Antenna choices for Yaesu FT-60R

[GKLdiy88]

First let me say that I am very new to ham radio -and- I already did a lot of researching on some of the antenna possibilities, the reason I am still asking is that when reading thru the customer reviews on the difference choices there are conflicting opinions. Also, I don't want to get another antenna unless it would make big enough of a difference.

Also, let me say that with the stock antenna I have picked up the weather transmission as well as a conversation between a few hams, and that was without having to be outside, I received those transmission clearly from within my home and I live in a semi-rural area.

I will list 4 choices of action I am currently pondering:

1.) Just keep using the stock antenna that came with the FT-60R because I have read some are either happy with it's performance or felt there was not a big difference when they tried a different antenna.

2.) the "Signal Stick" antenna, I have read good reviews on that, but negative reviews also, some said the Diamond antenna was much better.

3.) the Diamond SRH77CA, I have read good reviews on that, but also negative reviews, and some said the "Signal Stick" did much better.

4.) keep researching other possible antenna choices, it can be perplexing though due to some of the extreme differences in opinions on the customer reviews, it's seems that likely on any given model you will have both very positive reviews and very negative reviews, and even if the negative reviews are not as many, they are negative enough to give you pause on trying that model.

Thanks in advance for any replies !

 

[mmckenna]

Take reviews written by amateur radio operators with a grain pound of salt. I've been a ham for a very long time, and I can tell you there's not a more opinionated group out there. Everyone has an opinion. Getting actual facts off those sorts of reviews is difficult. There's too many variables involved to get accurate information.

The stock antenna is pretty good. Yaesu isn't going to sell a radio with a crappy antenna that makes their products work poorly. The antenna is going to work as well as any portable antenna will.
You ~might~ see a slight improvement going to one of the longer 1/4 wave VHF antennas like the Signal Stick/Diamond, but it's not going to be a huge improvement. The limitation isn't just the antenna, it's also the counterpoise presented by the radio body (and a bit of coupling to the user). It's hard to make a radio that's 5" tall act like a good counterpoise on VHF frequencies.

Especially indoors…. The big limitation to you hearing more is that you are indoors surrounded by a lot of RF noise generators, and probably a lot of building materials that are blocking RF.

If you want to see any notable improvement in radio performance, get yourself and outdoor antenna. You'll throw money at the after market stuff and see minimal changes, if any. Put that money towards an outdoor antenna and it'll blow your mind.

 

[jwt873]

Do you plan to use the radio exclusively as a portable? That is, walking about outdoors, with it in your hand or clipped to your belt? If that's the case, then the you'll probably see some improvement with the aftermarket antennas you've looked at.

Or.. do you ever think you might use it in the house or in your vehicle? If so, then you'll need more than a simple rubber duck upgrade if you want to see a significant performance improvement.

Consider that when you're sitting in your home, there are walls for the signal to penetrate. In this case, your best bet will be to have an antenna mounted outdoors on the roof as high as you can get it. (In my case, I have a dual band vertical on a 40 foot tower. I can plug a 5W handheld in to it and chat on repeaters 30-50 miles away)

Same goes for mobile use. In a vehicle, you're surrounded by steel which can affect signals. A roof or trunk mounted antenna will outperform any longer rubber duck antenna on the market.

 

[GKLdiy88]

Take reviews written by amateur radio operators with a grain pound of salt. I've been a ham for a very long time, and I can tell you there's not a more opinionated group out there. Everyone has an opinion. Getting actual facts off those sorts of reviews is difficult. There's too many variables involved to get accurate information.

The stock antenna is pretty good. Yaesu isn't going to sell a radio with a crappy antenna that makes their products work poorly. The antenna is going to work as well as any portable antenna will.
You ~might~ see a slight improvement going to one of the longer 1/4 wave VHF antennas like the Signal Stick/Diamond, but it's not going to be a huge improvement. The limitation isn't just the antenna, it's also the counterpoise presented by the radio body (and a bit of coupling to the user). It's hard to make a radio that's 5" tall act like a good counterpoise on VHF frequencies.

Especially indoors…. The big limitation to you hearing more is that you are indoors surrounded by a lot of RF noise generators, and probably a lot of building materials that are blocking RF.

If you want to see any notable improvement in radio performance, get yourself and outdoor antenna. You'll throw money at the after market stuff and see minimal changes, if any. Put that money towards an outdoor antenna and it'll blow your mind.

Thanks, I really appreciate that insight based on your experience !

I also would think that Yaesu would not include a very poor antenna on one of their very popular models.

