PDA

View Full Version : Antenna upgrade



mp11
02-21-2012, 09:46 PM
Toying with the idea of a new antenna before the summer season, and looking for advice from anyone. Ed, I understand you're the antenna guru, so any input is appreciated. Although these are about twice the size of what I'm using now,(mine is the third one listed for comparison), I'm hoping the size difference will pay dividends. I think the quality is OK. It will only be about 18' AGL.
http://www.solidsignal.com/pview.asp?mc=03&p=HD1800&d=AntennaCraft-HD1800-Heavy-Duty-VHF-UHF-FM-HD-TV-Antenna-(HD1800)&c=TV Antennas&sku=
http://www.solidsignal.com/pview.asp?mc=03&p=HD1850&d=AntennaCraft-HD1850-Heavy-Duty-VHF-UHF-FM-HD-TV-Antenna-(HD1850)&c=TV Antennas&sku=
http://www.solidsignal.com/pview.asp?mc=03&p=HD7080P&d=Winegard-HD-7080P-High-Definition-VHFUHFFM-TV-Antenna-(HD7080P)&c=TV Antennas&sku=

Mike-CT
02-21-2012, 11:21 PM
Since the 1850 is one dollar less than the 1800, go for the 1850. Either one of those fringe antennas should outperform the one at the bottom. It looks to me that the 1850 has a few more elements for high band than the 1800.

fm_dxer
02-22-2012, 11:28 AM
As a FM tuner will outperform a FM radio built into an A/V receiver dx wise, so too an antenna cut to VHF or UHF only should outperform any combo.

Gary Hickerson
02-22-2012, 02:41 PM
Mike,
The Antennacraft #1850 is a "copy" of Channel Master's #3671. The 3671 sells for $124.00 at Warren Electronics. I have used the 3671, with excellent results and it is Very heavy-duty. I think the 3671 is well worth, the $15.00 difference !
( Can watch all the Tulsa UHF/VHF, from here, 105 air miles)
Gary H.
Okla.

Mike-CT
02-22-2012, 04:30 PM
As a FM tuner will outperform a FM radio built into an A/V receiver dx wise, so too an antenna cut to VHF or UHF only should outperform any combo.

Yes, that's true. Separate U and V antennas should always outperform combination U &V antennas. Not everyone can go that route, so as far as combination antennas go, that one seems pretty good. Wish I had one. :-)

mp11
02-22-2012, 08:33 PM
Since the 1850 is one dollar less than the 1800, go for the 1850. Either one of those fringe antennas should outperform the one at the bottom. It looks to me that the 1850 has a few more elements for high band than the 1800.
OK thanks Mike. BTW, I know the long elements toward the back are for low band, but where are the VHF high band elements located? Somewhere around the mast I assume?


Mike,
The Antennacraft #1850 is a "copy" of Channel Master's #3671. The 3671 sells for $124.00 at Warren Electronics. I have used the 3671, with excellent results and it is Very heavy-duty. I think the 3671 is well worth, the $15.00 difference !
( Can watch all the Tulsa UHF/VHF, from here, 105 air miles)
Gary H.
Okla.

Thanks Gary, so if this a basically a copy of the CM 3671, is it safe to assume that the quality is similar?

Mike-CT
02-22-2012, 08:59 PM
As you go up in frequency, element lengths shorten. If you look at the antenna picture you will see shorter elements that are in front of the reflector on the corner yagi. Those are missing on the other antenna. If the UHF wasn't part of the antenna system, you'd notice them easier.

mp11
02-22-2012, 09:52 PM
Thanks Mike, That cleared that up nicely. BTW, although I'm looking hard at the 1850, I haven't ruled out the VHF only UHF only choice(budget permitting). Thanks for all the input guys.

Gary Hickerson
02-25-2012, 10:22 PM
Mike,

You might, want to check, this out. I forgot about Denny,s Ant. Service, in Mich. He and Winegard engineers, came up with this set-up. If you take a Winegard HD 8200 ant, and seperate the UHF from VHF, this is what you come up with.
http://www.dennysantennaservice.com/Best_TV_Antenna.html

Gary H.
Okla.

