MAXSCAN 1000 vs LARSEN TRI-BAND

Status
Not open for further replies.

eastrocks400

Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2009
Messages
217
Im looking for a good all around scanner antenna. The larsen has a little wider range according to the charts, but since it is for only receiving it probably doesnt matter. So whats the difference? what should i go for?

Thanks.
 

RodStrong

Member
Joined
Nov 11, 2007
Messages
1,173
Location
West
Im looking for a good all around scanner antenna. The larsen has a little wider range according to the charts, but since it is for only receiving it probably doesnt matter. So whats the difference? what should i go for?

For what it's worth, I have had the Larsen NMO150/450/800 on a work vehicle for about 6 months, and it's on a scanner that I only listen to 700/800mhz stuff on. It seems to work great. I have driven all over the state I live in and it has performed well for me.

Also comparable to the two you mentioned is the Antennex model: Antenex ASCANC [ASCANC] - $26.95 : The Antenna Farm :: , Your Two Way Radio Source!

Good luck.
 

eastrocks400

Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2009
Messages
217
Has anyone noticed that scanner stops on frequencies that are not really receiving anything, and deicdes to make noises kind of like a little static? (This is with tri band larsen.) I am using a pl259 to bnc adapter.

Also, it seems to be a bit rusty on 478mhz..... why would this be? It said 450mhz... but obv not only 450.000
 

FFPM571

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Mar 11, 2003
Messages
1,716
Location
Nashvillle
I have used both the Larsen and the Maxrad. I have had better luck with the Maxrad.
 

fireant

Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2004
Messages
850
Location
Copland
I just recently got the Larsen and have no complaints what so ever in it. You cannot beat them as far as price and quality. I believe they also come with a 2 year warranty as well. I ordered through cheapham.com and had the antenna to my door in 2 days will definitely shop with them again.

fireant
 

eastrocks400

Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2009
Messages
217
I just recently got the Larsen and have no complaints what so ever in it. You cannot beat them as far as price and quality. I believe they also come with a 2 year warranty as well. I ordered through cheapham.com and had the antenna to my door in 2 days will definitely shop with them again.

fireant

Ordered from the same place, great everything.
 

eastrocks400

Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2009
Messages
217
Ok... i have had the larsen for a decent amount of time now, and it seems to be showing no improvement whatsoever in the house. while in the car, i dont really pick up any FURTHER , i just get clearer.

For anyone around nassau, long island: I live in east rockaway. With the stock antenna, i can barely pick up freeport dispatch. With larsen, i can pick it up slightly better. With stock and larsen, i can pick up syosset disp, westbury, which are a lot further than freeport. i can also pick up NCPD all the way out by suffolk. Will any antenna do this, or is this just a repeater issue/ issue with frequency?

I know w2lie has many scanner feeds which pick up all of nassau crystal clear. I understand he has base antennas galore, but still, if he is up where its hilly, and i am only 10 or so miles from freeport, why can he pick it up better than me??
 

allen5565

Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2003
Messages
67
Location
Montgomery County, MD
Eastrocks, you haven't said where your antenna is positioned or what kind of coax you're using or how long a run you have of that coax, or at least I haven't seen that info, let's say. All those factors play a role. If you have the antenna on a mag mount on the rear 1/4 panel of your car you're losing 3.4 dB of signal strength -- that's more than HALF your signal, vaporized!! On the other hand, if you've got an NMO or a mag mount on your roof, you're pulling all or just shy of all your possible signal strength.

http://www.larsen-antennas.com/docfiles/ASB9/Mobile/MobileSeriesDesignations.pdf

Larsen - Antenna Basic Concepts

Also look at the kind of coax and the amount of it you have for your task. Don't settle for crummy coaxial. Get the best you can afford, and pay the extra to have a professional install good-quality connectors for your radio and the antenna -- BNC and soldiered, I would assume would work for your needs. What's the best coax? Bone up on your signal attenuation charts and work from there. Look for the highest frequency you'll want to listen to and see what the signal loss is for the nearest freq. These measurements are usually given for 100-foot lengths, but you can easily take that figure, divid by 100, ,then multiply the result by the number of feet of cable you actually need. 17 feet is a common length for mobile apps. Here's a simple attenuation chart for a few common types of cable, but the intertubes are full of all sorts of info like this. [EDIT: One thing to keep in mind when scouting coax is the diameter of the stuff. LMR 400 looks inviting, but it's way too ft to jam into the NMO connector, which will take up to 1/4" outside diameter, I believe. Just something to think about.]

