Best Location for a Hamstick?

[zz0468]

from the definition in the dictionary of an "antenna"
a usually metallic device (as a rod or wire) for radiating or receiving radio waves

So now explain to me how the Smartuner does either of the above??It doesnt--no matter how you slice it, dice it or word it in their advertising----it still is nothing more than a transmatch, and it does nothing to change the antenna radiation pattern--it just makes the transmitter very happy, and i will grant you as i stated above, gets a much better match at the antenna as opposed to trying to match all the feedline............

Dont get me wrong, i think they are very good tuners, and by all means the best place to have a tuner/transmatch is at the antenna, and i agree that it eliminates a lot of the feed line loss. but you could also put my Palstar AT1Kp at the base of my vertical and do the same thing, just manually and i am not going to leave my $400.00 tuner out in the rain
Great debate though--it what i love about forums----73

Ok... I'll use an analogy. Picture a Yagi antenna. This yagi antenna is matched to the coax with a gamma match. Is the gamma match an integral part of the antenna, or is it not?

Here's another: Picture a stacked dipole array, the kind you see on vhf high band systems. Those stacked dipoles are matched to the 50 ohm feedline with a phasing harness made from 75 ohm cable. Is that phasing harness an integral part of the antenna, or is it not?

How about yet another: The typical AM broadcast antenna, a vertical radiator, frequently less than a quarter wavelength. These usually have a coupler housed in a small shack at the base of the antenna. These may be in the form of a pi or L network, and are an integral part of the antenna - just like an SGC tuner.

A transmatch is NOT an antenna coupler. But the SGC autotuners are. The manufacturer makes it a point in their literature to indicate that it is NOT a transmatch. Why do you insist that it is?

 

[zz0468]

I think the only "tuner" SGC ever made that was intended to be near the radio to feed coax was the MAC-200, otherwise their products are designed to be part of the antenna. You can feed balanced line with most of their models but there are more efficient tuners for this. SGC is not a bad antenna coupler (I have 3) if used within its limits and much more robust than LDG. BTW, all 3 of my SGC have blown up and SGC reduced their warranty from 5yrs to 1yr. They must have a lot of faith in their product lately. They also want as much to repair an out of warranty unit as you can buy one used.
prcguy

I run reduced power until it locks to a tuning solution. I can either reduce it at the transmitter, or I can switch a high power 6 db pad in line. No problems in several years operation either at home, or in the car. I NEVER attempt to tune at full transmitter power.

 

[OceanaRadio]

Where did you get that from Jack; actual in use reports from hams or advertising hype? What were the conditions of this so called test? Until satisfactory answers are forthcoming I'll go with what the hams who have used them say; they suck. Now please put aside the technojabber and get down to brass tacks, the Hamstick in question like any 75M mobile antenna is as efficient as a strand of wet spaghetti or at least that's how the AM Fone crowd and I see them. WA1HLR doesn't call his Cadaverlac the PW mobile for nothing, you can guess what the PW stands for.
.

Warren,

The Isotrons tested were by the USCG 5th District, USCG LANTAREA and the USCG Auxiliary. These included a custom-built 2182 KHz Isotron and another Isotron built for use on a reserved frequency near the 60 meter band. These outperformed all traditional antennas in use at the time and have since had thousands of hours of superior performance.

The opinions of those hams you like to third-party quote about Isotrons reflects poorly on the entire amateur community in my opinion. The Isotrons we used were built under contract and exceeded the performance guaranteed by the manufacturer. They can all be loaded to 1KW but perform just fine on 100w and have incredible reception abilities, albeit somewhat directional wrt the 60 meter versions.

No matter what you call a tuner or a coupler, the device belongs at the feedpoint of the antenna and making it cozy in your shack does not make the best use of the device.

Please re-read what I suggested as an option to the OM for using hamsticks, as I did not mention any single "mobile whip" that you referred to as spaghetti. The configuration I described works quite satisfactory for the 5 mhz and under range that best supports NVIS, and has at least modest performance through 40 meters. They're cheap and it would get the guy on the air, instead of scaring him away with phony references of what some ham sombody knew thought about Isotrons. You're an Elmer Warren, so give the guy recommendations, not criticism about a system you have no personal experience with.

73,
Jack

 

[prcguy]

I found the two hamstick dipole arrangement a little disappointing and a dipole as short as 50ft fed with balanced line and a tuner will greatly outperform it, plus you get many other bands.

How much experience does Warren have with HF antennas and his current grade license? Did he posses a general class or above at one time?
prcguy

Warren,

The Isotrons tested were by the USCG 5th District, USCG LANTAREA and the USCG Auxiliary. These included a custom-built 2182 KHz Isotron and another Isotron built for use on a reserved frequency near the 60 meter band. These outperformed all traditional antennas in use at the time and have since had thousands of hours of superior performance.

The opinions of those hams you like to third-party quote about Isotrons reflects poorly on the entire amateur community in my opinion. The Isotrons we used were built under contract and exceeded the performance guaranteed by the manufacturer. They can all be loaded to 1KW but perform just fine on 100w and have incredible reception abilities, albeit somewhat directional wrt the 60 meter versions.

No matter what you call a tuner or a coupler, the device belongs at the feedpoint of the antenna and making it cozy in your shack does not make the best use of the device.

Please re-read what I suggested as an option to the OM for using hamsticks, as I did not mention any single "mobile whip" that you referred to as spaghetti. The configuration I described works quite satisfactory for the 5 mhz and under range that best supports NVIS, and has at least modest performance through 40 meters. They're cheap and it would get the guy on the air, instead of scaring him away with phony references of what some ham sombody knew thought about Isotrons. You're an Elmer Warren, so give the guy recommendations, not criticism about a system you have no personal experience with.

73,
Jack

 

[cpuerror]

I found the two hamstick dipole arrangement a little disappointing and a dipole as short as 50ft fed with balanced line and a tuner will greatly outperform it, plus you get many other bands.

Trying to bring this thread back to life I think that is what I may end up doing. I already have an existing dipole fed with a balun for 20m, so I will cut 2 wires each 20m long and attatch them to the existing balun. I have some space limitations and i'm thinking of taking the wire and wrapping it around, spaced apart to minimize inductance, some 1" PVC. This will keep the physical wire length the same but the amount of room I'll need will be reduced and hopefully it will radiate all the same.

 

[prcguy]

The secret to all band use or making a dipole work on non resonant bands is to feed it with balanced line all the way from a tuner to the antenna if possible. A balun is not required and not practical in this case.
prcguy