eHam

eHam Forums => Antennas and Towers and more => Topic started by: KD2CJJ on March 06, 2013, 11:59:28 AM



Title: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: KD2CJJ on March 06, 2013, 11:59:28 AM
Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?  Its hard for me to determine which would be a better overall and would like some first hand opinions on either one.  (The XYL will in no way condone a Hex Beam.. I have tried but she seems to be ok with the "TV Antenna").

Thanks!!!


Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: N5TWB on March 06, 2013, 12:29:59 PM
Being in an antenna-restricted HOA neighborhood, I have no direct experience with either. I have many ham friends with Mosley's of every size/design who are very happy with their choice and the performance of the antenna. With only $150 difference between the two, I'd tend toward the Mosley for the positive reports I've had from friends.


Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: KD2CJJ on March 06, 2013, 02:37:55 PM
I am leaning torwards the Mosely... Any feedback on construction? Tuning, etc?


Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: VA2FSQ on March 06, 2013, 04:54:25 PM
In in exactly the same position, but I also have another contender...the TGM MQ-36SR.  One person I heard tested each of these and found the MQ the better.  I'm waiting on the comments here too!


Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: KD2CJJ on March 06, 2013, 07:50:26 PM
That is not in the same league for price.

In in exactly the same position, but I also have another contender...the TGM MQ-36SR.  One person I heard tested each of these and found the MQ the better.  I'm waiting on the comments here too!


Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: VA2FSQ on March 06, 2013, 08:19:11 PM
Really?  Didn't check.  Just want good performance in this sized antenna.  Oh, it is expensive.  Worth twice the price due to performance?


Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: VA3WXM on March 08, 2013, 09:25:36 AM
I have no experience with the Mosley but had an MA5B for almost 10 years.  I wasn't expecting mind-blowing results but it worked fine for my needs.

Keep in mind it's a 2-element yagi on 10-15-20 and a rotatable dipole for 12 and 17.  Don't expect it to perform like a multi-element beam.


Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: K3VAT on March 08, 2013, 09:30:03 AM
Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?  Its hard for me to determine which would be a better overall and would like some first hand opinions on either one.  (The XYL will in no way condone a Hex Beam.. I have tried but she seems to be ok with the "TV Antenna").

Thanks!!!

Did you search the archives of this Forum?  There are dozens if not hundreds of postings on these two antennas, their Price-per-Performance, assembly notes, on-the-air experiences, etc.

GL, 73, Rich K3VAT


Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: KB6HRT on March 11, 2013, 07:11:27 PM
Have another one to through into the Mix an TGM MQ26 I brought one of these antennas about a year ago, first had it 25' now have it 35' to the center of the antenna, checked most all the mini beams before I settled on the MQ-26 reason I did was its small does not have much wind load and nobody complains because it does look like some sort of TV antenna. I'm not a DXer but do like to hear station a far, this antenna does me a great job at that, It is a very quite antenna and has a great signal to noise ratio
the further the station the better it seems to works, live in AZ have heard station from all over the world and if I call to them they most always return my call, don't think its a pyle up buster but don't know that for sure, I can and sometimes do run 1K through it, no problems, If something happened to it I would replace it with another one, I do like the antenna for two reasons one being it still hears good 360 deg but down a couple of S units down from the direction it faces, I face it east here in AZ most of the time, but still hear Washington state well. Second the antenna is well built and strong, it will last a lot longer than I will for sure and it covers 6-20 don't hang out on 6m so don't know how it works there but on 10m works about the same as my A99 but is quiter on 12m about the same again on 15 through 17 works better than my 43' vertical and my wire Vee. on 20m it changes
most of the time sometimes the G5RV works sometimes my 20m dipole works best but it alway works better than my 43' vertical. When on 17 and 20m I alwasy have my radio on the MQ-26 then I check the other antennas to see where the station may be and how they compare with my little toy. I believe I have a good radio used with my antennas, a Yasue FT5000D
which I know is the best radio I have ever used. If I was out in country I would try a Hex Beam to see how it would play
but am not..................73s..........KB6HRT


Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: KA7NIQ on March 11, 2013, 10:02:10 PM
You may want to consider one of these instead ?

http://www.n6bt.com/n6bt-Q52-p1-1.htm


Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: AC5OQ on March 14, 2013, 01:10:53 PM
I have sued the MA5B before. It seems to work pretty well but it is really ugly and hard to put together. You will never get it up without some of the little capacitance hat things on the ends getting bent

73s

Lee K5PQ


Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: AF5CC on March 14, 2013, 04:01:05 PM
I have sued the MA5B before.

Why, what did it do to you :)


Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: AJ0Z on March 15, 2013, 12:04:57 PM
I've had my MA5B up 2 years. It went together with no problems and went up without bending anything. It has withstood Nebraska winters and 60+ MPH winds on a 2.5 inch mast with a Yaesu G-450A rotor. I have been very satisfied with it. I use it with with my Ameritron AL-80B amp with no problems. One thing I did is pin all joints with #6 SS screws to prevent any windmilling or movement of the elements.

Andy


Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: AF5CC on March 15, 2013, 07:52:52 PM
What do you think of the Yaesu 450 rotor?  I am looking at one for the MA5B I have.

73 John AF5CC


Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: KD2CJJ on March 15, 2013, 08:05:37 PM
I would but there are too many negative reviews on customer service. 
You may want to consider one of these instead ?

http://www.n6bt.com/n6bt-Q52-p1-1.htm


Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: VA3WXM on March 19, 2013, 10:14:56 AM
What do you think of the Yaesu 450 rotor?  I am looking at one for the MA5B I have.

73 John AF5CC

I used a G-450A with my MA5B for almost 10 years and had zero problems.


Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: AJ0Z on March 19, 2013, 04:30:42 PM
I have had zero problems with my Yaesu G-450A rotor using the mast adaptor in two years of use works well and turns at a reasonable rate. i would buy it again.

Andy


Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: KF7CG on March 20, 2013, 09:48:02 AM
No experience with the "baby" Mosley, but I have had and used the same full size TA-33 for 40 years. No problems, only minor maintenance when changing QTHs. So I figure the little guy will work well, too, and for a long time.

KF7CG


Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: KA7NIQ on March 20, 2013, 10:15:15 AM
No experience with the "baby" Mosley, but I have had and used the same full size TA-33 for 40 years. No problems, only minor maintenance when changing QTHs. So I figure the little guy will work well, too, and for a long time.

KF7CG
BIG difference between a full sized Mosley TA 33 and the Mosley Mini 33 WARC.
The TA 33 is a good antenna, but the Mini 33 was not one of Mosley's better moments.
Yes, because it is a Mosley, it will last a long long time. That is unfortunate, because it's poor performance will survive long enough to effect Ham after Ham.
The Cush Craft MA 5B is a better antenna, and a Hex Beam even better yet.



Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: KD2CJJ on March 20, 2013, 05:55:20 PM
Not one person has given me a technical reason why the cushcraft is better than the Mosley mini other than its better.


Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: KA7NIQ on March 20, 2013, 06:14:42 PM
Not one person has given me a technical reason why the cushcraft is better than the Mosley mini other than its better.
Good Lord Mike, don't you read and compare ?
The MA5B has almost perfect EHam reviews, the Mosley does not, The MA5B has a 7.3ft boom, the Mosley has a 6 ft boom.
The Cush Craft has a superior loading scheme for the elements, and is a newer antenna.
This mean it has benefited from Computer Design, vs the primitive, old school Mosley.

Look at all the videos on YouTube about the MA5B, then try to find any about the Mosley Mini 33 ?

Even Steve Hunt, the designer of the K4KIO and NA4RR Hexbeams once owned the MA5B, and said it was a decent antenna.

I am beginning to think that if Jesus Christ appeared in person, at your door, you would want to see the holes in his hands, from being nailed to the Cross ?

What more proof do you need ?

Longer Boom, Superior Element Loading Scheme, Computer Designed, Better EHam Reviews, and the Blessing of G3TXQ

Sounds like your next antenna should be a MA5B vs The Mosley Mini 33 Warc  ;)











Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: KD2CJJ on March 20, 2013, 06:57:51 PM
Everything I have read about each antenna has just praised what they had.  The Mosley antenna is old school but proven.  Personally the matching network and accompanied traps coupled with shorter elements should provide far more loss and less gain.  The longer boom may prove better f/b but it should be minmal.  So I guess I am try to better understand if my understanding of the science is correct than why is the antenna better?  Maybe better advertising?  If I am wrong about my understanding of the science then correct me with fact not conjecture or just what other people say.


Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: KA7NIQ on March 20, 2013, 07:14:09 PM
Everything I have read about each antenna has just praised what they had.  The Mosley antenna is old school but proven.  Personally the matching network and accompanied traps coupled with shorter elements should provide far more loss and less gain.  The longer boom may prove better f/b but it should be minmal.  So I guess I am try to better understand if my understanding of the science is correct than why is the antenna better?  Maybe better advertising?  If I am wrong about my understanding of the science then correct me with fact not conjecture or just what other people say.
All things being equal Mike, the Gain of a Yagi is a function of boom length. A "full size" small tribander has a 14 ft boom, and even that is close spaced on 20 meters!

Most 10 meter 3 element beams have from an 8 to a 12 ft boom.

The Mosley has a 6 ft boom, not enough for even good 10 meter performance, let alone 15 and 20!

The MA5B is almost 7.3  ft boom length, vs only 6 for the Mosley.

I did not look at element length for either antenna.



Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: KF7CG on March 21, 2013, 09:37:48 AM
A point missed in the boom length discussion, by the laws of math a two elelment beam can have half or slightly less then the boom length of a 3 element beam.

KF7CG


Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: KA7NIQ on March 21, 2013, 10:28:11 AM
A point missed in the boom length discussion, by the laws of math a two elelment beam can have half or slightly less then the boom length of a 3 element beam.