The outside antenna seems like a good idea, I am on a modest budget as far as hobby stuff so I might have to see what I can do on a budget level, I have read where some have used a magnetic mount antenna like you would use for a car, but they used it at home. So if I wanted to try that option I guess I'd have to hope the cable from the magnetic mount antenna would be long enough to reach inside the house where I'd would use the FT-60R.

 

[GKLdiy88]

Do you plan to use the radio exclusively as a portable? That is, walking about outdoors, with it in your hand or clipped to your belt? If that's the case, then the you'll probably see some improvement with the aftermarket antennas you've looked at.

Or.. do you ever think you might use it in the house or in your vehicle? If so, then you'll need more than a simple rubber duck upgrade if you want to see a significant performance improvement.

Consider that when you're sitting in your home, there are walls for the signal to penetrate. In this case, your best bet will be to have an antenna mounted outdoors on the roof as high as you can get it. (In my case, I have a dual band vertical on a 40 foot tower. I can plug a 5W handheld in to it and chat on repeaters 30-50 miles away)

Same goes for mobile use. In a vehicle, you're surrounded by steel which can affect signals. A roof or trunk mounted antenna will outperform any longer rubber duck antenna on the market.

Thanks, I would use it both from inside the house as well as walking around outside and even occasionally from the car.

That is why the magnetic mount antenna idea might be best for me, I can hook it up to that when in the house or car and then put the stock antenna back on when using it as a walk around HT.

 

[mmckenna]

OK, so if it's limited budget, you'll get much more 'bang for your buck' by putting an external antenna outside your home. As you suggested, it can be as easy as a magnetic mount antenna outside. Bonus is that you can easily take that in a car with you if you go mobile.

 

[GKLdiy88]

OK, so if it's limited budget, you'll get much more 'bang for your buck' by putting an external antenna outside your home. As you suggested, it can be as easy as a magnetic mount antenna outside. Bonus is that you can easily take that in a car with you if you go mobile.

Thanks, yep, that was what I was thinking, get an antenna that can "muli-task" and be used both at home as well as in the car.

Not wanting to hurry too much and make a hasty choice, I'll take my time to research what magnetic mount antenna compatible with the FT-60R that I might want to consider.

 

[ko6jw_2]

In fifty years of experimenting with scanner and HT antennas I have proven that there is no Holy Grail of antenna that will magically transform your radio. Generally, short helical wound or base loaded antennas are less efficient. Full size antennas are more efficient. There are a lot of variables affecting handheld radio antennas. The lack of a ground plane being most important followed by proximity to your body or hand. The bottom line is that there is no clear winner. I have antennas (in addition to stock ones) by Diamond, Comet, Smiley, Nagoya, and others. I like Diamond a lot. My most recent Diamond antenna is the SRH770S. Very long and awkward but solid performer.

If money is a concern the Diamond SRH77CA is a good choice.

Do not be fooled by off brand claims of gain and stick to the established manufacturers. There is no wrong choice.

 

[HeyU2]

For portable use I find the vhf bands best improvement with the 19” wire tail under the antenna base of any antenna. Costs nothing to make. Try it on WX channels for example.
I agree with the above Ham comments 😀
Have been one for 20 years.

 

[GKLdiy88]

For portable use I find the vhf bands best improvement with the 19” wire tail under the antenna base of any antenna. Costs nothing to make. Try it on WX channels for example.
I agree with the above Ham comments 😀
Have been one for 20 years.

Thanks for the idea, I'll see about checking into it, I've heard of doing long wire antennas connected to the whip antenna of shortwave radios, but now I'm guessing it can help with any kind of radio, kinda like putting aluminum foil on an AM pocket radio antenna to improve reception

 

[Wynterspop]

When I first started, I installed a Comet GP-1 in the attic and ran the coax down through ceiling duct work to the room I wanted to use my FT-60R. It worked great. I was hitting repeaters 30 miles away.

 

[GKLdiy88]

When I first started, I installed a Comet GP-1 in the attic and ran the coax down through ceiling duct work to the room I wanted to use my FT-60R. It worked great. I was hitting repeaters 30 miles away.

Thanks ! 30 miles away is great !!!!

Sounds like you had a good set-up with being able to put it in the attic, we live in a double-wide manufactured home with no real attic, so no inside place to put a 4 foot+ antenna, but a great idea for those with an attic !

Good to know an FT-60R can have that range with the right antenna !

 

[mmckenna]

Good to know an FT-60R can have that range with the right antenna !

The right antenna will make a huge difference. Some get hung up on transmitter output power, but the antenna makes a bigger difference.

 

[GKLdiy88]

The right antenna will make a huge difference. Some get hung up on transmitter output power, but the antenna makes a bigger difference.

