RS Antenna

[aar9sm]

I have recently bought the RS 20-176 108-1300 for $25.00 dllars and was wondering if anyone has both the RS Discone and 20-176 and if there were any drastic changes or improvements using the RS Discone. Iwill monitor mainly Vhf hi band and the Mil-air bands with some 800mhz

Mike

 

[hsdtech]

Stick with the "sputnik". The R.S. Discone just plain sucks in my opinion. The elements always end up falling off, and performance just isn't worth it for the price.
I switched to the Scantenna and have never looked back. I still have my little sputnik (20-176) though, great little antenna.

 

[LarrySC]

The main issue with the 176 is the SO-239 female connector for a PL-259 plug. They are not rated above 600 mHz. Rather than use coax that requires a PL-259, insert a PL to "F" adp'r and use RG-6 with "F" connectors which is rated to 900 mHz. This will help the 800 coverage. Add an "F" to BNC adp'r to your scanner.

 

[mike_s104]

The main issue with the 176 is the SO-239 female connector for a PL-259 plug. They are not rated above 600 mHz. Rather than use coax that requires a PL-259, insert a PL to "F" adp'r and use RG-6 with "F" connectors which is rated to 900 mHz. This will help the 800 coverage. Add an "F" to BNC adp'r to your scanner.

I'm going to try this first. I kinda wish I would have gotten the Scantenna or a Diamond Dipole. there is another thread on here with using a cell phone antenna and a diplexer. you can get the diplexer here:

http://tinlee.com/

 

[hsdtech]

I'm going to try this first. I kinda wish I would have gotten the Scantenna or a Diamond Dipole. there is another thread on here with using a cell phone antenna and a diplexer. you can get the diplexer here:

http://tinlee.com/

What antenna do you have now? The 20-176?

 

[mike_s104]

What antenna do you have now? The 20-176?

yeah, the 20-176

 

[mike_s104]

I bought the PL-239 to F connector adapter tonight and I had an F to BNC. I installed them with a short piece of RG6 good up to 2.25GHz. the antenna seems to be working better. there is an 800MHz trunked system that I was unable to receive with the other cable I was using with the PL-259 connectors, now I can receive it. thanks LarrySC.

 

[prcguy]

Any improvement will be due to the coax you changed to, not eliminating the PL-259. A PL-259 to F adaptor is still a PL-259 at one end. Where did the 600MHz rating on a PL/SO-239 come from? An SO-239 that terminates directly into antenna elements as in the Sputnik becomes part of the antenna and losses would be negligible. There are high quality versions of SO-239s and Motorola has used them up to 860MHz in the past. Where did the 900MHz rating on F connectors come from? Most that I see and use are rated to beyond 2GHz with a very good match.
prcguy

The main issue with the 176 is the SO-239 female connector for a PL-259 plug. They are not rated above 600 mHz. Rather than use coax that requires a PL-259, insert a PL to "F" adp'r and use RG-6 with "F" connectors which is rated to 900 mHz. This will help the 800 coverage. Add an "F" to BNC adp'r to your scanner.

 

[mike_s104]

Any improvement will be due to the coax you changed to, not eliminating the PL-259. A PL-259 to F adaptor is still a PL-259 at one end. Where did the 600MHz rating on a PL/SO-239 come from? An SO-239 that terminates directly into antenna elements as in the Sputnik becomes part of the antenna and losses would be negligible. There are high quality versions of SO-239s and Motorola has used them up to 860MHz in the past. Where did the 900MHz rating on F connectors come from? Most that I see and use are rated to beyond 2GHz with a very good match.
prcguy

I figured it was the coax more then the connectors. I went with the F connectors since I have a lot of them at home. regardless of which was to blame, it's been some what fixed. I still may try the Scantenna also.