KF7CG
Good point! Most small 3 element tribanders are on 14 ft booms, so at 7 ft 3 inches, the Cushcraft MA5B is almost exactly 1/2 of that.



Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: KD2CJJ on March 21, 2013, 10:58:29 AM
Ahhaha!   That is the type of explanation I have been looking for.  I am a relatively new ham and still learning.

Here are the technical differences for those who are not familiar with the antennas.  Hopefully one of you elmers can help me choose a mini based on scientific fact over just conjecture.  I am mostly interested in 10, 15 and 20m with 20m being my favorite most used band.  WARC is nice to have at this point.  I need a mini due to my QTH and a Hex Beam is just not going to work for the XYL.

Both are two element beams with WARC bands as dipoles.


                                        MA5B                                                                                               MOSLEY MINI 32
Longest Element             17.1 FT                                                                                                         19.6 FT
Boom Length                    7.3 FT                                                                                                          6 FT
Stated Gain on 20m              3.6 dBi                                                                                                       3.3 dBd
F/B     on 20m                       22 dB                                                                                                         17 dB
Matching Network            Two Torrid Baluns w/Capacitors (Looks like a T Network design)                   None / Ugly Balun
Loading Scheme               Traps and Capacitance Hats                                                                           Traps
Bandwidth 20m                 90 kh                                                                                                         >200kh

So correct me if I am wrong (I love to be corrected with the proper information) but it seems to me other than F/B the Mosley should be a more effective and efficient antenna

Any comments?  I think this is a great discussion...!
       


Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: KA7NIQ on March 21, 2013, 11:36:15 AM
OK, why do you think the Mosley is the better antenna ?
It has a shorter boom, and no matching device!
The highest gain, bandwidth, and front to back ratio of a Yagi Antenna seldom, if ever, occurs when the driven element is a perfect 52 ohm match for direct coaxial fed.



Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: KB6HRT on March 21, 2013, 07:57:56 PM
Mike,
 First off its time for you to put down on paper what your requirements are and the weight them for what you think your needs are. With the information that you have on this post you should be able to make a very well rounded decision on the antenna that will work well for your need. I had most of the information that is on this post when I ordered the MQ-26 an have been very happy with the antenna, it met and exceeded my needs, had a friend that has worked most if not all countries in the world come over to the QTH an checked it the MQ-26 out, his first words after running some checks were it works very well indeed for a mini beam. The MQ-26 has gain on the WARC bands over the MA5B an that was important for me,  I know after using the MQ-26 for 7+ months its true because about 90% of the time I hear both sides of all QSO or 17m.  With the other antennas I have used before.  I did not an its the quitest antenna that I have, an that's good enough enough for me :-*............KB6HRT


Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: KE2TR on March 22, 2013, 03:59:07 PM
Hi Mike, if you can find one used the F12 C3SS would knock the sock's off those two antenna's buy a huge margin. 17&12mtr's will cover well with most AT's built in rig's today but only as good as a dipole but 10/15&20 it's a real beam, no trap's and it out does some larger trapped tribander's, longest element is 24' and a 12' boom, about 27 pounds so the light duty Yaesu rotor will work real well. Those other mini beam's are a step up from a dipole with some FB but low gain, I know they spec around 3 dbd but you would be luck to get maybe 2 dbd on 10&15 and maybe like a dipole on 20. If there is any gain at all its gain/bandwidth is gonna be 20-30khz, yes they show some for of directivity but they have very poor efficiency.
Jim KE2TR


Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: N4CR on March 23, 2013, 10:16:25 AM
MA5B continuous power is 400 watts.

The Mosley Mini 32 continuous power is 250 watts.

Either is suitable for 100 watts ssb, but probably not for use with an amplifier. I have a friend who burned up the traps on an MA5B with an Ameritron AL-811H. So consider that neither of these is suitable for amplifier use in the long term. He liked it well enough before it caught fire.


Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: KA7NIQ on March 23, 2013, 12:49:51 PM
MA5B continuous power is 400 watts.

The Mosley Mini 32 continuous power is 250 watts.

Either is suitable for 100 watts ssb, but probably not for use with an amplifier. I have a friend who burned up the traps on an MA5B with an Ameritron AL-811H. So consider that neither of these is suitable for amplifier use in the long term. He liked it well enough before it caught fire.

Good Post CR !


Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: N6AJR on March 25, 2013, 12:05:08 PM
I have had the ma5b and currently own a 3 ele steppir. I have had other beams as well.  That ma5b is an amazing antenna and works much better than I would have thought.  stick it up at leas 25 or 30 feet in the air and go for it. I did not ass the cap hats till I had the antenna on the mast.


Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: KD2CJJ on March 25, 2013, 01:24:08 PM
Thanks for all the feedback.  I did some educating myself on how Yagi's work in general and what makes an efficient Yagi.   I now have a better grasp and understand why the Mosley may not perform as well as the Cushcraft.  I can clearly see now that the Cushcraft matching network and loading scheme is much better coupled with the longer boom giving it a possible edge over the Mosley (correct me if I am wrong)  Of course I have still yet to understand how the TGM MQ line of Mini Beams work and am very interested in this antenna as some of the posters has suggested for me to be.

With that said, I have crossed off the list of the Mosley and now am focusing on the MA5B and the MQ-26SR; maybe even the MQ-34SR.

Can anyone comment on their experience for TGM MQ line of Mini Beams?  I am really leaning torwards the Cushcraft due to performance / price / size.  I dont mind spending the extra $$ for the TGM but is it really that much better than the MA5B?  The stated gain is higher on the TGM MQ26 and even higher on the MQ34 (if fine with the limits on bands it supports as 10 - 15 and 20 are my focus) with better F/B.

Generally the cushcraft has amazing reviews, the TGM line of antenna get great reviews but what is weird is that there are a few sprinkled in there that absolutely say its no better than their dipole.  That kind of concerns me-- I dont see that feedback with the MA5B.

Any feedback on the TGM antenna compared to the MA5B?





Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: KA7NIQ on March 25, 2013, 01:46:39 PM
Thanks for all the feedback.  I did some educating myself on how Yagi's work in general and what makes an efficient Yagi.   I now have a better grasp and understand why the Mosley may not perform as well as the Cushcraft.  I can clearly see now that the Cushcraft matching network and loading scheme is much better coupled with the longer boom giving it a possible edge over the Mosley (correct me if I am wrong)  Of course I have still yet to understand how the TGM MQ line of Mini Beams work and am very interested in this antenna as some of the posters has suggested for me to be.

With that said, I have crossed off the list of the Mosley and now am focusing on the MA5B and the MQ-26SR; maybe even the MQ-34SR.

Can anyone comment on their experience for TGM MQ line of Mini Beams?  I am really leaning torwards the Cushcraft due to performance / price / size.  I dont mind spending the extra $$ for the TGM but is it really that much better than the MA5B?  The stated gain is higher on the TGM MQ26 and even higher on the MQ34 (if fine with the limits on bands it supports as 10 - 15 and 20 are my focus) with better F/B.

Generally the cushcraft has amazing reviews, the TGM line of antenna get great reviews but what is weird is that there are a few sprinkled in there that absolutely say its no better than their dipole.  That kind of concerns me-- I dont see that feedback with the MA5B.

Any feedback on the TGM antenna compared to the MA5B?




IMHO, the TGM Antenna has crossed that fine line, where an antenna is TOO Small to have enough gain over a dipole, to make it worthwhile.
I remember the TGM Antenna, it was once called the Hybrid Products Company Mini Quad. It sucked then, and it sucks now. Sorry to be so blunt, but it sucks.
It is also a very narrow bandwidth device, especially on 20 meters.
One can only bend the laws of Physics so far, before severe performance penalties are to be paid.
The Cush Craft MA 5B will kick it's butt, on a daily basis.



Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: KD2CJJ on March 25, 2013, 02:06:46 PM
I see where your coming and going - and probably why there are some very concerning reviews on the TGM for the MQ26.  What do you think of the MQ-34SR?  Seems to be more reasonable due to its size but the bandwidth is still limited but far better than the MA5B - http://www.tgmcom.com/images/Antennas/mq34srsw_.jpg


Here are the specs:
Electrical Specifications

Operating  Bands- 10,15,20 Meters
Forward Gain (+/-0.5dB)-  10M-7.0 dBd., 15M-6.8.0 dBd., 20M-6.0 dBd.
(Reference being a full size dipole at 25')
SWR @ Resonance (See Curves)
Power Rating: 1500 Watts  P.E.P
Front to Back Ratio: 12 to 20 dBd
Front to Side Ratio: -20db.
Input Impedance: Single 50 Ohm  Feedline
Rotor: Medium to Heavy  Duty
Mechanical Specifcations

Element Length: 11 Ft 5 inches
Boom Length: 10 Ft 3 inches
Turning Radius: 8 Ft 8 inches
Overall Quad Reflector Height: 48 inches
Weight: 24 lbs
Mast (not inc'l): up to 2 1/8 inch
Wind Loading: 2.8 Sq. Ft.
Wind Survival: 75 MPH



Any thoughts or comments?


Thanks for all the feedback.  I did some educating myself on how Yagi's work in general and what makes an efficient Yagi.   I now have a better grasp and understand why the Mosley may not perform as well as the Cushcraft.  I can clearly see now that the Cushcraft matching network and loading scheme is much better coupled with the longer boom giving it a possible edge over the Mosley (correct me if I am wrong)  Of course I have still yet to understand how the TGM MQ line of Mini Beams work and am very interested in this antenna as some of the posters has suggested for me to be.

With that said, I have crossed off the list of the Mosley and now am focusing on the MA5B and the MQ-26SR; maybe even the MQ-34SR.

Can anyone comment on their experience for TGM MQ line of Mini Beams?  I am really leaning torwards the Cushcraft due to performance / price / size.  I dont mind spending the extra $$ for the TGM but is it really that much better than the MA5B?  The stated gain is higher on the TGM MQ26 and even higher on the MQ34 (if fine with the limits on bands it supports as 10 - 15 and 20 are my focus) with better F/B.

