Review: Maldol MH-255 on 159-162MHz VHF

[ezdropper]

I like the scanner stand, where did you get it from?

 

[JHaislet]

Contact Ron at http://www.scannerstandman.com
Bar-none the best scanner stand on the market. He's also a membe here at RR.

 

[MB]

I ran the Antenex all day today, and I did not notice any difference between it and the Maldol.

I did not hear anything on the mountain repeater today, so I'm waiting to see how well I can pick it up on the Antenex VS the Maldol.

More to follow over the next couple of days.

So the Antenex is close to the Maldol? Keep us posted with more results..

 

[KE7TJK]

I haven't noticed any measurable difference between the Maldol or the Antenex.

I prefer the Maldol because it is slightly smaller and alot more flexible.

I would highly recommend either antenna for the 150-162 freqs.

 

[BrainCandyBanter]

I have a vx-6r and the mh-255. I can hit the metroplex nyc repeater 449.225 from 30 miles away bayonne nj with a tenth of a watt. And I receive full quieting on the same.

I'm wondering what the difference between 255 and the 209 would be. I bet there is no noticeable difference with an ht.

I got myn at the retail store front of rim industries. Here is the link to the item in their online store http://www.rimindustries.com/index.asp?PageAction=VIEWPROD&ProdID=51638 , $24.95.

If you are in NY you can go to 200 Jericho Turnpike; Mineola, NY 11501 Monday - Friday 9:00 - 6:00 EST, save on the shipping.

 

[traumacop]

I too would like to know if anyone has the MH-209 and the MH-255 and if there is any noticeable performance difference in reception. I have the MH-209 and it picks up vhf/uhf well and does a decent job on 800. I haven't noticed any major problem transmitting in the 155/465 band segment with the MH-209, but would still be interested in hearing if there is a noticeable improvement before buying.

I can tell you that I have tried about every SMA antenna sold at Universal-Radio and the MH-209 blow away other antennas, some that are much larger and more rigid. The MH-511 performed close to the MH-209 but also has 6-meter for those of you that still listen to low band. One thing to keep in mind is the MH-511 is completely solid, no bending whatsoever.

 

[traumacop]

dup .

 

[BrainCandyBanter]

I too would like to know if anyone has the MH-209 and the MH-255 and if there is any noticeable performance difference in reception. I have the MH-209 and it picks up vhf/uhf well and does a decent job on 800. I haven't noticed any major problem transmitting in the 155/465 band segment with the MH-209, but would still be interested in hearing if there is a noticeable improvement before buying.

I can tell you that I have tried about every SMA antenna sold at Universal-Radio and the MH-209 blow away other antennas, some that are much larger and more rigid. The MH-511 performed close to the MH-209 but also has 6-meter for those of you that still listen to low band. One thing to keep in mind is the MH-511 is completely solid, no bending whatsoever.

I'm very satisfied with my mh-255 to say the least. I def think its better than the oem antenna that came with the vx6r, and it's absolutely way more fun. It has a cool swat look to it.

 

[Concrete1]

I have a vx-6r and the mh-255. I can hit the metroplex nyc repeater 449.225 from 30 miles away bayonne nj with a tenth of a watt. And I receive full quieting on the same.

I'm wondering what the difference between 255 and the 209 would be. I bet there is no noticeable difference with an ht.

I got myn at the retail store front of rim industries. Here is the link to the item in their online store http://www.rimindustries.com/index.asp?PageAction=VIEWPROD&ProdID=51638 , $24.95.

If you are in NY you can go to 200 Jericho Turnpike; Mineola, NY 11501 Monday - Friday 9:00 - 6:00 EST, save on the shipping.

Advanced Specialties is just a few miles from you in Lodi, stocks both antennas & is a buck cheaper than your link..
http://www.advancedspecialties.net
Also, I believe the repeater you mention is located only just a few air miles north of you, in FT Lee/ Cliffside Park, not 30 miles away, if I understand you are in Bayonne ...

 

[BrainCandyBanter]

Advanced Specialties is just a few miles from you in Lodi, stocks both antennas & is a buck cheaper than your link..
http://www.advancedspecialties.net
Also, I believe the repeater you mention is located only just a few air miles north of you, in FT Lee/ Cliffside Park, not 30 miles away, if I understand you are in Bayonne ...

The repeater is location in Manhattan on 449.225 KQ2H 146.2.

http://www.hamrepeater.net/kq2h/

http://www.geocities.com/aa2ls/kq2h.html

 

[N0JRD]

mh-255

I have the mh-255 on my 396 and a 209 on vx-6. I think the 255 maybe just a little better than the 209 but not by much. Both great antennas.

 

[Yaris07]

I just got the Maldol MH-255 SMA "Active Hunter" in today. It is a very flexible ducky; size-wise, it fits the 396T extremely well and is exactly HALF the length of the stock Uniden ducky. There are no markings on the MH-255, so it would probably be difficult to tell the difference between it & it's 2M/70cm sibling, the MH-209 SMA.

So far I am very pleased. It picks up all the local 159MHz VHF P25 traffic with a full five bars (to be expected since tower is rather close). There hasn't been enough conventional traffic on the distant site I was trying to compare, but will update when I get a chance.

Note: The following comparison is done using two NOAA stations: (1) 162.500MHz & (2) 162.475MHz. Site 1 is about 28 miles away; site 2 is about 48 miles away. These were chosen as they continuously transmit on a frequency extremely close to the range I needed the MH-255 for.

The numbers below are by no means scientific, so take them as such. They're my observation of the signal strength bars on a BCD396T and my perception of how clear the channel/antenna combo sounds. YMMV!