You have a very good point, I am very new to ham radio stuff, but from what I have been reading here and there it does indeed seem the right antenna can make a real difference.

Now I have read customer reviews that the antenna included with FT-60R is not a bad antenna as far as those types of antennas go, but it would seem obvious if you connected an HT to the right 4 foot vertical antenna high above the ground that would get much greater range than the included 7 inch antenna.

 

[littona]

Thanks, yep, that was what I was thinking, get an antenna that can "muli-task" and be used both at home as well as in the car.

Not wanting to hurry too much and make a hasty choice, I'll take my time to research what magnetic mount antenna compatible with the FT-60R that I might want to consider.

Don't be too hasty like me and get a mag mount that won't stick to your vehicle. (Ford F-150 has an aluminum body) It was a stupid mistake, but at least it was a cheap antenna.

 

[n7uv]

What @mmckenna sez!

There's no holy grail. RF is complicated.

At 2 m VHF, the radio wavelength is 2 m / 79" (I know, that's obvious). The smallest electrically resonant antenna is a quarter wave. That's ~19". Leaving out a lot of details and minutiae, that quarter-wave "monopole" antenna needs to work against a properly sized counterpoise to be efficient. That's another electrical length of 19" or more, whether ground plane, or wire counterpoise, or whatever. There's no such thing in a handheld radio - it's just the frame of the radio, and on the FT-60 that's what, 5"? So, no matter what antenna is attached directly to the connector on the radio (I am excluding all antennas that are decent and connected to the radio's antenna connector via coax) there's little way for it to be an efficient radiator.

Physically short antennas (like supplied with the FT-60) are often electrically resonant (or at least less non-resonant) somewhere around 150 MHz. But, with a dual-band radio, that antenna, already short, has to accomplish a fair job at both 2 m and 440 MHz, which just complicates things more. Yes, there are some tricks that can be played with short antennas to get them more resonant, but at the end of the day the efficiency is always lower than a full-sized antenna. There are no miracles.

To get rid of the need for the counterpoise, one can use a dipole antenna, which has both the driven element and its counterpoise all in one. Of course, it's not resonant when fed from one end, like that stubby duck. Ideally would be center fed, and that's hard to do in a cheap rubber duck. Also, for the most part it will be bulkier. And still, unless they make the antenna at least 1/2 wave long (plus some to isolate it a bit from the body) it's gonna have *meh* performance.

Possibly the biggest issue is where the radio and its antenna spend their time. If on your hip, can add 10-15 dB loss to the antenna's efficiency. In non-dB terms, 10x to 40x worse. That's a typical number used in LMR propagation calcs for radio systems. VHF's not quite as bad as UHF, but still, the body is a big bag of meat/water, and it's not great for radio signals. In one's hand, at face level, the arm can help with acting as more of a counterpoise (it's in at least capacitive contact with the radio frame) and the stubby duck is away from the body, so it's better.

I've got some 19" antennas that I've used occasionally, but the added length makes it really inconvenient, and more than once has nearly poked me in the eye so I don't use them.

YMMV.

 

[GKLdiy88]

Don't be too hasty like me and get a mag mount that won't stick to your vehicle. (Ford F-150 has an aluminum body) It was a stupid mistake, but at least it was a cheap antenna.

Thanks for that alert, didn't think whether some vehicles had aluminum bodies !

The car I drive the most is a Toyota Prius Prime, I have to check but offhand I don't think it's aluminum.

Even if you warning doesn't apply to me, hopefully it will serve as an alert to others.

 

[GKLdiy88]

What @mmckenna sez!

There's no holy grail. RF is complicated.

At 2 m VHF, the radio wavelength is 2 m / 79" (I know, that's obvious). The smallest electrically resonant antenna is a quarter wave. That's ~19". Leaving out a lot of details and minutiae, that quarter-wave "monopole" antenna needs to work against a properly sized counterpoise to be efficient. That's another electrical length of 19" or more, whether ground plane, or wire counterpoise, or whatever. There's no such thing in a handheld radio - it's just the frame of the radio, and on the FT-60 that's what, 5"? So, no matter what antenna is attached directly to the connector on the radio (I am excluding all antennas that are decent and connected to the radio's antenna connector via coax) there's little way for it to be an efficient radiator.

Physically short antennas (like supplied with the FT-60) are often electrically resonant (or at least less non-resonant) somewhere around 150 MHz. But, with a dual-band radio, that antenna, already short, has to accomplish a fair job at both 2 m and 440 MHz, which just complicates things more. Yes, there are some tricks that can be played with short antennas to get them more resonant, but at the end of the day the efficiency is always lower than a full-sized antenna. There are no miracles.