Gary Hickerson
02-25-2012, 10:30 PM
Mistake on my last Post. Should be Winegard HD 7698P instead of HD 8200. Denny's antenna doesn't cover Low band.
I don't know how the 1850 compares to the 3671, performance-wise but I do know, the 3671 is made from aircraft-grade alominum and it Very stong. It came through the ice storm (elements drooped some, after the thaw, they spang back straight !) I would choose the 3671 for $15.00 more....
Gary H.

mp11
02-25-2012, 11:25 PM
Thanks Gary, and although I didn't mention it in my OP, the 3671 was one I was looking at also. Now here's another question about antennas. How important are the "active elements" number in an antenna? The 3671 lists as 61 active elements, and the 1850 says 84 active elements. And would it be more significant to UHF or VHF?

cd637299
02-26-2012, 12:33 AM
This is a note from Danny, who is unable to post at this time; he sent it to me, but it concerns mp11:

The Antennacraft low-band yagi with five elements would not likely perform as well as the big Antennacraft V/U/F that he has been considering. It is too short and has too few elements. I have a 150 inch Antennacraft ten element low-band yagi that I put up some summers for Es. I once had an Antennacraft five element channel 2 yagi that was a very poor performer compared to my Finco ten element channel 2 yagi.

cd

Gary Hickerson
02-27-2012, 12:57 PM
Mike,
I don't know, "How" antenna companies, determine "active elements" ! To me, ALL elements are active, except, the rear reflector. Radio Shck antennas, are made by Antennacraft. I've put up several, for people and I was always, disappointed, in the results ! From experience, I have found that Channel Master and Winegard, are excellent antennas (performance and durability). Back, in the old days, there were others (Finco, Jerrold, Kaytownes,etc.). If you really want performance, get the 3671 plus a CM #7777 preamp. Don't forget used at least RG-6/U coax, (RG-11/U is even better.......

Gary H.

dtvdxer
02-27-2012, 09:45 PM
Gary...

I believe active elements are connected together and then connected to the lead-in cable. The reflectors and directors are not.

Chris

fm_dxer
02-27-2012, 10:57 PM
See page 25

mp11
02-27-2012, 11:47 PM
Gary...

I believe active elements are connected together and then connected to the lead-in cable. The reflectors and directors are not.

Chris

Chris, I believe that to be correct. All active elements will be connected with the driven element, which is in turn connected directly to the coax. However, Gary may be right to an extent, as I seem to remember reading about how all elements carry a certain amount of "current" (correct me if I'm wrong about that). Which brings me back to my question; realistically, wouldn't a 84 active element antenna outperform a 61 active element antenna of the same size? Or are there other factors?

fm_dxer
02-28-2012, 12:17 PM
"84 Electronic Elements " = Front-to-Back Ratio VHF Low: 20.2 dB VHF High: 17.3 dB UHF: 13.7 dB; Gain: VHF Low 6.2 dB VHF High: 10.7 dB UHF: 10 dB
"69 Electronic Elements " = Front-to-Back Ratio VHF Low: 20.2 dB VHF High: 17.3 dB UHF: 13.7 dB; Gain: VHF Low 6.2 dB VHF High: 9.4 dB UHF: 10.0 dB
The "69er" loses 1.3dB in the VHF high band according to the manufacturer’s specs

mp11
02-28-2012, 04:50 PM
Mike,
I don't know, "How" antenna companies, determine "active elements" ! To me, ALL elements are active, except, the rear reflector. Radio Shck antennas, are made by Antennacraft. I've put up several, for people and I was always, disappointed, in the results ! From experience, I have found that Channel Master and Winegard, are excellent antennas (performance and durability). Back, in the old days, there were others (Finco, Jerrold, Kaytownes,etc.). If you really want performance, get the 3671 plus a CM #7777 preamp. Don't forget used at least RG-6/U coax, (RG-11/U is even better.......
Gary H.