While the signal strength only displays whole numbers, I've converted them to decimals to portray approximately how long it stayed at that level. For example, 1.5 means the signal evenly fluctuated between 1 bar & 2 bars.

-162.5 & 162.475 MHz--Site 1-------Site 2-----Length(inches)-
Maldol MH-255SMA----3.75--------1.5-------2.85-------------
Uniden Stock SMA------3.25-------0.75-------5.68-------------
Pryme RD-9-SMA-------2.0---------0.25------7.68-------------
RadioShk 800BNC-------3.0--------0.75-------7.43------------
Maldol AS-25SMA------0.25--------0.0-------1.00------------

(Interestingly, while the AS-25 usually didn't show a signal bar, the audio was extremely clear and probably coming in at ~80-85% (I could easily understand the broadcast, with very little static or popping).

The MH-255 now makes the 396T extremely portable for my purposes, all without any perceivable loss in signal clarity for the VHF frequencies needed.

I hope this has been helpful to those looking for a small VHF antenna.

(from left to right: Pryme RD-9-SMA, Radio Shack 800MHz BNC w/SMA adapter, Uniden 396T stock SMA, Maldol MH-255 SMA, Maldol AS-25 SMA)

I received the MH-255 for my 396 t and im very disapointed. It is not what it a pears to be.I don't pick up anything NO BARS. So i went back to my Uniden antenna. A waste of money.

 

[blueangel-eric]

There are no markings on the MH-255, so it would probably be difficult to tell the difference between it & it's 2M/70cm sibling, the MH-209 SMA.

So what reception differences are there between the two? I need a good dual band duck for the ham radio bands on my FT60R but also find it important to monitor 160/452mhz as well. I have the RH77CA but want a SMA antenna, possibly a shorter one for ease of use and professional look. after all how many commercial radios have 15inch antennas? the railroads sure could use the range but even they don't have antennas that long.

I also need to know if it works the same or better then the Comet SMA-503. i hear good things about the comet but don't like the flimsier look of it. those thin ones don't' look as professional as commercial antennas. I was about to buy the sma-503 but now reading this thread i'm not sure what i want to buy. The Maldol's sure look solid and professional.
Eric Burris
kc0ldt

 

[blueangel-eric]

I too would like to know if anyone has the MH-209 and the MH-255 and if there is any noticeable performance difference in reception. I have the MH-209 and it picks up vhf/uhf well and does a decent job on 800. I haven't noticed any major problem transmitting in the 155/465 band segment with the MH-209, but would still be interested in hearing if there is a noticeable improvement before buying.

I can tell you that I have tried about every SMA antenna sold at Universal-Radio and the MH-209 blow away other antennas, some that are much larger and more rigid. The MH-511 performed close to the MH-209 but also has 6-meter for those of you that still listen to low band. One thing to keep in mind is the MH-511 is completely solid, no bending whatsoever.

I hope your just talking about the short SMA's because i really don't think that little thing would blow a 15 inch whip away.
Eric Burris

 

[blueangel-eric]

bump.

 

[blueangel-eric]

nobody replied to my questions.

 

[trap5858]

The diamond rh77 is available with an SMA mount.

I am currently trying out a Maldol MH-209SMA on my 396- so far I am pretty impressed. For my local TRS system it seems to work well, I can pick up some VHF Hi stuff. It does not come close to matching the reception of the stock antenna but for the right situation, it is a good fit.

 

[blueangel-eric]

The diamond rh77 is available with an SMA mount.

I am currently trying out a Maldol MH-209SMA on my 396- so far I am pretty impressed. For my local TRS system it seems to work well, I can pick up some VHF Hi stuff. It does not come close to matching the reception of the stock antenna but for the right situation, it is a good fit.

i already know the RH77 comes with a SMA as i read this forum alot. I never got a response so i went ahead and ordered a stock Kenwood dual band duck. though i'm tempted to get a cute Maldol antenna if they work better then a stock duck as everyone claims. I don't see how a 3 inch antenna can work as good as a 7 inch antenna.

nobody answered my questions on the other antennas for comparison.
Eric Burris

 

[br0adband]

"It's not always about length..."

Sorry, I just couldn't resist that one, it was just too easy. But with antennas, length isn't necessarily the deciding factor as there are other considerations. The "virtual" ground plane that an antenna creates by typically using a loading coil of some kind in the base of the antenna structure (just above the connector) can have a dramatic effect on how well the actual wire itself works.

Perhaps the Maldol is simply more efficient in that respect, and creates a virtual ground plane that exceeds the one in a 7" or longer antenna, or whatever you're using for a comparison.

 

[blueangel-eric]

"It's not always about length..."

Sorry, I just couldn't resist that one, it was just too easy. But with antennas, length isn't necessarily the deciding factor as there are other considerations. The "virtual" ground plane that an antenna creates by typically using a loading coil of some kind in the base of the antenna structure (just above the connector) can have a dramatic effect on how well the actual wire itself works.

Perhaps the Maldol is simply more efficient in that respect, and creates a virtual ground plane that exceeds the one in a 7" or longer antenna, or whatever you're using for a comparison.

well i suspected they have a formula to make it that good that short but it's still hard to believe it would work as good as a 7 inch duck though. So then i wonder how it stacks up against other 3 inch ducks. Its so fascinating placing with and learning about different ducks or other antennas for that matter to see what works good and how it works good. And so many choices it's hard to decide what to get these days.
So if a 3 inch duck can be as good as a 7 inch then the ultimate duck would be a 7inch be as good as a 15 inch. I know the kenwood stock dual band antenna comes close to a 15 inch duck even though it's around 6 or 7 inches.