Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*TopBand\:\s+UNI\-HAT\s+vs\.\s+GAP\s+vs\.\s+GLADIATOR\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*TopBand\:\s+UNI\-HAT\s+vs\.\s+GAP\s+vs\.\s+GLADIATOR\s*$/: 3 ]

Total 3 documents matching your query.

1. TopBand: UNI-HAT vs. GAP vs. GLADIATOR (score: 1): Author: km3g@cts.com (Lane C. Zeitler); Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 13:32:29 -0700; Esteemed Colleagues: Lots of POSITIVE feedback concerning the Unihat vertical. Perhaps this is better than the legendary inverted L with only 40- 50 feet of vertical?? Is $500 a bit pricey for the Un; /archives//html/Topband/1997-10/msg00023.html (7,133 bytes)
2. TopBand: UNI-HAT vs. GAP vs. GLADIATOR (score: 1): Author: w8jitom@postoffice.worldnet.att.net (w8jitom@postoffice.worldnet.att.net); Date: Fri, 3 Oct 1997 12:35:24 +0000; To: <topband@contesting.com> Most likely not Lane, if the antennas were the same height and had the same ground systems the antenna's performance would be about the same on 160. The Uni-hat is a good; /archives//html/Topband/1997-10/msg00027.html (8,889 bytes)
3. TopBand: UNI-HAT vs. GAP vs. GLADIATOR (score: 1): Author: jjensen@mankato.msus.edu (Joel Jensen); Date: Fri, 03 Oct 1997 14:41:41 -0500; I assume you're referring to the GAP on 160. (This is the TOP BAND reflector after all...) I have to agree... However, the GAP is a strong performer on 40. Of course, it's a 1/2 wave vertical dipole; /archives//html/Topband/1997-10/msg00030.html (7,194 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 3
Page: [1]