Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+TH6\s+vs\s+TH7\s+vs\s+TA\-36\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TowerTalk\]\s+TH6\s+vs\s+TH7\s+vs\s+TA\-36\s*$/: 3 ]

Total 3 documents matching your query.

1. [TowerTalk] TH6 vs TH7 vs TA-36 (score: 1): Author: perring@infocom.net (Bob Perring); Date: Sat, 15 Nov 1997 13:13:07 -0600; What would make one feel as though a TH7 might be a better antenna than a TH-6 ? Similarly, what would make one feel as though a TH-6 might be a better antenna than a TA-36? Boom lengths on all of th; /archives//html/Towertalk/1997-11/msg00400.html (7,332 bytes)
2. [TowerTalk] TH6 vs TH7 vs TA-36 (score: 1): Author: af006@lafn.org (Harv Shore); Date: Sat, 15 Nov 1997 11:22:30 -0800; The improvement in the matching system in the TH7 made is an excellent antenna The TH6 is very narrow by comparison. I had a TH6 -- OK better than a wet noodle converted to the TH7 -- Outstanding per; /archives//html/Towertalk/1997-11/msg00401.html (8,523 bytes)
3. [TowerTalk] TH6 vs TH7 vs TA-36 (score: 1): Author: harpole@pegasus.cc.ucf.edu (Charles H. Harpole); Date: Sat, 15 Nov 1997 15:03:53 -0500 (EST); TH7 is broader banded than TH6. Have had both and that is all difference I can see. Don't know about TA-36. K4VUD -- FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/towertalkfaq.html Submissions: towertalk@con; /archives//html/Towertalk/1997-11/msg00403.html (7,116 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 3
Page: [1]