Pro 96 Reception Better With Stock Antenna?

[sajohnson]

I just got my Pro-96, but so far it seems to work better using the stock antenna vs. a RS 'all band' discone antenna on my 70' tower or the external scanner antenna on my car.

Very strange.

Any thoughts?

 

[Voyager]

I just got my Pro-96, but so far it seems to work better using the stock antenna vs. a RS 'all band' discone antenna on my 70' tower or the external scanner antenna on my car.

Very strange.

Any thoughts?

On what frequency(ies) do you notice this, and what type of feedline are you using? I've always heard great things about discones, but mine fed with about 30' of Heliax is getting its butt kicked by an old RS ground plane with about 50' of RG-58 on it.

Joe M.

 

[KB8UYC]

I just got my Pro-96, but so far it seems to work better using the stock antenna vs. a RS 'all band' discone antenna on my 70' tower or the external scanner antenna on my car.

Very strange.

Any thoughts?

Boy am I glad that you posted that! I was beginning to think that I was the only one experiencing problems. I have the New Radio Shack Discone up at 20' and it is fed with 100' of LMR-400(the company did the work of putting the pl-259's on it) The closest tower to me will not come in, however about a footballs length from me, thunderbolt has the same antenna at the same height, and his out performs mine any day of the week!......I am thinking it is time for the discone to come down and a new antenna to be ordered!

 

[Pro-95]

My discone is laying on the ground about where I tossed it off the roof when I put up my home built antennas. I figured that since I had to put it together with parts from several that was what is the problem was. I deceided to make my own as a test and with one sitting in the garage being held in my hand got better reception than my discone.

However discones are good antennas, not great but good. They actually work better for TX than RX, or so I'm told. The extreme broadband coverage that the discone offers is a good all-around antenna but that also means sacrafices in specific bands. I'll take my $12 home built poles and be VERY happy.

 

[Voyager]

However discones are good antennas, not great but good. They actually work better for TX than RX, or so I'm told. The extreme broadband coverage that the discone offers is a good all-around antenna but that also means sacrafices in specific bands. I'll take my $12 home built poles and be VERY happy.

My dummy load provides a great match on a wide range of frequencies, too. However, it doesn't radiate or receive worth much. :wink:

Joe M.

 

[jbstahr]

My discone is laying on the ground about where I tossed it off the roof when I put up my home built antennas. I figured that since I had to put it together with parts from several that was what is the problem was. I deceided to make my own as a test and with one sitting in the garage being held in my hand got better reception than my discone.

However discones are good antennas, not great but good. They actually work better for TX than RX, or so I'm told. The extreme broadband coverage that the discone offers is a good all-around antenna but that also means sacrafices in specific bands. I'll take my $12 home built poles and be VERY happy.

Do you have any pics/schematics on the antennas you built? I'd be curious to see what I could put together myself.

 

[W4KRR]

Don't overlook the fact that the outside mounted antenna could be working too well. If too much signal gets to the receiver, you could experience receiver "de-sense", and actually cause the receiver to act as if it is receiving worse than using a rubber duck attached to the scanner. This is most often seen when using a receiver pre amp (amplifier) on an outside antenna in a metropolitan area where there are a lot of signals. Of course, this might not be the case here, but it's something to consider. YMMV.

 

[W5JLF]

jbstahr:
take a look at this:
http://www.radioreference.com/modul...ile=viewtopic&t=11952&highlight=jpole

 

[Voyager]

If too much signal gets to the receiver, you could experience receiver "de-sense", and actually cause the receiver to act as if it is receiving worse than using a rubber duck attached to the scanner.

To clarify, this happens when too strong signals on OTHER nearby frequencies get to the scanner in addition to a much relatively weaker on-frequency signal you are trying to receive.

Too much on-frequency signal never causes a problem. (unless it's watts of power into the receiver which can take out the front end)

Joe M.