Thanks Gary, I think the CM 3671 is the one I'm leaning towards. Speaking of the old days, Jerrold...which I think later became Wade Electronics once created what might be the Granddaddy of all VHF-UHF combos, of course no longer in production. :( Check out the specs on the VU-937SR monster here (http://wade-antenna.com/Wade/900%20&%20VU%20series.pdf).

Danny
02-29-2012, 04:07 PM
Mike,

You might, want to check, this out. I forgot about Denny,s Ant. Service, in Mich. He and Winegard engineers, came up with this set-up. If you take a Winegard HD 8200 ant, and seperate the UHF from VHF, this is what you come up with.
http://www.dennysantennaservice.com/Best_TV_Antenna.html


That Denny's setup looks interesting (I've seen it before), but I don't have much confidence in its capabilities as a DX antenna setup.

My experience with antennas has led me to believe that it is best to use the largest (long element length) and longest (long boom length - the tube that elements are connected to) antennas you can afford or have room for.

Danny
02-29-2012, 04:19 PM
Mike, Jerrold became General Instrument. Later, the brand became Delhi. Wade has owned what was originally Jerrold for a number of years.

Their old VIP series antennas were among the best antennas available.

mp11
02-29-2012, 05:46 PM
My experience with antennas has led me to believe that it is best to use the largest (long element length) and longest (long boom length - the tube that elements are connected to) antennas you can afford or have room for.

I hear you Danny...working on it. If that VU-937SR were still available...Yikes! :D From what I've read about it, it's quality was unsurpassed. Why are all the good old quality antennas being discontinued? Sheesh!

Gary Hickerson
02-29-2012, 05:56 PM
Why, have all the "good old antennas", been discontinued ! Two words: Cable & Satellite ! That VU-937 sounds great. IS it still available?

Gary H.

mp11
02-29-2012, 07:31 PM
Why, have all the "good old antennas", been discontinued ! Two words: Cable & Satellite ! That VU-937 sounds great. IS it still available?

Gary H.

Nope. I've read posts on other forums, of availability as late as 2008. So I'm guessing production ended around that time I imagine. They weren't cheap...around $250.

mp11
03-02-2012, 09:48 AM
"84 Electronic Elements " = Front-to-Back Ratio VHF Low: 20.2 dB VHF High: 17.3 dB UHF: 13.7 dB; Gain: VHF Low 6.2 dB VHF High: 10.7 dB UHF: 10 dB
"69 Electronic Elements " = Front-to-Back Ratio VHF Low: 20.2 dB VHF High: 17.3 dB UHF: 13.7 dB; Gain: VHF Low 6.2 dB VHF High: 9.4 dB UHF: 10.0 dB
The "69er" loses 1.3dB in the VHF high band according to the manufacturer’s specs

Thanks for that breakdown fm_dxer. Does anyone know the gain numbers for the CM 3671? Looks like every place that shows the specs, seem to leave out the VHF-lo, VHF-hi and UHF gain.

OK finally found some numbers;
CM 3671 VHF-lo 5.6 db VHF-hi 10.9 db UHF 10db
Antennacraft 1850 VHF-lo 6.2 db VHF-hi 10.7 db UHF 10db

So...the only real difference is in low band and what difference that would make in getting those south of the border stations. Some have said that Antennacraft may fall a bit short on quality to the CM 3671. Any opinions are appreciated. Sorry about all these questions, just want to make sure I get the right one. :)

Gary Hickerson
03-02-2012, 02:37 PM
Mike,
I installed, a 3671, 12 years ago, and its still, going strong ! I have Never seen an Antennacraft, last, like CM or Winegard. After you assemble the 3671, pick, it up, and feel how heavy, it is. As, I said, this antenna, has survived ice, high winds, hail, heavy birds, etc. and "keeps on ticking" ! !

Gary H.
Okla.

mp11
03-02-2012, 06:27 PM
OK Gary thanks.