To get rid of the need for the counterpoise, one can use a dipole antenna, which has both the driven element and its counterpoise all in one. Of course, it's not resonant when fed from one end, like that stubby duck. Ideally would be center fed, and that's hard to do in a cheap rubber duck. Also, for the most part it will be bulkier. And still, unless they make the antenna at least 1/2 wave long (plus some to isolate it a bit from the body) it's gonna have *meh* performance.

Possibly the biggest issue is where the radio and its antenna spend their time. If on your hip, can add 10-15 dB loss to the antenna's efficiency. In non-dB terms, 10x to 40x worse. That's a typical number used in LMR propagation calcs for radio systems. VHF's not quite as bad as UHF, but still, the body is a big bag of meat/water, and it's not great for radio signals. In one's hand, at face level, the arm can help with acting as more of a counterpoise (it's in at least capacitive contact with the radio frame) and the stubby duck is away from the body, so it's better.

I've got some 19" antennas that I've used occasionally, but the added length makes it really inconvenient, and more than once has nearly poked me in the eye so I don't use them.

YMMV.

Thanks, I'm new at this and realizing ham antennas are a bit more complicated than the old "rabbit ear" TV antennas I used as a kid

I appreciate your info and realize a short antenna attached directly to an HT is going to have limitations regardless of the brand.

Being new to ham radio and starting out at a budget level, my new Yaesu FT-60R HT is my only ham radio right now and I have mostly used it so far from inside my house with the included stock antenna, and have been pleasantly surprised at how well it picks up conversations between hams even though I am using the included stock antenna from within my house especially considering there are no repeaters listed as being within the county limits of the county we live in, so it must be picking up a repeater from outside our county limits because the conversations I have heard thus far has included people from another state.

So while I will possibly consider a larger (coax connected) antenna as a later possibility, in the meantime I am very impressed with the reception ability of my FT-60R with the stock antenna from inside my house.

So while I am pleased and content with how well my FT-60R HT already does "as is" from our semi-rural location, it does make me wonder how much better it might be connected to a 4 foot antenna with how well it already does "as is" from our location.

Thanks again !

 

[n7uv]

Thanks for that alert, didn't think whether some vehicles had aluminum bodies !

The car I drive the most is a Toyota Prius Prime, I have to check but offhand I don't think it's aluminum.

Even if you warning doesn't apply to me, hopefully it will serve as an alert to others.

And! Some of the really cheap "mag-mount" antennas have a magnet that is barely that, street speeds can knock them loose. Especially no fun on the freeway. When a mag-mount whip-style wire antenna is stuck to a suitable ferrous material (@littona discovered that the expensive way), should be able to grab the end of the antenna and fold it to the roof without it popping loose. Even then, the mag-mount base is only capacitively coupled to the metal roof surface, so the base should be at least a few inches in diameter and there should be a piece of metal (copper, maybe, but not likely, prolly just copper colored) foil on the bottom of the antenna base. Take an ohmmeter and buzz the foil to the ground connection on the cable to make sure it's actually connected.

 

[n7uv]

Thanks, I'm new at this and realizing ham antennas are a bit more complicated than the old "rabbit ear" TV antennas I used as a kid

I appreciate your info and realize a short antenna attached directly to an HT is going to have limitations regardless of the brand.

Being new to ham radio and starting out at a budget level, my new Yaesu FT-60R HT is my only ham radio right now and I have mostly used it so far from inside my house with the included stock antenna, and have been pleasantly surprised at how well it picks up conversations between hams even though I am using the included stock antenna from within my house especially considering there are no repeaters listed as being within the county limits of the county we live in, so it must be picking up a repeater from outside our county limits because the conversations I have heard thus far has included people from another state.

So while I will possibly consider a larger (coax connected) antenna as a later possibility, in the meantime I am very impressed with the reception ability of my FT-60R with the stock antenna from inside my house.

So while I am pleased and content with how well my FT-60R HT does "as is", it does make me wonder how much better it might be connected to a 4 foot antenna.

Thanks again !

Like I think @mmckenna said, try connecting your FT-60 to a decent antenna mounted outside. It's nearly as good as any mobile out there (receiver intermod is generally worse, and of course it puts out only 5 W which is plenty good enough with a decent antenna). I have a couple Yaesu/Vertex VX-150 2-meter-only handhelds in service as ammo-can digis. While not the same radio, they're similar enough in size and performance. On a decent antenna (one's on a j-pole and the other's on a 1/4 mounted over a ground plane) they're as good as anything out there.