Generally the cushcraft has amazing reviews, the TGM line of antenna get great reviews but what is weird is that there are a few sprinkled in there that absolutely say its no better than their dipole.  That kind of concerns me-- I dont see that feedback with the MA5B.

Any feedback on the TGM antenna compared to the MA5B?




IMHO, the TGM Antenna has crossed that fine line, where an antenna is TOO Small to have enough gain over a dipole, to make it worthwhile.
I remember the TGM Antenna, it was once called the Hybrid Products Company Mini Quad. It sucked then, and it sucks now. Sorry to be so blunt, but it sucks.
It is also a very narrow bandwidth device, especially on 20 meters.
One can only bend the laws of Physics so far, before severe performance penalties are to be paid.
The Cush Craft MA 5B will kick it's butt, on a daily basis.




Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: KA7NIQ on March 25, 2013, 02:17:09 PM
I see where your coming and going - and probably why there are some very concerning reviews on the TGM for the MQ26.  What do you think of the MQ-34SR?  Seems to be more reasonable due to its size but the bandwidth is still limited but far better than the MA5B - http://www.tgmcom.com/images/Antennas/mq34srsw_.jpg


Here are the specs:
Electrical Specifications

Operating  Bands- 10,15,20 Meters
Forward Gain (+/-0.5dB)-  10M-7.0 dBd., 15M-6.8.0 dBd., 20M-6.0 dBd.
(Reference being a full size dipole at 25')
SWR @ Resonance (See Curves)
Power Rating: 1500 Watts  P.E.P
Front to Back Ratio: 12 to 20 dBd
Front to Side Ratio: -20db.
Input Impedance: Single 50 Ohm  Feedline
Rotor: Medium to Heavy  Duty
Mechanical Specifcations

Element Length: 11 Ft 5 inches
Boom Length: 10 Ft 3 inches
Turning Radius: 8 Ft 8 inches
Overall Quad Reflector Height: 48 inches
Weight: 24 lbs
Mast (not inc'l): up to 2 1/8 inch
Wind Loading: 2.8 Sq. Ft.
Wind Survival: 75 MPH



Any thoughts or comments?


Thanks for all the feedback.  I did some educating myself on how Yagi's work in general and what makes an efficient Yagi.   I now have a better grasp and understand why the Mosley may not perform as well as the Cushcraft.  I can clearly see now that the Cushcraft matching network and loading scheme is much better coupled with the longer boom giving it a possible edge over the Mosley (correct me if I am wrong)  Of course I have still yet to understand how the TGM MQ line of Mini Beams work and am very interested in this antenna as some of the posters has suggested for me to be.

With that said, I have crossed off the list of the Mosley and now am focusing on the MA5B and the MQ-26SR; maybe even the MQ-34SR.

Can anyone comment on their experience for TGM MQ line of Mini Beams?  I am really leaning torwards the Cushcraft due to performance / price / size.  I dont mind spending the extra $$ for the TGM but is it really that much better than the MA5B?  The stated gain is higher on the TGM MQ26 and even higher on the MQ34 (if fine with the limits on bands it supports as 10 - 15 and 20 are my focus) with better F/B.

Generally the cushcraft has amazing reviews, the TGM line of antenna get great reviews but what is weird is that there are a few sprinkled in there that absolutely say its no better than their dipole.  That kind of concerns me-- I dont see that feedback with the MA5B.

Any feedback on the TGM antenna compared to the MA5B?




IMHO, the TGM Antenna has crossed that fine line, where an antenna is TOO Small to have enough gain over a dipole, to make it worthwhile.
I remember the TGM Antenna, it was once called the Hybrid Products Company Mini Quad. It sucked then, and it sucks now. Sorry to be so blunt, but it sucks.
It is also a very narrow bandwidth device, especially on 20 meters.
One can only bend the laws of Physics so far, before severe performance penalties are to be paid.
The Cush Craft MA 5B will kick it's butt, on a daily basis.


It has a nice long boom vs the Cush Craft MA 5B!
But element length is shorter. I know nothing about that antenna, is it new ?


Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: AF5CC on March 25, 2013, 07:37:43 PM
How does the Cushcraft MA5B compare with a regular 2 element tribander, such as the Mosley TA32 or the Hy-Gain TH2?  Both of those have a slightly shorter boom, but longer elements. Does the MA5B lose much in performance when it shortens the elements?

John AF5CC


Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: KB6HRT on March 25, 2013, 11:52:29 PM
I have not owned an MA5B but think its a good antenna, do own an MQ-26 and know its a very good for my needs because
when I use it I can use 4 other antennas an compare it any given one of them an about 85% of the time I use the MQ-26. I am old now an been a HAM for 30+ years, not a lot of years by some Ham's standards but I do no being older have to go by the book these days, so when I put up an antenna I check and double check my work then check again an I do follow the instruction to a tee, Like some other hams have said before the MQ-26 is not a broad banded as some larger beams, but does cover most all of the 20m general part for SSB with out problems. If an antenna is not installed correctly to manufactures spec the results will very. I used 100' of RG 213 coax, the correct balm recommended and tuned correctly on all bands.The antenna can see 360 deg unobstructed at 36' to the bottom of the antenna. I have read revues of HAMS that have had both the MQ-26 an the MA5B don't remember numbers now but more liked the MQ-26 more than the MA5B.
Don't think the MQ-34 is as good a antenna as MQ-26 is from what I read. If I am having trouble making up my mind on something like this I always go with my gut feeling, that works best for me! Today signals were not great at the time I was on 20m but again like most days kept checking antennas but always got the best an clearest signal from my MQ-26 but could read weak signals best with the MQ-26.........kb6hrt 


Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: KD2CJJ on April 01, 2013, 01:44:24 PM
I wanted to let the thread know that I ordered a MQ-26 - shipped already.... I should be able to put it up in the next few weeks depending on the delivery and that the weather holds up..

I have an Alpha Delta DXEE Fan Dipole (up at 27 feet) and LNPAR End Fed  20/40 up about the same ....

I will surely report back A/B comparisons when its up...

Stay Tuned...


Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: KF7DS on April 01, 2013, 09:32:12 PM
Please let us know how you like it. I am going to try the Mosley Mini 32 AW. Just took delivery today but need to find time to finish a few other projects and getting past the Spring rains.

How do you like the EndFez 40/20?

Don KF7DS


Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: KD2CJJ on April 02, 2013, 11:20:39 AM
I will post the outcome when I get the antenna up...

The 40/20 is great BUT its power is VERY limited (100 watts SSB).  Running 30 watts of Digital damaged the matchbox where now 40 meters will not tune at all without a tuner.   Before blowing the matchbox the bandwidth was not bad for most of 40 meters and great for 20 meters.  Now since blowing the matchbox 40 meters no matter how much I shorten or lengthen (I fold back) its SWRs will not go lower than 2:1 up to 4:1... Not good...BUT with my LDG tuner it tunes to 1:1 on both 20 and 40 meters....  It also will tune on 80 to 1:1 with no issues; not bad for NVIS.   For 40 meters its a full 1/2 wave and a full wave on 20 meters.  I find it a little noisier than the dipole for 20 meters (and 40 but I also receive significantly better for 40 in general)

Regarding performance 40 meters it is seriously 3 - 8s points higher than my AD DXEE Fan Dipole (loaded on 40 meters).  For 20 Meters typically the Fan Dipole is 2 - 3s higher... some times (very rare) the end fed is 1 - 2 s higher than the fan dipole..    The end fed at its highest after looking at it last night is probably at 35 - 40 feet where my fan dipole is about 27 feet. 

The end fed is notorious for common mode but a simple ferrite choke in the shack cured the issue.



The MQ26 will be replacing my fan dipole..  I cant wait!!!

Please let us know how you like it. I am going to try the Mosley Mini 32 AW. Just took delivery today but need to find time to finish a few other projects and getting past the Spring rains.

How do you like the EndFez 40/20?

Don KF7DS


Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: KF7DS on April 03, 2013, 10:01:07 PM
Thanks for the feedback. Yes, I anticipated the need for a choke and expect it to be noisier than my ad dxcc. Love my ad dxcc...apex is at 50 Ft and end at 30. Works well

Don KF7DS


Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: KB6HRT on April 06, 2013, 08:11:16 PM
Mike,
 Some tips when you install the MQ26 make sure you get the belum that Tom recommends, set the SWR as per instructions,
I used a MFJ 259 with a 3' jumper to get my SWR where I though I wanted it, was about 7 ' above the ground and took my reading, then put it up to 24' to the bottom to the ground, then took more readings with the SWR meter in my HF radio with 100' of RG 213 an found where the SWR was lowest on each band, when I put it on the tower at 36' to the bottom my center point changes on some of the bands, then dropped the antenna down and adjusted the center points where I wanted them for good, nothing changed since the final installation last August, still love my little two element toy, hope you have as much fun with your little new found toy, I am having fun with this one .........73s.....kb6hrt
 


Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: KD2CJJ on April 14, 2013, 05:29:08 AM
Ok put up the mq26 yesterday.  Generally went together easy.  Unfortunately I did not have my antenna analyzer as it was lent out and not returned by when I needed it.  Since time was more important than tuning I proceeded to install as I can easily access the antenna later to tune it.  With that said the out of the box tuning does not seem to be true in my situation.  There is not part that dips below 2:1 Swr for 20 meters.  I suspect either the feedline is too short, only 40 feet, or something is wrong (same feedline that was on my dipole which was fine) with the antenna.  Reservation is out till I can ge an antenna analyzer on the antenna.  All other bands are very close but again not all that wide... Why I am suspect I need to get the feed line to at least 50 feet as I suspect the feedline is a bad multiple.

Anyway real world performance....with the handicap not being tuned I used my ldg tuner to tune it up to test it out.... All bands tune to 1 to 1 with no issue though on 20 it really works to get there on the lowest part of the band.  I made a few contact 1 into France from ny 1 into New Mexico...1 into MN.. All reported great strong signal.  Bad part it's not much better in most cases as my full wave end fed on 20...  In many cases the end fed beats it by 2s.  The directionality is almost Non existent on 20 no matter the direction.  Noise level is lower than the end fed but only by 1s.  When the mq26 beats my end fed its only by 1 or 2s points not earth shattering at all.  More than half the time they are the same within a s point...  I am comparing this antenna to a full wave 20 end fed which in all purposes may not be the best comparison (full wave compared to half wave)

With that said once I get the antenna tuned I will post back the results...so the verdict is still out ... But so far not promising

Any comments or questions?


Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: KA7NIQ on April 14, 2013, 07:42:25 AM
I am not surprised at all. I suggested the CushCraft MA 5B


Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: KD2CJJ on April 14, 2013, 08:42:32 AM
I know I know... >:(

I will tune it up and see what's next... If it doesn't work out then you will find a mq26 up for sale and it will be a very expensive lesson learned for me. 

I did some measurements today and found that it truly needs to be tuned on 20 as it just starts to dip below 2:1 at 14.330... It's pia without my analyzer now on the mast... Hopefully next weekend I can get the thing tuned.


Again verdict is out still until I can tune the thing...  I suspect though there won't be much improvement...

Stay tuned..



I am not surprised at all. I suggested the CushCraft MA 5B



Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: KA7NIQ on April 14, 2013, 08:47:41 AM
There will be some improvement with lower SWR.
How high up is it ?



Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: KD2CJJ on April 14, 2013, 09:55:53 AM
About 33 feet...

There will be some improvement with lower SWR.
How high up is it ?




Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: AB4ZT on April 14, 2013, 10:26:05 AM
I had an MA5B up 35 feet for several years.  It held up well and it had no problem with 600 watts CW.  Beyond that, however, it was a shortened 2-element yagi and performed as such.  Directional, but perhaps only a little better than a dipole at the same height (10, 15, 20).  When I replaced it with a full-size 3-el yagi, the additional element and boom length made a significant difference.  Unless I absolutely had to go with a smaller antenna because of space considerations, I would not go less than 3-el.  Even cost is not an issue - I got my 3-el used for $250.  If I did absolutely have to go with a 2-el, I would probably stick with the Cushcraft.

The specs cited for the 3-el hybrid are garbage.  10 feet is very, very short for a 3-el design.  You are not going to get that gain with a shortened, short boom 3-el yagi.  Although they did specify a dipole at 25-feet as a reference (???).  Who does that?   Forward gain should be specified versus free-space references.  My 3-el has 14-foot boom and you really don't want to go shorter than that for 3-el designs.  A step-up is an 18-foot boom design.  When it comes to comparing antennas you pretty much have to ignore claimed specs and rely on what you know about basic antenna design and how each antenna will perform based on number of elements, boom length, element size, etc.

73,

Richard, AB4ZT


Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: KD2CJJ on April 14, 2013, 11:36:28 AM
Well... for 17m its about 5s points over my end fed (using tuner as it is not resonant on 17m)... Its about 3s directional...  Made a contact into Italy - he was a 5/7 I received a 5/9 plus...  The other bands are dead but I suspect performance will improve as I go higher on the bands with this antenna which is what is proclaims...  

Also depending on which part hover overs my house there is a difference in SWR... at some point I will try to push it a little higher on the mast.... its about 5 feet above the ridge line.. I might be able to push it a little higher..  Wont do that until I can tune 20m... its way off right now...

I will keep the thread updated as I progress with this antenna..


Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: KA7NIQ on April 14, 2013, 02:41:11 PM
I had an MA5B up 35 feet for several years.  It held up well and it had no problem with 600 watts CW.  Beyond that, however, it was a shortened 2-element yagi and performed as such.  Directional, but perhaps only a little better than a dipole at the same height (10, 15, 20).  When I replaced it with a full-size 3-el yagi, the additional element and boom length made a significant difference.  Unless I absolutely had to go with a smaller antenna because of space considerations, I would not go less than 3-el.  Even cost is not an issue - I got my 3-el used for $250.  If I did absolutely have to go with a 2-el, I would probably stick with the Cushcraft.

The specs cited for the 3-el hybrid are garbage.  10 feet is very, very short for a 3-el design.  You are not going to get that gain with a shortened, short boom 3-el yagi.  Although they did specify a dipole at 25-feet as a reference (???).  Who does that?   Forward gain should be specified versus free-space references.  My 3-el has 14-foot boom and you really don't want to go shorter than that for 3-el designs.  A step-up is an 18-foot boom design.  When it comes to comparing antennas you pretty much have to ignore claimed specs and rely on what you know about basic antenna design and how each antenna will perform based on number of elements, boom length, element size, etc.

73,

Richard, AB4ZT
I agree Richard. The Cushcraft MA5B is about the only real small directional antenna I have ever known to work at all.


Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: N4CR on April 14, 2013, 02:52:55 PM
Assuming it's a 50 ohm feed point, the length of your feed line has absolutely nothing to do with where the SWR dips.

Does the SWR dip inside the band and never gets low enough or is the dip outside of the band?


Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: KD2CJJ on April 14, 2013, 04:41:19 PM
 (I am a relatively new ham so I am still learning) -I noticed that in CW and Digital the direcationality made much more of a significant difference over SSB (using 20m as my reference).  I received probably 1 - 3s difference.  I also noticed with CW and Digital the beam did have a gain of 2 - 3s over my end fed generally.  My last observation is that this antenna is much quieter than my end fed.  Stations that may be 1S lower (in any mode) i can copy better than on my end fed.....  Does this all make any sense?  If so, could you explain any theory behind it?

SWR Stats:

Keep in mind I did absolutely no tuning.  Everything is set as per the manual.   It seems the antenna is fine just needs tuning...

Band = 20M <--- Needs tuning for sure.  I believe tuning will get me to 90 - 100Khz in bandwidth

14.292 = 2.0 SWR

14.325 = 1.33 SWR -- Lowest SWR

14.350 = 1.8 SWR

58Khz in bandwidth


----------------------------------------------




Band = 17m <--- Needs tuning for sure.  I believe tuning will get me to desired bandwidth (maybe even better than specs actually based on where it stands)

18.125 = 2.0 SWR

18.168 = 1.2 SWR  -- Lowest SWR

43Khz in bandwidth

----------------------------------------------


Band = 15m <---- Perfect - within Specs

21.160 = 2.0 SWR

21.275 = 1.1 SWR -- Lowest SWR

21.372 = 2.0 SWR

212Khz in bandwidth


----------------------------------------------



Band = 12m <---- Again needs tuning.  Again believe with tuning I can get this to beat specs.

24.916 = 2.0 SWR

24.990 = 1.2 SWR -- Lowest SWR

74Khz in Bandwidth


----------------------------------------------------------
Band = 10m <---- Perfect within specs

28.102 = 2.0SWR

28.560 - 1.1 -- Lowest SWR

28.986 = 2.0SWR

884Khz in Bandwidth


Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: AF5CC on April 14, 2013, 07:19:49 PM
I had one of the original Mini Products HQ-1 miniquads that TGM eventually based their design on.  It was the 2 element version for 20, 15, 10 and 6m on a 4.5 foot boom.  As you stated, it performed better on the higher bands than on 20m.  In the 2002 10 meter contest I made 850 QSOs using it and 100 watts from a Yaesu FT100D.  Worked 9M2 for my best catch of the contest (only time I have ever worked 9M2).  On 6 meters I worked Argentina, Portugal, Japan, and lots of Carribean stations with it.

I now have a Cushcraft MA5B I am hoping to get up later this year.  The miniquad replaced a MA5B which I had before.  I got the impression that the miniquad was a little quieter and worked about the same as the MA5B.  The MA5B did seem to have a wider bandwidth, especially on 20m. Good luck getting yours tuned.

73 John AF5CC


Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: KD2CJJ on April 15, 2013, 08:02:50 AM
Quick question...  (I am a relatively new ham so I am still learning)  When tuning do I start on the outer ring (20m) and work my way in to the inner ring (10m) or visa versa?  I know that one band can affect another when tuning but what is best practice in general when your dealing with a multi-band antenna?

I had one of the original Mini Products HQ-1 miniquads that TGM eventually based their design on.  It was the 2 element version for 20, 15, 10 and 6m on a 4.5 foot boom.  As you stated, it performed better on the higher bands than on 20m.  In the 2002 10 meter contest I made 850 QSOs using it and 100 watts from a Yaesu FT100D.  Worked 9M2 for my best catch of the contest (only time I have ever worked 9M2).  On 6 meters I worked Argentina, Portugal, Japan, and lots of Carribean stations with it.

I now have a Cushcraft MA5B I am hoping to get up later this year.  The miniquad replaced a MA5B which I had before.  I got the impression that the miniquad was a little quieter and worked about the same as the MA5B.  The MA5B did seem to have a wider bandwidth, especially on 20m. Good luck getting yours tuned.

