Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+Comparison\s+between\s+SteppIR\s+and\s+Cushcraft\s+LogPeriodic\?\s*$/: 8 ]

Total 8 documents matching your query.

1. Re: [TowerTalk] Comparison between SteppIR and Cushcraft LogPeriodic? (score: 1)
Author: "David Hachadorian" <k6ll@adelphia.net>
Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2006 03:35:54 -0000
If you believe the manufacturers' numbers, you are giving up over 2 dB of gain on most bands if you go with the Cushcraft. That would be significant for me. Plus, there is the old ham axiom of "LP's
/archives//html/Towertalk/2006-09/msg00225.html (8,466 bytes)

2. Re: [TowerTalk] Comparison between SteppIR and Cushcraft LogPeriodic? (score: 1)
Author: Edward Sylvester <navydude1962@yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2006 20:38:06 -0700 (PDT)
Plus, you'll expereinece more overload to your receiver, and potentially cause more interference with log, as it is broadbanded. Heavier too! David Hachadorian <k6ll@adelphia.net> wrote: -- Original
/archives//html/Towertalk/2006-09/msg00226.html (8,875 bytes)

3. Re: [TowerTalk] Comparison between SteppIR and Cushcraft LogPeriodic? (score: 1)
Author: Bill Turner <dezrat@copper.net>
Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2006 21:13:55 -0700
ORIGINAL MESSAGE: -- REPLY FOLLOWS -- Cushcraft rates the LP gain at 6.4 dbi and SteppIR rates the 3-el at 6.6 dbi, a difference of .2 dB, not 2. Where did your info come from? If the gain is within
/archives//html/Towertalk/2006-09/msg00228.html (9,085 bytes)

4. Re: [TowerTalk] Comparison between SteppIR and Cushcraft LogPeriodic? (score: 1)
Author: Bill Turner <dezrat@copper.net>
Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2006 21:16:46 -0700
ORIGINAL MESSAGE: -- REPLY FOLLOWS -- Yes, I saw that mentioned in the archives. Did this actually happen to someone or is it just conjecture? What RX? How bad? Was an attempt made to cure it with ba
/archives//html/Towertalk/2006-09/msg00229.html (8,864 bytes)

5. Re: [TowerTalk] Comparison between SteppIR and Cushcraft LogPeriodic? (score: 1)
Author: "Doug Rehman" <rehman@surveil.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2006 00:20:26 -0400
Just for the other side... I've got the Cushcraft log at 55' in Central Florida. My primary HF contest rig is a Yaesu MKV Field. While my installation is not a "big gun", I work anything I hear- usua
/archives//html/Towertalk/2006-09/msg00230.html (9,653 bytes)

6. Re: [TowerTalk] Comparison between SteppIR and Cushcraft LogPeriodic? (score: 1)
Author: "Mike, K6BR" <noddy1211@sbcglobal.net>
Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2006 21:28:26 -0700
I'm looking to get a new antenna and would appreciate some comments on comparing the 3-element SteppIR and the 8-element Cushcraft log periodic. The performance in terms of gain, F/B, bandwidth, SWR,
/archives//html/Towertalk/2006-09/msg00231.html (11,189 bytes)

7. Re: [TowerTalk] Comparison between SteppIR and Cushcraft LogPeriodic? (score: 1)
Author: "Scott Honaker" <scotthon@pilchuckvet.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2006 23:38:20 -0700
For me the visual impact of the SteppIR is a clear advantage. I'm looking forward to upgrading my 3 element with the new 30/40m driven. This small antenna size lets me add additional antennas for VHF
/archives//html/Towertalk/2006-09/msg00236.html (9,628 bytes)

8. Re: [TowerTalk] Comparison between SteppIR and Cushcraft LogPeriodic? (score: 1)
Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <w4tv@subich.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Sep 2006 10:41:31 -0400
Bill, I think you're looking at some incorrect claims (2 el SteppIR perhaps?). Here are the results of a comparison between the ASL2010 and 3-el SteppIR in AO. The Cushcraft half elements were offset
/archives//html/Towertalk/2006-09/msg00246.html (10,138 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu