[Rover] Antenna comparisson

[Phil Lefever]

At 08:20 AM 10/10/02, you wrote:
>Going to be ordering a new 3 element beam for the home station next Wed.=
 and
>was looking for comments on the pro's & con's between the Cushcraft 50-3S
>and the M2 3element version?
>
>Going for a smaller beam for hilltopping and possible rover.
>
>Main concern is how the driven elements mounts to the boom, looking for
>which one would be easier for quick breakdown/ seperation from boom for
>storage in a long ski bag so as to strap down on the roof of the car.

I've never used the smaller M2 beam but if it is built like the larger
ones it will break down FAR easier then a Cushcraft!

The Cushcraft antenna is built using the old method of telescoping tubes
and hose clamps for the elements which are held to the boom with U bolts.
The M2 6m beams use smaller elements made from single pieces of aluminium
tubing that are attached at the center boom attachment point. With the M2
it is easy to simply loosen the bolt that fastens the element to the clamp
then swing the element in alongside the boom. Breaking down the Cushcraft
will require more tools and loose hardware to get lost.

Finally the M2 will work better and is constructed better. This company also
doesn't see the need to publish inflated gain figures for their antennas.
For these reasons I won't buy a Cushcraft antenna again.

Another antenna to consider is the 4el Hy-Gain 6m beam. These seem to work
quite well and are darned cheap! Also since they are a 4el design they seem
to balance better and have the mast clamp further from any elements. The
boom length is 12 feet if I recall correctly.

73

Phil
----------------------------------------------------------------------------=
------------------
Phil Lefever, KB=D8NES   		Field day Chairman
Twin Cities Repeater Club		http://www.tcrc.org
Burnsville, Minnesota