Towertalk
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TowerTalk] Hy-gain Hy-Tower versus 53 ft Vertical

To: towertalk@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Hy-gain Hy-Tower versus 53 ft Vertical
From: "Roger (K8RI) on TT" <K8RI-on-TowerTalk@tm.net>
Date: Thu, 05 Sep 2013 11:49:14 -0400
List-post: <towertalk@contesting.com">mailto:towertalk@contesting.com>
On 9/4/2013 1:16 PM, Henry Pollock - K4TMC wrote:
I know from a recent thread, that the old Hygain HyTower (AV-18HT) has a
fond following.  There were even a few notes about home-brewing something
similar.  Considering the cost of a new AV-18HT ($1000.00), or a good used
one ($500.00), I began to wonder if not just a 53 ft vertical with
auto-tuner at the base might be just as effective?


The Hy Tower "is a vertical with stubs and more efficient (assuming both have a good radial system)than a base loaded vertical which not only loses when loaded, but when used on bands where it's too long.

Now the question becomes, would the average ham notice the difference in performance? My guess is that would be a yes if they could compare them

My opinion: As the Hy Tower is a vertical with stubs, theoretically a mast with stubs would perform similarly although the size of the Hy Tower might give it an edge in band width, BUT I would expect the Hy Tower to be far sturdier than the average mast with stubs.

73,

Roger (K8RI)



And, for this discussion, lets not worry about powers above 200 watts.



And finally, if the HyTower is better, any thoughts on adding similar
decoupling stubs to a 53 ft aluminum telescopic mast?

73,
Henry - K4TMC
_______________________________________________



_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk


_______________________________________________



_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>