73 John AF5CC


Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: KB6HRT on April 15, 2013, 10:17:06 AM
Mike,
 The key for good reading SWR with the MQ-26 is using a feeder line of 100' of RG213U for broadness of useable SWR
your transceiver see's for 20m with antenna. Here are my readings with 50 watts AM applied at the shacks coax end.  SWR at 14.225 1.5  SWR at 14.275 1.4 SWR  14.300 1.3 SWR  14.310 1.6 SWR
 14.320 1.8 SWR  14.330 2.3 SWR 14.340 2.6 SWR and 14.350  3.1 SWR  You can see SWR readings are within limits of the tuner in most transceivers with a built in tuner in of 3 to 1 or less. After tuned SWR is 1.1 from 14.225 - 14350.  As you can see have my MQ26 dip at 14.300 which works great for my 20m needs. My antenna uses the proscribed balun, an is installed at 36' to the bottom an the antenna can see unobstructed 360 deg..............73s.........kb6hrt


Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: KA7NIQ on April 15, 2013, 10:41:19 AM
Mike,
 The key for good reading SWR with the MQ-26 is using a feeder line of 100' of RG213U for broadness of useable SWR
your transceiver see's for 20m with antenna. Here are my readings with 50 watts AM applied at the shacks coax end.  SWR at 14.225 1.5  SWR at 14.275 1.4 SWR  14.300 1.3 SWR  14.310 1.6 SWR
 14.320 1.8 SWR  14.330 2.3 SWR 14.340 2.6 SWR and 14.350  3.1 SWR  You can see SWR readings are within limits of the tuner in most transceivers with a built in tuner in of 3 to 1 or less. After tuned SWR is 1.1 from 14.225 - 14350.  As you can see have my MQ26 dip at 14.300 which works great for my 20m needs. My antenna uses the proscribed balun, an is installed at 36' to the bottom an the antenna can see unobstructed 360 deg..............73s.........kb6hrt
Heck, why stop at only 100 feet of coax ? Why not 2 or 3 hundred feet, and really introduce some loss, for best SWR ?
Any antenna that "requires" a long length of Coax for best SWR IMHO, is a flawed antenna.
To depend on feed line loss to achieve low SWR or Wide Bandwidth is not the best plan.



Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: KD2CJJ on April 15, 2013, 01:15:52 PM
KA7NIQ - I agree, I wouldn't want an antenna that needed a specific feedline length; though I tested it anyway and it didnt help any by adding 50 feet... SWRs didnt budge...

I then proceeded with the SWR sweep accross all supported bands, which I would have done  easily with an analyzer but I used my Bird meter to calculate the SWRs.

KB6HRT - As you can see the antenna is fine based on the SWR sweep... It IS resonant (assumed based on a 1.5 or lower swr) at some part of the corresponding band.  From my analysis, I just need to tune the antenna.   I am running LMR 400 Flex... I am also using the prescribed balun as per the instructions.

I will report back when I tune the antenna but from what I can see tuning will just shift the resonant point - in other words performance will not improve much... 

PS - the more I use the antenna the more I am happy with it -- It is some times is weaker than my end fed, some times its 1 or 2s points stronger enough for me to copy the station where on the end fed would be very difficult... For 17m - 10m it completely destroys my end fed - at least 5 - 6s difference in favor of the Mini Beam.


Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: KA7NIQ on April 15, 2013, 03:32:50 PM
KA7NIQ - I agree, I wouldn't want an antenna that needed a specific feedline length; though I tested it anyway and it didnt help any by adding 50 feet... SWRs didnt budge...

I then proceeded with the SWR sweep accross all supported bands, which I would have done  easily with an analyzer but I used my Bird meter to calculate the SWRs.

KB6HRT - As you can see the antenna is fine based on the SWR sweep... It IS resonant (assumed based on a 1.5 or lower swr) at some part of the corresponding band.  From my analysis, I just need to tune the antenna.   I am running LMR 400 Flex... I am also using the prescribed balun as per the instructions.

I will report back when I tune the antenna but from what I can see tuning will just shift the resonant point - in other words performance will not improve much... 

PS - the more I use the antenna the more I am happy with it -- It is some times is weaker than my end fed, some times its 1 or 2s points stronger enough for me to copy the station where on the end fed would be very difficult... For 17m - 10m it completely destroys my end fed - at least 5 - 6s difference in favor of the Mini Beam.
Comparing it to your End Fed is not what you think! If your End Fed is an 80 meter end fed, or even a 40 meter End Fed Wire, it will have lobes, some with a little gain over a dipole, but it will also have Nulls (holes in the pattern) that can be 20 db deep!
LOL, a Dummy Load mounted at 33 feet can sometimes "outperform" a long end fed wire, especially if that dummy load causes the coax to radiate.

A true comparison for your antenna is to compare it to a 1/2 wave dipole, mounted at, or close to, the same height.

I can assure you, that if and when you compare that antenna to a 1/2 wave dipole, you will never see " 5 to 6 S Units difference"  ;)

By the way, welcome to the hobby, since you are a New Ham!

I can not tell you how Many "antenna projects" I have had, that did not turn out like I wanted them to.

Those god darn laws of physics kept ruining my plans.

However, I learned a little, from each and every failure, and I am still learning!







Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: KD2CJJ on April 16, 2013, 06:59:13 AM
The more I use the antenna the more I getting acquainted the more I like it, the more I see my install is contributing to some of the negatives.


I have found that my SWRs change considerably pointing north and south (where half of the dipole is over my house and half is over free space).  When its east / west either the radiator or driven element is over free space or over the house - the SWR drop about 1/2 of its reading or more (example it can go from 1.2 SWR to 2.0.  That explains why I was seeing some odd performance characteristics and SWR curves when the beam is pointed north and south!..... For example stations in Florida (My QTH is Long Island) if I rotate the beam SE the stations dB actually increases, when reason would say that having the beam pointed directly at the station should yield higher dB - but that is not the case for stations north and south of me.  This morning it was just about 1 - 2S difference just by slightly turning the beam off center of the station!   -- all this  I suspect due to it being too close to the house, detuning the antenna.   

I can get the antenna about 2 feet higher on the current mast before I will need another mast - I will attempt that this weekend and report back. 



Lessons learned this antenna seems to be very sensitive to housing structures - My roof is tar shingles, wood structure, vinyl siding and have aluminum gutters (though they are a fair distance, like 10 feet to the antenna - could they be having an effect??  Also I have a Power cord in my attic up at the peak with bulbs attached running the entire length, could that be having an effect?).



Comparing it to your End Fed is not what you think! If your End Fed is an 80 meter end fed, or even a 40 meter End Fed Wire, it will have lobes, some with a little gain over a dipole, but it will also have Nulls (holes in the pattern) that can be 20 db deep!
LOL, a Dummy Load mounted at 33 feet can sometimes "outperform" a long end fed wire, especially if that dummy load causes the coax to radiate.

A true comparison for your antenna is to compare it to a 1/2 wave dipole, mounted at, or close to, the same height.

I can assure you, that if and when you compare that antenna to a 1/2 wave dipole, you will never see " 5 to 6 S Units difference"  ;)

By the way, welcome to the hobby, since you are a New Ham!

I can not tell you how Many "antenna projects" I have had, that did not turn out like I wanted them to.

Those god darn laws of physics kept ruining my plans.

However, I learned a little, from each and every failure, and I am still learning!








Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: KB6HRT on April 20, 2013, 11:15:32 AM
KA7NIQ,
 All antennas are flawed, you have to do the best you can with what the your landscape dictates, an how much time an money you want to put into your project. Have a small lot, lots of antennas, each has to be tuned to work there best, an also not interact with the other antennas on the lot, not an easy job to get good results.
My Grandmother told me when I was a small boy that nothing is impossable, the impossable just takes a little longer, am an old bird now but do know she gave the best advice she could have ever given me in doing my life and she must have knowed me well, and loved me very much to plant that seed in me when I was young........73s......kb6hrt


Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: KA7NIQ on April 20, 2013, 11:49:40 AM
KA7NIQ,
 All antennas are flawed, you have to do the best you can with what the your landscape dictates, an how much time an money you want to put into your project. Have a small lot, lots of antennas, each has to be tuned to work there best, an also not interact with the other antennas on the lot, not an easy job to get good results.
My Grandmother told me when I was a small boy that nothing is impossable, the impossable just takes a little longer, am an old bird now but do know she gave the best advice she could have ever given me in doing my life and she must have knowed me well, and loved me very much to plant that seed in me when I was young........73s......kb6hrt
Yes, and some are flawed more then others.


Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: KD2CJJ on April 27, 2013, 08:34:51 AM
Wanted give you all an update -  I finished up the tuning... Raised it to about 33 feet ag.  I needed to lengthen on 20, 17 and 15 meters tuning rods from default settings.  It was relatively easy since each band didnt have much of an effect on the other bands... All prescribed bands get a 1:1 - 1:5 match with a tuner.  At the center point of resonance it tunes (with no tuner) to a 1:1 - 1:3 on all bands.  On 20 meters its about 90 - 100k of below 2:1, on the other bands its just about the entire band you are below 2:1. 

The antenna is SIGNIFICANTLY quieter over my previous wire dipole and End Fed.  I would say 2S over my wire dipole and 2-4s points over my end fed.

 Generally the beams signal strength is 0 - 2s over my wire dipole and 0 - 3s over my end fed... Keep in mind its 2 - 3s quieter all the time over my other antennas... stations that I can not pull out on my end fed are crystal clear on the beam.  On the wire dipole I can copy them but with difficulty...

Example, this morning I could not make out a station in puerto rico on my end fed at all...  On my wire dipole i could hear him but could not copy him... On the beam I could copy him with no issues (he was 5/3!)... even though its a small difference over my wire dipole it was the difference of copying him or not... 

One other positive - Stage 1 of getting the XYL to accept any antenna on the roof is complete "Wow not that bad... looks like a TV antenna"  This is only stage 1...
Stage 2 comes in time for a bigger better antenna Muahahahah!  It really does look like a TV antenna!  Whats stage 2?  Not sure - I really want that hex beam, but I suspect that will need to be a stage 3 or 4... Maybe a full size 2 element beam (still has more gain over the mini beam)...  OR maybe just get the antenna higher (with a tripod on the roof or something)... time will tell..


So... All objectives met with little disappointment...   And as another positive, Tom was amazing on assisting on just about everything; he responded within 24 hours on all emails... Very high quality parts no quality issues at all!






Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: KA7NIQ on April 27, 2013, 08:58:58 AM
Wanted give you all an update -  I finished up the tuning... Raised it to about 33 feet ag.  I needed to lengthen on 20, 17 and 15 meters tuning rods from default settings.  It was relatively easy since each band didnt have much of an effect on the other bands... All prescribed bands get a 1:1 - 1:5 match with a tuner.  At the center point of resonance it tunes (with no tuner) to a 1:1 - 1:3 on all bands.  On 20 meters its about 90 - 100k of below 2:1, on the other bands its just about the entire band you are below 2:1. 

The antenna is SIGNIFICANTLY quieter over my previous wire dipole and End Fed.  I would say 2S over my wire dipole and 2-4s points over my end fed.

 Generally the beams signal strength is 0 - 2s over my wire dipole and 0 - 3s over my end fed... Keep in mind its 2 - 3s quieter all the time over my other antennas... stations that I can not pull out on my end fed are crystal clear on the beam.  On the wire dipole I can copy them but with difficulty...


Example, this morning I could not make out a station in puerto rico on my end fed at all...  On my wire dipole i could hear him but could not copy him... On the beam I could copy him with no issues (he was 5/3!)... even though its a small difference over my wire dipole it was the difference of copying him or not... 

One other positive - Stage 1 of getting the XYL to accept any antenna on the roof is complete "Wow not that bad... looks like a TV antenna"  This is only stage 1...
Stage 2 comes in time for a bigger better antenna Muahahahah!  It really does look like a TV antenna!  Whats stage 2?  Not sure - I really want that hex beam, but I suspect that will need to be a stage 3 or 4... Maybe a full size 2 element beam (still has more gain over the mini beam)...  OR maybe just get the antenna higher (with a tripod on the roof or something)... time will tell..


So... All objectives met with little disappointment...   And as another positive, Tom was amazing on assisting on just about everything; he responded within 24 hours on all emails... Very high quality parts no quality issues at all!





Unless your end fed is at the same height, and is a dipole on the bands you are comparing it to your antenna, comparisons are well meaning, but meaningless.

I am not accusing you of being a shill, but this is almost a perfect Shill Thread !
The title of it lists the 2 major competitors to the antenna you say you purchased!
Thus, anyone considering the proven Cush Craft MA 5B or Mosley Mini 33 WARC will probably read this thread, and be made aware of that antenna you say you purchased.

Then, you say "And as another positive, Tom was amazing on assisting on just about everything; he responded within 24 hours on all emails... Very high quality parts no quality issues at all!"

LOL, I will BET he was  ::)
I am sure he is aware of this thread, at the very least, EH ?

Could you please take some pictures of your antenna installation, and also some pics of the End Fed Antenna in relation to your antenna. Try to show both antennas in the same picture, so we can see if there is any interaction taking place.






Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: KD2CJJ on April 27, 2013, 09:43:21 AM
I did consider the other two until I stumbled upon the MQ - I was leaning towards the Mini 33 until I read about the difference between the loading systems ... then it was between the MA5B and the MQ... I believed both the MA5B and the MQ would have similar performance on 20 but better on 17 meters and higher, thus went with the MQ.

I doubt Tom was aware of the thread... Honestly another major reason I didnt go with the MA5B is due to poor past experience with MFJ.... So quality of the product and customer service in my opinion is 1/2 the value of any product.  I dont have time or patience to deal with issues and poor service.


The End Fed is about as high as the Antenna at the base (about 4 feet below it) and the top goes to about 40 feet up across my yard (its End Fed resonant on 40 and 20 as its a about a 1/2 wave on 40 and full wave on 20 with a tuning stub - No tuner needed for either band - about 200k bandwidth below 2:1 on 40 and less than 1.5 for entire 20).  I doubt there is an interaction, at least my analyzer tells me so - and nothing has changed since putting up the beam for the end fed.

I have since taken down the wire dipole as it didnt add any value other than clutter my yard... It was about 4 feet below the beam before I took it down perpendicular to the end fed... the dipole required a tuner similar to the mini beam.  Since the dipole and end fed I have had for about a year it was easy for me to compare between the 3.

I know you probably had hopped that the mini beam didnt work out... but for me I had pretty low expectations - In other works as good as my dipole, better than my end fed (because thats what I saw in general in comparison to my wire dipole)...  I find its slightly better than my dipole in receive, much better in noise and will probably never use my end fed for 20m now.. It pretty much meets what it advertises... I dont know what you expected?  Worse than the wire dipole?  If that was the case I would have ripped that sucker off my roof and bought a different antenna - probably the MA5B next then the Mini 33 if that didnt work out! 

BUT it did meet my expectations, I was able to get some directivity (albeit, not very much but .5 - 2s points helps on 20), nice nulls off the side which helps with the power lines north of me, I can get it now 4 feet higher at or above the 1/2 wave for 20m, I have about 4 -6s points higher on 15 - 10m over the wire dipole, did I say how much improved the S/N is?, and looks like a TV antenna....

Not really sure what the point of your response was? AND just realized I spent 10 minutes of my life typing this out... !

Anyway... Will post some pics later on..





Wanted give you all an update -  I finished up the tuning... Raised it to about 33 feet ag.  I needed to lengthen on 20, 17 and 15 meters tuning rods from default settings.  It was relatively easy since each band didnt have much of an effect on the other bands... All prescribed bands get a 1:1 - 1:5 match with a tuner.  At the center point of resonance it tunes (with no tuner) to a 1:1 - 1:3 on all bands.  On 20 meters its about 90 - 100k of below 2:1, on the other bands its just about the entire band you are below 2:1. 

The antenna is SIGNIFICANTLY quieter over my previous wire dipole and End Fed.  I would say 2S over my wire dipole and 2-4s points over my end fed.

 Generally the beams signal strength is 0 - 2s over my wire dipole and 0 - 3s over my end fed... Keep in mind its 2 - 3s quieter all the time over my other antennas... stations that I can not pull out on my end fed are crystal clear on the beam.  On the wire dipole I can copy them but with difficulty...


Example, this morning I could not make out a station in puerto rico on my end fed at all...  On my wire dipole i could hear him but could not copy him... On the beam I could copy him with no issues (he was 5/3!)... even though its a small difference over my wire dipole it was the difference of copying him or not... 

One other positive - Stage 1 of getting the XYL to accept any antenna on the roof is complete "Wow not that bad... looks like a TV antenna"  This is only stage 1...
Stage 2 comes in time for a bigger better antenna Muahahahah!  It really does look like a TV antenna!  Whats stage 2?  Not sure - I really want that hex beam, but I suspect that will need to be a stage 3 or 4... Maybe a full size 2 element beam (still has more gain over the mini beam)...  OR maybe just get the antenna higher (with a tripod on the roof or something)... time will tell..


So... All objectives met with little disappointment...   And as another positive, Tom was amazing on assisting on just about everything; he responded within 24 hours on all emails... Very high quality parts no quality issues at all!





Unless your end fed is at the same height, and is a dipole on the bands you are comparing it to your antenna, comparisons are well meaning, but meaningless.

I am not accusing you of being a shill, but this is almost a perfect Shill Thread !
The title of it lists the 2 major competitors to the antenna you say you purchased!
Thus, anyone considering the proven Cush Craft MA 5B or Mosley Mini 33 WARC will probably read this thread, and be made aware of that antenna you say you purchased.

Then, you say "And as another positive, Tom was amazing on assisting on just about everything; he responded within 24 hours on all emails... Very high quality parts no quality issues at all!"

LOL, I will BET he was  ::)
I am sure he is aware of this thread, at the very least, EH ?

Could you please take some pictures of your antenna installation, and also some pics of the End Fed Antenna in relation to your antenna. Try to show both antennas in the same picture, so we can see if there is any interaction taking place.







Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: KA7NIQ on April 27, 2013, 10:39:31 AM
I did consider the other two until I stumbled upon the MQ - I was leaning towards the Mini 33 until I read about the difference between the loading systems ... then it was between the MA5B and the MQ... I believed both the MA5B and the MQ would have similar performance on 20 but better on 17 meters and higher, thus went with the MQ.

I doubt Tom was aware of the thread... Honestly another major reason I didnt go with the MA5B is due to poor past experience with MFJ.... So quality of the product and customer service in my opinion is 1/2 the value of any product.  I dont have time or patience to deal with issues and poor service.


The End Fed is about as high as the Antenna at the base (about 4 feet below it) and the top goes to about 40 feet up across my yard (its End Fed resonant on 40 and 20 as its a about a 1/2 wave on 40 and full wave on 20 with a tuning stub - No tuner needed for either band - about 200k bandwidth below 2:1 on 40 and less than 1.5 for entire 20).  I doubt there is an interaction, at least my analyzer tells me so - and nothing has changed since putting up the beam for the end fed.

I have since taken down the wire dipole as it didnt add any value other than clutter my yard... It was about 4 feet below the beam before I took it down perpendicular to the end fed... the dipole required a tuner similar to the mini beam.  Since the dipole and end fed I have had for about a year it was easy for me to compare between the 3.

I know you probably had hopped that the mini beam didnt work out... but for me I had pretty low expectations - In other works as good as my dipole, better than my end fed (because thats what I saw in general in comparison to my wire dipole)...  I find its slightly better than my dipole in receive, much better in noise and will probably never use my end fed for 20m now.. It pretty much meets what it advertises... I dont know what you expected?  Worse than the wire dipole?  If that was the case I would have ripped that sucker off my roof and bought a different antenna - probably the MA5B next then the Mini 33 if that didnt work out! 

BUT it did meet my expectations, I was able to get some directivity (albeit, not very much but .5 - 2s points helps on 20), nice nulls off the side which helps with the power lines north of me, I can get it now 4 feet higher at or above the 1/2 wave for 20m, I have about 4 -6s points higher on 15 - 10m over the wire dipole, did I say how much improved the S/N is?, and looks like a TV antenna....

Not really sure what the point of your response was? AND just realized I spent 10 minutes of my life typing this out... !

Anyway... Will post some pics later on..