Coax Cable Attenuation Details

Personally, I have been using Comtelco's Microloss 900 on an NMO trunk mount (I'm too lazy to fish wires through my roof and I think my Larsen 825 would look goofy up that high, too) and I'm pretty happy. I'd be happoer still if I didn't know I was losing close to half my signal from the mounting location, but I am consoled by the fact that the coax doesn't "bleed" too much of the signal before it hits my radios. Antenna Permanent Body Mounts - Comelco

I hope this is of some use to you. If you already knew all this, please accept my apologies. I didn't mean to bean patronizing or didactic.

Be safe, have fun.
 
Last edited:

eastrocks400

Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2009
Messages
217
I am using the mag mount model on the roof of my car. jI am not replacing the type of coax that runs through the base because i dont want to ruin anything in there. I think it may just have to do with height..

I haven't been getting too great reception, but then again the car is only 6,7 feet high.
 

allen5565

Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2003
Messages
67
Location
Montgomery County, MD
It's less the height of the roof that makes it an ideal mounting location than the fact that you have that nice broad surface all around the antenna to help scoop up the broadcast signals and reflect them nicely so the antenna will pick them up. since there is nothing in the way of the roofline to block the signals it works better than the trunk, where the rear window and "C" pillars obscure a good portion of the signal. Sure the height of the roof helps, but it's more the fact that you've got an unobscured "view" of the radio waves that are bouncing around the car, hitting that wide-open ground plane of the roof. To that end, is there anything on your roof that might be obscuring the antenna? Any roof racks or lightbars(?!?!) or anything like that?

If you are taking the mag mount inside and plopping it on your coffee table or somewhere similar you can absolutely expect to hear a degridation in signal quality indoors. the mount needs a groundplane, and it ought to be metallic to work best. Tables, chairs, magazine stacks, window casements are not going to offer the same ideal surface that your smooth car roof will, and your reception will suffer because of it.

I really would take a serious look at the coax you have connected to your mag mount. I will bet you a doughnut it's something pretty thin and pretty high-loss, like RG-58 or the like. Also, make sure you do not have any kinks in the cable!! Coax is a lot like a garden hose in that respect, and if the cable is bent or coiled too tightly, the radio waves will not flow through to your scanner. Further, bundling it too tightly could crack the inner element, in essence breaking the conduit through which the signal must pass. If you have surplus cord, try making a set of not-too-small loops, like a cowboy's laso, maybe no smaller than a foot in diameter, and see if that makes a difference. Whatever you do, don't pack excess coax the way you see power cords wrapped in a new package, in tight little bundles that are tied tightly together.

Lots of people have been pretty happy with that Larsen tri-band ("I know, that's why I bought it.) What is your budget? Where did you get the mag mount, or was it ordered with the antenna? Check the jacket of the coax. tehre should be printing on it that will say what kind of cable you have. With that information, look up the cable's attentuation details online and see if the stuff is any good for the frequencies you want to draw in. If you have a radio shop or know someone who's knowledgeable, perhaps you could test the cable to see if it is sending full strength signals from one end to the other, or if it is damaged internally and thus "spilling" some signal inside, before the radio waves get a chance to make it to your scanner.

Be safe, have fun.
 

engine3

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
May 19, 2009
Messages
60
Location
Connecticut
i just ordered the Larsen tri-band from Cheap Ham...
cant wait till it shows up after hearing so many good comments on it
 

prcguy

Member
Joined
Jun 30, 2006
Messages
15,368
Location
So Cal - Richardson, TX - Tewksbury, MA
RG-58 is standard issue on mag mounts and most NMO mounts, a short run for mobile use is not lossy enough to worry about.

As long as your RG-58 is not WWII surplus you can coil or wrap it any way you please including the way I wrap power cords, just avoid a bend radius smaller than an inch or so. The "inner element" is not going to break and the signal will not be squeezed or "spilled" like the coax was a garden hose.

If a ground plane is not metallic, what would it be made of? If radio waves 'hit" your groundplane do they get squished or maybe dented?
prcguy

It's less the height of the roof that makes it an ideal mounting location than the fact that you have that nice broad surface all around the antenna to help scoop up the broadcast signals and reflect them nicely so the antenna will pick them up. since there is nothing in the way of the roofline to block the signals it works better than the trunk, where the rear window and "C" pillars obscure a good portion of the signal. Sure the height of the roof helps, but it's more the fact that you've got an unobscured "view" of the radio waves that are bouncing around the car, hitting that wide-open ground plane of the roof. To that end, is there anything on your roof that might be obscuring the antenna? Any roof racks or lightbars(?!?!) or anything like that?

