Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+Discoverer\s+7\-2\s+or\s+Cushcraft\s+xm\-240\?\s*$/: 12 ]

Total 12 documents matching your query.

1. [TowerTalk] Discoverer 7-2 or Cushcraft xm-240 (score: 1)
Author: Glenn Pritchard <hfcomnet@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2014 22:49:15 -0600
Hi guys Have been pondering this over for a couple of months. In the past my monobander for 40 has been KLM, however it's time to replace this antenna and currently the antenna is down. Question is,
/archives//html/Towertalk/2014-03/msg00072.html (7,063 bytes)

2. Re: [TowerTalk] Discoverer 7-2 or Cushcraft xm-240 (score: 1)
Author: Roger D Johnson <n1rj@roadrunner.com>
Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2014 05:51:58 -0400
My choice would be the XM-240 with the W6NL Moxon modifications. Much better F/B and bandwidth. 73, Roger Have been pondering this over for a couple of months. In the past my monobander for 40 has be
/archives//html/Towertalk/2014-03/msg00073.html (7,883 bytes)

3. Re: [TowerTalk] Discoverer 7-2 or Cushcraft xm-240 (score: 1)
Author: Wayne Kline <w3ea@hotmail.com>
Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2014 08:39:47 -0400
I have had Both of the antennas ...The hi Gain Dis-2 is a good antenna the linear loading wires are problematic if you live in a ICE area... I lost mine two times..... The Original CD40 had a number
/archives//html/Towertalk/2014-03/msg00074.html (9,774 bytes)

4. Re: [TowerTalk] Discoverer 7-2 or Cushcraft xm-240 (score: 1)
Author: K4SAV <RadioIR@charter.net>
Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2014 08:22:49 -0500
Correcting a few things on the XM240 before putting it up would help. Mine collected water inside the elements. The water ran down the X-hat and into the hole used for mounting the X-hat. The plugs o
/archives//html/Towertalk/2014-03/msg00075.html (10,046 bytes)

5. Re: [TowerTalk] Discoverer 7-2 or Cushcraft xm-240 (score: 1)
Author: "D. Drake" <daleaa1qd@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2014 10:22:00 -0400
Glenn, I put up an XM-240 here in NH just over a year ago. Before I did I checked with the local contest club guys to see what things I might be careful about. Here?s what I did ? Replaced the boom t
/archives//html/Towertalk/2014-03/msg00077.html (10,419 bytes)

6. Re: [TowerTalk] Discoverer 7-2 or Cushcraft xm-240 (score: 1)
Author: Grant Saviers <grants2@pacbell.net>
Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2014 11:03:32 -0700
A another choice is the W6NL scratch build "110mph Moxon". Particularly if your site is challenged with wind or ice. K6KR and I together built two and I acquired one for a 2x2 stack from K7ZSD. It co
/archives//html/Towertalk/2014-03/msg00080.html (10,526 bytes)

7. Re: [TowerTalk] Discoverer 7-2 or Cushcraft xm-240 (score: 1)
Author: Paul Staupe <staupe@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2014 13:17:52 -0500
Glen, I've had an XM-240 with the W6NL modifications that several of us did as a YCCC club project. The modifications were well worth it. It's been up for over two years at 97' and hasn't moved at al
/archives//html/Towertalk/2014-03/msg00082.html (9,495 bytes)

8. Re: [TowerTalk] Discoverer 7-2 or Cushcraft xm-240 (score: 1)
Author: K7LXC@aol.com
Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2014 14:22:05 -0400 (EDT)
BTW, be sure to use the secret LXC dimensions that'll give you 7.000 > 7.250 less than 2:1 swr. Cheers, Steve K7LXC _______________________________________________ ___________________________________
/archives//html/Towertalk/2014-03/msg00084.html (8,072 bytes)

9. Re: [TowerTalk] Discoverer 7-2 or Cushcraft xm-240 (score: 1)
Author: K7LXC@aol.com
Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2014 14:28:09 -0400 (EDT)
Split the CW and Mid settings and you'll have 7.000 to 7.250 at less than 2:1. Cheers, Steve K7LXC TOWER TECH _______________________________________________ ________________________________________
/archives//html/Towertalk/2014-03/msg00085.html (8,096 bytes)

10. Re: [TowerTalk] Discoverer 7-2 or Cushcraft xm-240 (score: 1)
Author: Tony Brock-Fisher <barockteer@aol.com>
Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2014 18:47:48 -0400
I have to second what Paul, W0AD said about the W6NL Moxon. I replaced a CC shorty-forty with the Moxon design and the difference is NIGHT AND DAY, -For the first time EVER, I find a frequency on 40
/archives//html/Towertalk/2014-03/msg00090.html (9,526 bytes)

11. Re: [TowerTalk] Discoverer 7-2 or Cushcraft xm-240 (score: 1)
Author: "Peter Voelpel" <dj7ww@t-online.de>
Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2014 00:01:26 +0100
You are saying the gain of the shorty-forty is just 0.5db? 73 Peter All in all, between the coil losses and the directivity, I'd say it is ~4 db better than the shorty-forty in forward gain. That's a
/archives//html/Towertalk/2014-03/msg00091.html (8,905 bytes)

12. Re: [TowerTalk] Discoverer 7-2 or Cushcraft xm-240 (score: 1)
Author: "Georgens, Tom" <Tom.Georgens@netapp.com>
Date: Sat, 15 Mar 2014 23:16:34 +0000
I echo all the comments on the W6NL Moxon. I have built two from scratch and they are both in operation at my station 8P5A. All cutting was done on a table saw and all element drilling was done with
/archives//html/Towertalk/2014-03/msg00093.html (11,257 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu