Hey all, just curious if anyone has used both the Omni X and a dual band vertical (ie: Diamond X50, etc). Curious what the results were for VHF and UHF. Thanks!
OmniX vs Dual Band Vertical
- Thread starter emsflyer84
- Start date
I use a Comet GP6NC and Comet GP9NC. Those are the commercial versions and not the amateur radio versions. Both are fed with LMR400 cable. In my case they blow away the Omni-X, but they should as they are gain antennas meant to be used for that purpose and the Omni-X is intended for multiband scanner use.
My Omni-X was side mounted off of my tower near the top at about 40' above ground and also fed with LMR400. The GP6NC is at a similar height, side mounted. The GP9NC is roof mounted on a tripod/mast setup.
My Omni-X was side mounted off of my tower near the top at about 40' above ground and also fed with LMR400. The GP6NC is at a similar height, side mounted. The GP9NC is roof mounted on a tripod/mast setup.
Answer I was looking for. Actually those two antenna are on my radar. Thank you.
In your experience and with your knowledge of the two comet antennas, do you think I would notice a real improvement with the GP9 over the GP6 if mounted in the same spot and being used for receive only? I’m trying to determine if the price premium is worth it for the gp9 considering the considerably bigger size and that I might need a beefier mount, etc. thanks again.
What frequency range do you need on each band? The GP9NC is fairly narrow band rated at 460-470 on UHF and 153-157MHz on VHF but the two I had were sharply tuned at 155MHZ and the 1.5:1 points were about 154.5 and 155.5MHz and 153/157MHz were over 2.0:1. When you go outside it’s rated specs gain will drop off and you will get some pattern up tilt or downtilt.
The GP-6 is definitely a nice balance between size and performance...been using one here for about years for both amateur bands and 2nd scanner antenna. Works well on VHF Hi band and aero band. Also have a GP-1 that I should put outside and give a try.
And just for S&G's, anyone that wants an Omni-X for free and doesn't mind the drive to my QTH can have the one I have here. It's only about 3 months old and in excellent condition.
Thanks, basically everything is 153-156. There are a couple things in the 151 range but 90% is within the advertised range.
For UHF there are only a couple frequencies. 464.xxx and 453.xxx
Based on this info would you recommend something different? Thanks.
Have you used the Omni? Thoughts? I assume you wouldn’t be giving it away if it was really impressive haha.
What frequencies are you scanning with the GP6NC? Do you find it drops off a lot just outside the advertised range?
Yup...put it up and thought I was getting good reception...until I tried building the off center fed DIY antenna mentioned on the forum. Much better results on VHF High band, which is a well used band in upstate NY.
The 9 obviously has more gain than the 6, but in each case here my antennas take a beating from high winds, especially being up on the tower, and for that matter even on the roof. As the 9 has 3 sections, and I had a problem with an earlier one coming apart when it was mounted on the top of my tower, I chose to keep this one lower and put the 6 up higher as it is only two sections. I get better results from the 6 but it is probably about 1.5 times higher than the 9.
I use these antennas for searching, primarily during tropo band openings, in and around the frequencies they are tuned to. I have no doubt a properly tuned antenna with similar gain would be better, but I only have X amount of room on the tower, and more importantly X amount of $$! I find them to be very good performers over all I'm trying to cover, which does extend into the 160 MHz area as well as the 470, 476, and 482 MHz UHF-T bands. That said I have a UHF yagi that is cut for 470-512 MHz which definitely outperforms either the 6 or the 9 in that range, for obvious reasons.
One more thing, I'm not sure if the C models only come with an N connector or if there is a PL-259 option but you definitely want the N connector as it will much better serve the UHF side of things, and probably the VHF for that matter.
Thanks for the heads up on that. I'll check into that.
Similar threads
