• Effective immediately we will be deleting, without notice, any negative threads or posts that deal with the use of encryption and streaming of scanner audio.

    We've noticed a huge increase in rants and negative posts that revolve around agencies going to encryption due to the broadcasting of scanner audio on the internet. It's now worn out and continues to be the same recycled rants. These rants hijack the threads and derail the conversation. They no longer have a place anywhere on this forum other than in the designated threads in the Rants forum in the Tavern.

    If you violate these guidelines your post will be deleted without notice and an infraction will be issued. We are not against discussion of this issue. You just need to do it in the right place. For example:
    https://forums.radioreference.com/rants/224104-official-thread-live-audio-feeds-scanners-wait-encryption.html

Diamond RH 519, any feedback?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Dec 4, 2009
Messages
187
Location
brianearlspilner
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 2.2; en-us; DROID2 GLOBAL Build/S273) AppleWebKit/533.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile Safari/533.1)

Just got this antenna today for my HT. Any thoughts about this antenna? So far I am hitting the repeaters fine, however reception could be a little bit better when if comes to scanning.
 

ST-Bob

Member
Database Admin
Joined
Oct 14, 2010
Messages
528
Location
Worcester, MA, USA
All "rubber duckies" are a compromise. It's probably a loaded 1/4 wave at 2m and maybe 2 colinear 1/4 waves with a choke in the middle for 70cm. It'll outperform a shorter antenna but it's nothing like as good as any outdoor antenna with some gain. Even a 1/4 wave ground plane on a cookie sheet will probably work better.
 
Joined
Dec 4, 2009
Messages
187
Location
brianearlspilner
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 2.2; en-us; DROID2 GLOBAL Build/S273) AppleWebKit/533.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile Safari/533.1)

Figures. The stock ducky picks up the weather channel better than the Diamond RH519. Also bought an Diamond MR77 for the car. I am very pleased with that antenna.
 

sparks40

Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2009
Messages
218
Location
Illinois
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 2.2; en-us; DROID2 GLOBAL Build/S273) AppleWebKit/533.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile Safari/533.1)

Figures. The stock ducky picks up the weather channel better than the Diamond RH519. Also bought an Diamond MR77 for the car. I am very pleased with that antenna.

Be careful with the MR77. The coax connection to the base is somewhat fragile. I had one, and one day i went to transmit and the SWR was way up there. On further inspection, the coax connection had loosened up on the mag base.

The connector just pushes down onto the mag base, and is held in place by a cheap adhesive as far as i could tell. I wouldn't buy another one.

The 519 is a good antenna, but be careful not to bend it too far at the base. I have one, and it takes a beating sometimes, but all in all, it's a good antenna.

You might also try an MFJ 1716. It seems to have higher gain, an also outperforms both the stock duck and the 519 on transmit and receive on my FT-60.
 

LtDoc

Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2006
Messages
2,145
Location
Oklahoma
The primary reason for any 'rubber duck' antenna is convenience, it's shorter than the typical antenna for that particular band. That means that the performance of that shortened antenna will also be 'shortened'. How 'much' just depends on how 'short' the thing is. (I don't think there's any direct relation between the percentage of 'length' and 'performance', at least not that I'm aware of.) The typical 'duck' antenna on a hand held radio may be just fine one one band and terrible on another, deals with that relative length per frequency thingy.
And then there's the fact that there's always two 'halves' to any antenna system. The typical hand held radio uses the radio's chassis and the user's body as it's 'other half', or "ground", or counterpoise. There are so many possible variations in that, it's sometimes a wonder that any 'duck' antenna works at all. One alternative is to supply the hand held with another 'other half' of an antenna to use instead of the chassis/hand/arm/whatever. How do you do that? How about hanging a 'tail' of the proper length from the attachment point of the 'duck' antenna (connected to the radio's ground, naturally). You end up with a sort of vertical dipole. It really can help. It doesn't turn the thing into some 'miraculous' antenna, but it can make 'some' difference.
Nothing will replace a "real live", 'full sized' antenna if it's shorter than that "real live" antenna. But you can sort of 'help' it along a little. All of this is a generalization, take it as such.
- 'Doc
 
Joined
Dec 4, 2009
Messages
187
Location
brianearlspilner
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 2.2; en-us; DROID2 GLOBAL Build/S273) AppleWebKit/533.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile Safari/533.1)

sparks40 said:
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 2.2; en-us; DROID2 GLOBAL Build/S273) AppleWebKit/533.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile Safari/533.1)

Figures. The stock ducky picks up the weather channel better than the Diamond RH519. Also bought an Diamond MR77 for the car. I am very pleased with that antenna.

Be careful with the MR77. The coax connection to the base is somewhat fragile. I had one, and one day i went to transmit and the SWR was way up there. On further inspection, the coax connection had loosened up on the mag base.

The connector just pushes down onto the mag base, and is held in place by a cheap adhesive as far as i could tell. I wouldn't buy another one.

The 519 is a good antenna, but be careful not to bend it too far at the base. I have one, and it takes a beating sometimes, but all in all, it's a good antenna.

You might also try an MFJ 1716. It seems to have higher gain, an also outperforms both the stock duck and the 519 on transmit and receive on my FT-60.
Thanks for the replies.

Sparks, should I put shrink tubing on the base of the antenna? Or would it not protect against strain.
 

W8RMH

Feed Provider Since 2012
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 4, 2009
Messages
7,867
Location
Grove City, Ohio (A Bearcat not a Buckeye)
I have used this antenna on my Yaesu FT-60R. It works better on 70cm but worse on 2m, compared to the stock RD. I would say it performs OK for a scanner antenna however it would not be my first choice. (Wears nice on the belt too, doesn't stick you in the side like the RD).
 

SCPD

Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2001
Messages
65,126
Location
Virginia
I use this antenna on my GRE PSR500 scanner ... and it works reasonably well. I like that it is flexible ... and overall isn't all that bad. I should be doing a test on this antenna in the coming weeks, so check the forums.
 

sparks40

Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2009
Messages
218
Location
Illinois
Sparks, should I put shrink tubing on the base of the antenna? Or would it not protect against strain.
Shrink tubing will firm it up a little bit, but what i was getting at was that if the 519 gets kinked at the base, it will be like that permanently. You can sraighten it out somewhat, but it never quite goes back the way it was. I did that to mine, but i hasn't affected perfomance at all.

I'll also reiterate on the MR77...they are JUNK the way they're put together. Apparently mine had loosened up over time from taking it on and off the roof. A good inexpensive 2M/70cm mobile is a Workman Electronics DB-1. It's a 3/8-24 1/4 wave. You can buy it with or without a mag mount from several places, and it's a good solid antenna. I use it on the wife's car. I have the same antenna on a homemade stake pocket mount i made for my truck.

The other mag mount i use is a Workman ANT-58 for 2M. It's a 5/8 wave, and also a 3/8-24 mount. I have it on a Hustler 5" heavy duty mag mount. I've been very impressed by the performance vs. the price of these two antennas.
 

Attachments

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top