160 Meters...? (or) 12 Meters...?

[BaoFeng_Blogger]

I'm in a situation where I have the option of obtaining one of two identical HF base/shack transceivers.

One of them is 160-Meters through 10-Meters... EXCLUDING the 12-Meter band.

The other rig is 80-Meters through 10-Meters... INCLUDING the 12-Meter band.

For those of you who have operated on both 160 and 12... what are the pro's and con's of either?
Is there a advantage or disadvantage with either band?

I notice that 160 phone runs from 1.800-MHz to 2.00-MHz, which is a 200 spread... while 12 phone
runs from 24.930MHz to 24.990Mhz, giving it only a 60 spread.

I hate to assume anything, but... because 160 has a little over 3 time the frequency allocation of 12,
should I go with 160... or what?

Help... HElp... HELp... HELP...!

Thanks for your input on the above.

73 to y'all...

BaoFeng Blogger KN4OTS

 

[zz0468]

An effective antenna for 160m is more difficult to achieve. Do you have the space for something other than a compact antenna? That might be the deciding factor.

Just for some sort of guideline, I use an open wire fed dipole of 43ft on each leg. 86 feet total, and use an antenna tuner. Running 100 watts, I've found that if I can hear it, I can work it, on 160. So, that's a shortened antenna, but it's about as efficient you can get, especially since it's not dependant on a very low impedance RF ground.

Another thing to factor in is, we're at a sunspot minimum. 12 will occasionally open up, but it's going to be a few years before it shows what it can really do.

On the other hand, noise is a problem on 160, and you might have to take extraordinary steps to be able to hear.

All in all, 160 is a fun band, and I like it. It's a bit more of a technical challenge to make it play right than 12 is. The amount of spectrum available in each is probably not a factor. Neither is ever anywhere close to full.

 

[iMONITOR]

WHAT TO EXPECT FROM OUR HF AMATEUR RADIO BANDS!
A GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF EACH HAM BAND

Amateur Radio Band Characteristics
http://www.hamuniverse.com/hfbands.html

 

[k9wkj]

if the one radio doesn't have 12M it probably doesn't have 17M or 30M either (all WARC bands or none in my experience)
which would be a NO for me
but I also use 160M more than 12M

so I guess i am of no help at all

 

[prcguy]

I think the OP should decide based on his ability to host a 160m antenna. I'm on HF all the time and have maybe had a QSO twice in my life on 12m. I listen a lot on 160 and have had a few dozen QSOs over the years but its also a very seldom used band for me.

12m is more of a daytime band when open and 160m is almost exclusively a night time band so your hours of operation may influence your decision. 12m is also heavily reliant on sunspot activity which is grim right now where 160m is fairly reliable even in bad times.

 

[BaoFeng_Blogger]

Re: 160 or 12...

if the one radio doesn't have 12M it probably doesn't have 17M or 30M either (all WARC bands or none in my experience)
which would be a NO for me
but I also use 160M more than 12M

so I guess i am of no help at all

Thanks for your response K9WKJ.

I guess I should have posted all the bands in my original post, but I was thinking more on the 160 - 12 situation than giving all the information. Sorry.

The rigs have the following bands...


160m = 1.800 MHz – 1.999 MHz
80m = 3.500 MHz – 3.999 MHz
40m = 6.900 MHz – 7.249 MHz
30m = 10.100 MHz – 10.149 MHz
20m = 14.000 MHz – 14.349 MHz
17m = 18.068 MHz – 18.168 MHz
15m = 21.000 MHz – 21.449 MHz
12m = 24.890 MHz – 24.990 MHz
10m = 28.000 MHz – 29.699 MHz

I just have to decide if I want either 160, less 12... or 12 less 160.

73 to ya...

BaoFeng Blogger KN4OTS

 

[BaoFeng_Blogger]

Ham Universe Info...

WHAT TO EXPECT FROM OUR HF AMATEUR RADIO BANDS!
A GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF EACH HAM BAND

Amateur Radio Band Characteristics
http://www.hamuniverse.com/hfbands.html

Thanks "iMonitor" for the link. It sure helped me understand the "bands" for me.

73 to ya...

BaoFeng Blogger KN4OTS

 

[AK9R]

Like K9WKJ, I'm curious about a radio that has 30m and 17m, but not 12m.

As for the usefulness of 12m, the current state of radio wave propagation makes 12m less useful than 160m in terms of being able to make contacts. That said, the challenges of putting up an effective 160m antenna make that band less useful, in my opinion. I know folks who are very enthusiastic about 160m, but when you hear what they go through for receive and transmit antennas, it's hard for me to share their enthusiasm. Bottom line--I'd choose the radio that has 12m over the radio that has 160m.

 

[Boombox]

Not a ham here, but even now I hear less activity on 160 meters than I was hearing on 12 when the sunspots were up. 12 just seems to be a more popular band when sunspots are favoring it. What the others have said about antenna space also is probably an important consideration.