Wanted give you all an update -  I finished up the tuning... Raised it to about 33 feet ag.  I needed to lengthen on 20, 17 and 15 meters tuning rods from default settings.  It was relatively easy since each band didnt have much of an effect on the other bands... All prescribed bands get a 1:1 - 1:5 match with a tuner.  At the center point of resonance it tunes (with no tuner) to a 1:1 - 1:3 on all bands.  On 20 meters its about 90 - 100k of below 2:1, on the other bands its just about the entire band you are below 2:1. 

The antenna is SIGNIFICANTLY quieter over my previous wire dipole and End Fed.  I would say 2S over my wire dipole and 2-4s points over my end fed.

 Generally the beams signal strength is 0 - 2s over my wire dipole and 0 - 3s over my end fed... Keep in mind its 2 - 3s quieter all the time over my other antennas... stations that I can not pull out on my end fed are crystal clear on the beam.  On the wire dipole I can copy them but with difficulty...


Example, this morning I could not make out a station in puerto rico on my end fed at all...  On my wire dipole i could hear him but could not copy him... On the beam I could copy him with no issues (he was 5/3!)... even though its a small difference over my wire dipole it was the difference of copying him or not... 

One other positive - Stage 1 of getting the XYL to accept any antenna on the roof is complete "Wow not that bad... looks like a TV antenna"  This is only stage 1...
Stage 2 comes in time for a bigger better antenna Muahahahah!  It really does look like a TV antenna!  Whats stage 2?  Not sure - I really want that hex beam, but I suspect that will need to be a stage 3 or 4... Maybe a full size 2 element beam (still has more gain over the mini beam)...  OR maybe just get the antenna higher (with a tripod on the roof or something)... time will tell..


So... All objectives met with little disappointment...   And as another positive, Tom was amazing on assisting on just about everything; he responded within 24 hours on all emails... Very high quality parts no quality issues at all!





Unless your end fed is at the same height, and is a dipole on the bands you are comparing it to your antenna, comparisons are well meaning, but meaningless.

I am not accusing you of being a shill, but this is almost a perfect Shill Thread !
The title of it lists the 2 major competitors to the antenna you say you purchased!
Thus, anyone considering the proven Cush Craft MA 5B or Mosley Mini 33 WARC will probably read this thread, and be made aware of that antenna you say you purchased.

Then, you say "And as another positive, Tom was amazing on assisting on just about everything; he responded within 24 hours on all emails... Very high quality parts no quality issues at all!"

LOL, I will BET he was  ::)
I am sure he is aware of this thread, at the very least, EH ?

Could you please take some pictures of your antenna installation, and also some pics of the End Fed Antenna in relation to your antenna. Try to show both antennas in the same picture, so we can see if there is any interaction taking place.


Any antenna cut to be 1/2 wave on 40 meters, will display slight gain, and very deep Nulls, when used on bands higher then 40 meters.
Thus, it is not possible to compare your new antenna with it on 10,15, and 20 meters.


Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: KD2CJJ on April 27, 2013, 04:56:59 PM
Thanks for stating the obvious....  thats why I included comparisons to a wire dipole at a similar height...


I did consider the other two until I stumbled upon the MQ - I was leaning towards the Mini 33 until I read about the difference between the loading systems ... then it was between the MA5B and the MQ... I believed both the MA5B and the MQ would have similar performance on 20 but better on 17 meters and higher, thus went with the MQ.

I doubt Tom was aware of the thread... Honestly another major reason I didnt go with the MA5B is due to poor past experience with MFJ.... So quality of the product and customer service in my opinion is 1/2 the value of any product.  I dont have time or patience to deal with issues and poor service.


The End Fed is about as high as the Antenna at the base (about 4 feet below it) and the top goes to about 40 feet up across my yard (its End Fed resonant on 40 and 20 as its a about a 1/2 wave on 40 and full wave on 20 with a tuning stub - No tuner needed for either band - about 200k bandwidth below 2:1 on 40 and less than 1.5 for entire 20).  I doubt there is an interaction, at least my analyzer tells me so - and nothing has changed since putting up the beam for the end fed.

I have since taken down the wire dipole as it didnt add any value other than clutter my yard... It was about 4 feet below the beam before I took it down perpendicular to the end fed... the dipole required a tuner similar to the mini beam.  Since the dipole and end fed I have had for about a year it was easy for me to compare between the 3.

I know you probably had hopped that the mini beam didnt work out... but for me I had pretty low expectations - In other works as good as my dipole, better than my end fed (because thats what I saw in general in comparison to my wire dipole)...  I find its slightly better than my dipole in receive, much better in noise and will probably never use my end fed for 20m now.. It pretty much meets what it advertises... I dont know what you expected?  Worse than the wire dipole?  If that was the case I would have ripped that sucker off my roof and bought a different antenna - probably the MA5B next then the Mini 33 if that didnt work out! 

BUT it did meet my expectations, I was able to get some directivity (albeit, not very much but .5 - 2s points helps on 20), nice nulls off the side which helps with the power lines north of me, I can get it now 4 feet higher at or above the 1/2 wave for 20m, I have about 4 -6s points higher on 15 - 10m over the wire dipole, did I say how much improved the S/N is?, and looks like a TV antenna....

Not really sure what the point of your response was? AND just realized I spent 10 minutes of my life typing this out... !

Anyway... Will post some pics later on..





Wanted give you all an update -  I finished up the tuning... Raised it to about 33 feet ag.  I needed to lengthen on 20, 17 and 15 meters tuning rods from default settings.  It was relatively easy since each band didnt have much of an effect on the other bands... All prescribed bands get a 1:1 - 1:5 match with a tuner.  At the center point of resonance it tunes (with no tuner) to a 1:1 - 1:3 on all bands.  On 20 meters its about 90 - 100k of below 2:1, on the other bands its just about the entire band you are below 2:1. 

The antenna is SIGNIFICANTLY quieter over my previous wire dipole and End Fed.  I would say 2S over my wire dipole and 2-4s points over my end fed.

 Generally the beams signal strength is 0 - 2s over my wire dipole and 0 - 3s over my end fed... Keep in mind its 2 - 3s quieter all the time over my other antennas... stations that I can not pull out on my end fed are crystal clear on the beam.  On the wire dipole I can copy them but with difficulty...


Example, this morning I could not make out a station in puerto rico on my end fed at all...  On my wire dipole i could hear him but could not copy him... On the beam I could copy him with no issues (he was 5/3!)... even though its a small difference over my wire dipole it was the difference of copying him or not... 

One other positive - Stage 1 of getting the XYL to accept any antenna on the roof is complete "Wow not that bad... looks like a TV antenna"  This is only stage 1...
Stage 2 comes in time for a bigger better antenna Muahahahah!  It really does look like a TV antenna!  Whats stage 2?  Not sure - I really want that hex beam, but I suspect that will need to be a stage 3 or 4... Maybe a full size 2 element beam (still has more gain over the mini beam)...  OR maybe just get the antenna higher (with a tripod on the roof or something)... time will tell..


So... All objectives met with little disappointment...   And as another positive, Tom was amazing on assisting on just about everything; he responded within 24 hours on all emails... Very high quality parts no quality issues at all!





Unless your end fed is at the same height, and is a dipole on the bands you are comparing it to your antenna, comparisons are well meaning, but meaningless.

I am not accusing you of being a shill, but this is almost a perfect Shill Thread !
The title of it lists the 2 major competitors to the antenna you say you purchased!
Thus, anyone considering the proven Cush Craft MA 5B or Mosley Mini 33 WARC will probably read this thread, and be made aware of that antenna you say you purchased.

Then, you say "And as another positive, Tom was amazing on assisting on just about everything; he responded within 24 hours on all emails... Very high quality parts no quality issues at all!"

LOL, I will BET he was  ::)
I am sure he is aware of this thread, at the very least, EH ?

Could you please take some pictures of your antenna installation, and also some pics of the End Fed Antenna in relation to your antenna. Try to show both antennas in the same picture, so we can see if there is any interaction taking place.


Any antenna cut to be 1/2 wave on 40 meters, will display slight gain, and very deep Nulls, when used on bands higher then 40 meters.
Thus, it is not possible to compare your new antenna with it on 10,15, and 20 meters.



Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: KA7NIQ on April 27, 2013, 05:19:30 PM
Thanks for stating the obvious....  thats why I included comparisons to a wire dipole at a similar height...


I did consider the other two until I stumbled upon the MQ - I was leaning towards the Mini 33 until I read about the difference between the loading systems ... then it was between the MA5B and the MQ... I believed both the MA5B and the MQ would have similar performance on 20 but better on 17 meters and higher, thus went with the MQ.

I doubt Tom was aware of the thread... Honestly another major reason I didnt go with the MA5B is due to poor past experience with MFJ.... So quality of the product and customer service in my opinion is 1/2 the value of any product.  I dont have time or patience to deal with issues and poor service.


The End Fed is about as high as the Antenna at the base (about 4 feet below it) and the top goes to about 40 feet up across my yard (its End Fed resonant on 40 and 20 as its a about a 1/2 wave on 40 and full wave on 20 with a tuning stub - No tuner needed for either band - about 200k bandwidth below 2:1 on 40 and less than 1.5 for entire 20).  I doubt there is an interaction, at least my analyzer tells me so - and nothing has changed since putting up the beam for the end fed.

I have since taken down the wire dipole as it didnt add any value other than clutter my yard... It was about 4 feet below the beam before I took it down perpendicular to the end fed... the dipole required a tuner similar to the mini beam.  Since the dipole and end fed I have had for about a year it was easy for me to compare between the 3.

I know you probably had hopped that the mini beam didnt work out... but for me I had pretty low expectations - In other works as good as my dipole, better than my end fed (because thats what I saw in general in comparison to my wire dipole)...  I find its slightly better than my dipole in receive, much better in noise and will probably never use my end fed for 20m now.. It pretty much meets what it advertises... I dont know what you expected?  Worse than the wire dipole?  If that was the case I would have ripped that sucker off my roof and bought a different antenna - probably the MA5B next then the Mini 33 if that didnt work out! 