If you are taking the mag mount inside and plopping it on your coffee table or somewhere similar you can absolutely expect to hear a degridation in signal quality indoors. the mount needs a groundplane, and it ought to be metallic to work best. Tables, chairs, magazine stacks, window casements are not going to offer the same ideal surface that your smooth car roof will, and your reception will suffer because of it.

I really would take a serious look at the coax you have connected to your mag mount. I will bet you a doughnut it's something pretty thin and pretty high-loss, like RG-58 or the like. Also, make sure you do not have any kinks in the cable!! Coax is a lot like a garden hose in that respect, and if the cable is bent or coiled too tightly, the radio waves will not flow through to your scanner. Further, bundling it too tightly could crack the inner element, in essence breaking the conduit through which the signal must pass. If you have surplus cord, try making a set of not-too-small loops, like a cowboy's laso, maybe no smaller than a foot in diameter, and see if that makes a difference. Whatever you do, don't pack excess coax the way you see power cords wrapped in a new package, in tight little bundles that are tied tightly together.

Lots of people have been pretty happy with that Larsen tri-band ("I know, that's why I bought it.) What is your budget? Where did you get the mag mount, or was it ordered with the antenna? Check the jacket of the coax. tehre should be printing on it that will say what kind of cable you have. With that information, look up the cable's attentuation details online and see if the stuff is any good for the frequencies you want to draw in. If you have a radio shop or know someone who's knowledgeable, perhaps you could test the cable to see if it is sending full strength signals from one end to the other, or if it is damaged internally and thus "spilling" some signal inside, before the radio waves get a chance to make it to your scanner.

Be safe, have fun.
 

eastrocks400

Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2009
Messages
217
The coax is not an issue for me.

I think it is just the repeaters around here. Some towns pretty close to me use sucky low powered repeaters and i cant hear them. Other towns faarther away i get just as clear with rubber duck as i do with larsen tri band or larsen lm490c
 

allen5565

Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2003
Messages
67
Location
Montgomery County, MD
Hi there prcguy. I think we are in agreement about how to handle surplus cable. You say yourself not to have a bend radius smaller than an inch or so, which is exactly what I see in the electric cords that come packed like a stack of logs, wrapped tightly back and forth and back and forth and then drawn taught with a twist tie around the middle. I am pleased to hear you have never encountered coax that got kinked or twisted inside and had neither the central copper wire nor the insulation break as a result. I can't say the same from my experience, and it would seem I am not alone. Refer to the section titled "Coax cable attenuation with time" Coax Attenuation / Loss :: Radio-Electronics.Com

At 450 MHz, a 17-foot run of RG-58 ought to have 1.678 dB attenuation, at least according to this calculator. Coax Calculator That's not a ton, a loss of roughly 1/8th the power, but one can still do better.

As for what I take to be your dismissal of my garden hose analogy, I make the comparison from the 19th century parlor trick of "total internal reflection", showing a focused beam of light seemingly "trapped" in a falling jet of water. "Light travels more slowly in water than air. So when it reaches the water-air boundary, it speeds up and gets bent. At a certain angle, the light ray is bent so much, it is reflected back into the water." All this winds up leading scientists to develop coax and fiber optic cable...eventually. Innovation - Life, Inspired . About the Episodes . Show Transcript | PBS

As for the ground plane -- what can I say? I meant that simply plopping the mag mount on your coffee table or on a window sill and expecting to pick up signals with the same vigor you will when the antenna is atop your car is an exercise in disappointment. The surface needs to be electrically conductive. Oh, as for the other bit of commentary-- "If radio waves 'hit" your groundplane do they get squished or maybe dented?" -- I shall ask, simply, "Do you have Prince Albert in a can?", which seems the appropriate level of response.

Eastrocks, if you are getting no better reception with a roof-mounted Larsen than you are with your rubber duckie, there's something wrong. Since it isn't the radio that's changed, it must be in either the Larsen antenna or the cable and connectors associated with it where the problem lies. Perhaps prcguy has some insight he would be willing to share to try to solve this problem, rather than limiting his knowledge of the subject matter to sophistry.
 
Last edited:

eastrocks400

Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2009
Messages
217
Well as i said before... could it just be that the repeaters around me have different amounts of power?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top