it's most basic form and they offer considerable gain.
Not everyone has such a tower. Single plane yagis are very easy to raise and lower even without a fold over tower. Dual polarity yagis have pretty much the same disadvantages as the quad with the exception that the quad element wires make a basically three dimensional box whereas the dual polarity yagi can be manipulated around guy wires etc a bit easier.
You should NEVER load a tower near it's maximum limit regardless of wghat you have on it. For the record this is coming from someone that overloaded his Delhi tower by a factor of almost 300% and had an antenna get destroyed by the wind and ice before the tower failed. I do NOT recommend this to anyone however. LOL Again, see my reference above to the stated surface area of the Shooting Star. Maco is the ONLY manufacturer of similar antenna with such a high rating. I fully believe the stated numbers are total flat area and are not corrected for round tubing. The math works to confirm this.
I run a old hi-gain big gun quad. It's a monster. Put it up at 60 ft. about 9 years ago and it has never been back down.I live in northwest ohio so i get the ice, snow and wind.I have ran the moonrakers, wilson's and even a A/S big daddy. I believe the noise floor on the quad is much more quiet and i hear mobiles out there that the yagi's can't. But this is like the ford verses chevy debate. Is all what works for you.
DXman
Yes, that's 3100 degrees F. Nine yrs of hard work.
Well - just for local DX, I would take the Yagi anyday. Been running that design for 39 yrs now; no repairs, no problems in all them years.
As far as on the other side of the world - lots of the big stations are running the Yagi's also.
As a general rule of thumb, A quad antenna will have the same gain as a yagi antenna that is one element larger. A 2 element quad will have the same gain as a 3 element yagi, and on up the line. I've run both yagis and quads, and prefer the quad for long range dx because it seems to have much better ears as SMOKERCRAFT mentioned in his post. The lower noise floor really helps pull out those weak signals when DXing. Since there is no local 11 meter traffic around here, DX is it for me. So the quad's quieter receive is a big plus. From a construction standpoint, a Yagi is much easier to build.
The quad is my personal choice, but designed and constructed properly, both quads and yagis are great performers.
- 399
The quad is my personal choice, but designed and constructed properly, both quads and yagis are great performers.
- 399