Zero-Five 24 Foot Vertical

[wavrider]

wavrider
Don't know if you read my post on Zerofive 43' verticals on eham or not but you may have realized I turned the ZF 43' vertical into a resonant antenna system, before I brought the ZF 43' vertical I tried a trapped dipole that would play but it had a very narrow bandwith, then I built a 204' G5RV and I got it to work fairly good on 160m but it was down 2S units on receive on 75m where I do most of my talking, I then tried the ZF 43' vertical using a full range antenna tuner an put down the 3500' of radials under it, my receive picked up but the transmit was so so, I have a mobile screwdriver antenna that I had used on another antenna project that I was not using an I incorporated both these antennas together to make this antennas system, an it has worked beyond my wildest dreams, works great NVIS and works very good DX as well, I am not an antenna guru ether but I do keep plugging 73s its my bed time..........KB6HRT

I have read the article on EHAM.

That is the fun of experimenting with antennas, you never know what will work.

Good idea using the screwdriver antenna for tuning the 43' vertical, but it is still only a 43' vertical and on 160 I would not even try to guess the efficiency of that antenna.

W9INN? I have ran across that call sign in several research sessions, have heard nothing but good things about his home brew antennas.

Thanks for the online QSO, definitely enjoy a good debate, was hoping Captain Kilowatt, or Doc would have joined in,they usually have some interesting insight to antennas and their comments are worth reading.

 

[W5LZ]

The term, "Barn Burner", is relative, just depends on what a device is being compared to. If you were comparing your 'loaded' 43 foot vertical to a mobile antenna, then I would agree with you, it would be a 'barn burner'. If you are comparing it to a typical 1/4 wave vertical antenna for 160 meters, then I would have to think it was a gross exaggeration. More a 'fizzle' than a 'burner' of any kind. (I think you, or Mr. Winn would agree with that.)
I think Mr. Varney(sp) is probably spinning in the grave considering all the misinformation/claims about his antenna. I know that he did try to correct several of the misconceptions about it before he died. His 'G5RV' antenna worked very well for it's designed, and intended purpose. It's only coincidental that it 'works' on other bands than 20 meters, -IF- you use a tuner with it. There's nothing particularly 'mysterious' about it unless you don't understand how/why it works. Mr. Varney would also tell you that it was NOT a dipole, but more a 'Zepp' type antenna. By common usage, a dipole is a 1/2 wave length antenna that's center fed. Call it a doublet instead, that's what it is.
Most of the confusion with this stuff is a misapplication of descriptive terms. Is that being 'picky'? No, it isn't. It's just common sense (Or un-common sense? Or if I really wanted to get 'snotty', it's an "Obamanation"/"Obamanism", one'a them "change" thingys?).
If you ain't on the same 'page', it don't make sense... no matter how 'nice' it sounds.
- 'Doc

 

[walterb]

Zerofive Antennas

Doc,
Thank you, thats it in a nut shell!...........KB6HRT

 

[walterb]

Time has passed, still using the resonant 43' vertical, all is well with it, I said Barn Burner
on 160m back in 2011, in my post, i know now that was an over statement when it comes to 160m antennas, a good inverted Ell higher could work better but not from what antennas I have used here on 160m after trying to build a better mouse trap for 6 years, so one more try coming a T2FD for a receive only antenna.
Will be installing the 83' T2FD biggest antenna I think I can install at this QTH with in a week or two it will be receive only an see where that takes me....................73s..............kb6hrt