BUT it did meet my expectations, I was able to get some directivity (albeit, not very much but .5 - 2s points helps on 20), nice nulls off the side which helps with the power lines north of me, I can get it now 4 feet higher at or above the 1/2 wave for 20m, I have about 4 -6s points higher on 15 - 10m over the wire dipole, did I say how much improved the S/N is?, and looks like a TV antenna....

Not really sure what the point of your response was? AND just realized I spent 10 minutes of my life typing this out... !

Anyway... Will post some pics later on..





Wanted give you all an update -  I finished up the tuning... Raised it to about 33 feet ag.  I needed to lengthen on 20, 17 and 15 meters tuning rods from default settings.  It was relatively easy since each band didnt have much of an effect on the other bands... All prescribed bands get a 1:1 - 1:5 match with a tuner.  At the center point of resonance it tunes (with no tuner) to a 1:1 - 1:3 on all bands.  On 20 meters its about 90 - 100k of below 2:1, on the other bands its just about the entire band you are below 2:1. 

The antenna is SIGNIFICANTLY quieter over my previous wire dipole and End Fed.  I would say 2S over my wire dipole and 2-4s points over my end fed.

 Generally the beams signal strength is 0 - 2s over my wire dipole and 0 - 3s over my end fed... Keep in mind its 2 - 3s quieter all the time over my other antennas... stations that I can not pull out on my end fed are crystal clear on the beam.  On the wire dipole I can copy them but with difficulty...


Example, this morning I could not make out a station in puerto rico on my end fed at all...  On my wire dipole i could hear him but could not copy him... On the beam I could copy him with no issues (he was 5/3!)... even though its a small difference over my wire dipole it was the difference of copying him or not... 

One other positive - Stage 1 of getting the XYL to accept any antenna on the roof is complete "Wow not that bad... looks like a TV antenna"  This is only stage 1...
Stage 2 comes in time for a bigger better antenna Muahahahah!  It really does look like a TV antenna!  Whats stage 2?  Not sure - I really want that hex beam, but I suspect that will need to be a stage 3 or 4... Maybe a full size 2 element beam (still has more gain over the mini beam)...  OR maybe just get the antenna higher (with a tripod on the roof or something)... time will tell..


So... All objectives met with little disappointment...   And as another positive, Tom was amazing on assisting on just about everything; he responded within 24 hours on all emails... Very high quality parts no quality issues at all!





Unless your end fed is at the same height, and is a dipole on the bands you are comparing it to your antenna, comparisons are well meaning, but meaningless.

I am not accusing you of being a shill, but this is almost a perfect Shill Thread !
The title of it lists the 2 major competitors to the antenna you say you purchased!
Thus, anyone considering the proven Cush Craft MA 5B or Mosley Mini 33 WARC will probably read this thread, and be made aware of that antenna you say you purchased.

Then, you say "And as another positive, Tom was amazing on assisting on just about everything; he responded within 24 hours on all emails... Very high quality parts no quality issues at all!"

LOL, I will BET he was  ::)
I am sure he is aware of this thread, at the very least, EH ?

Could you please take some pictures of your antenna installation, and also some pics of the End Fed Antenna in relation to your antenna. Try to show both antennas in the same picture, so we can see if there is any interaction taking place.


Any antenna cut to be 1/2 wave on 40 meters, will display slight gain, and very deep Nulls, when used on bands higher then 40 meters.
Thus, it is not possible to compare your new antenna with it on 10,15, and 20 meters.


You can not compare your antenna to a dipole at a similar height, unless your dipole was a multi band dipole, cut for all the bands your antenna covers.
I mean you CAN compare (it is a free country), however, unless you compare your antennas performance on let's say 15 meters, vs a full size 15 meter dipole, at or near the same height, you can not say it "performs as good as a dipole".




Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: KD2CJJ on April 27, 2013, 08:12:21 PM
It was... A fan dipole 10 - 20 meter...  I think I can...

Thanks for stating the obvious....  thats why I included comparisons to a wire dipole at a similar height...


I did consider the other two until I stumbled upon the MQ - I was leaning towards the Mini 33 until I read about the difference between the loading systems ... then it was between the MA5B and the MQ... I believed both the MA5B and the MQ would have similar performance on 20 but better on 17 meters and higher, thus went with the MQ.

I doubt Tom was aware of the thread... Honestly another major reason I didnt go with the MA5B is due to poor past experience with MFJ.... So quality of the product and customer service in my opinion is 1/2 the value of any product.  I dont have time or patience to deal with issues and poor service.


The End Fed is about as high as the Antenna at the base (about 4 feet below it) and the top goes to about 40 feet up across my yard (its End Fed resonant on 40 and 20 as its a about a 1/2 wave on 40 and full wave on 20 with a tuning stub - No tuner needed for either band - about 200k bandwidth below 2:1 on 40 and less than 1.5 for entire 20).  I doubt there is an interaction, at least my analyzer tells me so - and nothing has changed since putting up the beam for the end fed.

I have since taken down the wire dipole as it didnt add any value other than clutter my yard... It was about 4 feet below the beam before I took it down perpendicular to the end fed... the dipole required a tuner similar to the mini beam.  Since the dipole and end fed I have had for about a year it was easy for me to compare between the 3.

I know you probably had hopped that the mini beam didnt work out... but for me I had pretty low expectations - In other works as good as my dipole, better than my end fed (because thats what I saw in general in comparison to my wire dipole)...  I find its slightly better than my dipole in receive, much better in noise and will probably never use my end fed for 20m now.. It pretty much meets what it advertises... I dont know what you expected?  Worse than the wire dipole?  If that was the case I would have ripped that sucker off my roof and bought a different antenna - probably the MA5B next then the Mini 33 if that didnt work out! 

BUT it did meet my expectations, I was able to get some directivity (albeit, not very much but .5 - 2s points helps on 20), nice nulls off the side which helps with the power lines north of me, I can get it now 4 feet higher at or above the 1/2 wave for 20m, I have about 4 -6s points higher on 15 - 10m over the wire dipole, did I say how much improved the S/N is?, and looks like a TV antenna....

Not really sure what the point of your response was? AND just realized I spent 10 minutes of my life typing this out... !

Anyway... Will post some pics later on..





Wanted give you all an update -  I finished up the tuning... Raised it to about 33 feet ag.  I needed to lengthen on 20, 17 and 15 meters tuning rods from default settings.  It was relatively easy since each band didnt have much of an effect on the other bands... All prescribed bands get a 1:1 - 1:5 match with a tuner.  At the center point of resonance it tunes (with no tuner) to a 1:1 - 1:3 on all bands.  On 20 meters its about 90 - 100k of below 2:1, on the other bands its just about the entire band you are below 2:1. 

The antenna is SIGNIFICANTLY quieter over my previous wire dipole and End Fed.  I would say 2S over my wire dipole and 2-4s points over my end fed.

 Generally the beams signal strength is 0 - 2s over my wire dipole and 0 - 3s over my end fed... Keep in mind its 2 - 3s quieter all the time over my other antennas... stations that I can not pull out on my end fed are crystal clear on the beam.  On the wire dipole I can copy them but with difficulty...


Example, this morning I could not make out a station in puerto rico on my end fed at all...  On my wire dipole i could hear him but could not copy him... On the beam I could copy him with no issues (he was 5/3!)... even though its a small difference over my wire dipole it was the difference of copying him or not... 

One other positive - Stage 1 of getting the XYL to accept any antenna on the roof is complete "Wow not that bad... looks like a TV antenna"  This is only stage 1...
Stage 2 comes in time for a bigger better antenna Muahahahah!  It really does look like a TV antenna!  Whats stage 2?  Not sure - I really want that hex beam, but I suspect that will need to be a stage 3 or 4... Maybe a full size 2 element beam (still has more gain over the mini beam)...  OR maybe just get the antenna higher (with a tripod on the roof or something)... time will tell..


So... All objectives met with little disappointment...   And as another positive, Tom was amazing on assisting on just about everything; he responded within 24 hours on all emails... Very high quality parts no quality issues at all!





Unless your end fed is at the same height, and is a dipole on the bands you are comparing it to your antenna, comparisons are well meaning, but meaningless.

I am not accusing you of being a shill, but this is almost a perfect Shill Thread !
The title of it lists the 2 major competitors to the antenna you say you purchased!
Thus, anyone considering the proven Cush Craft MA 5B or Mosley Mini 33 WARC will probably read this thread, and be made aware of that antenna you say you purchased.

Then, you say "And as another positive, Tom was amazing on assisting on just about everything; he responded within 24 hours on all emails... Very high quality parts no quality issues at all!"

LOL, I will BET he was  ::)
I am sure he is aware of this thread, at the very least, EH ?

Could you please take some pictures of your antenna installation, and also some pics of the End Fed Antenna in relation to your antenna. Try to show both antennas in the same picture, so we can see if there is any interaction taking place.


Any antenna cut to be 1/2 wave on 40 meters, will display slight gain, and very deep Nulls, when used on bands higher then 40 meters.
Thus, it is not possible to compare your new antenna with it on 10,15, and 20 meters.


You can not compare your antenna to a dipole at a similar height, unless your dipole was a multi band dipole, cut for all the bands your antenna covers.
I mean you CAN compare (it is a free country), however, unless you compare your antennas performance on let's say 15 meters, vs a full size 15 meter dipole, at or near the same height, you can not say it "performs as good as a dipole".





Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: KB6HRT on April 28, 2013, 11:22:41 AM
Hi Mike,
 Looks like you have done some more work on your antenna system an got some good results or results very much the same as I have, think a HEX beam would be somewhat of an upgrade, because it is bigger, but does have a larger wind load and with the winds at my QTH in the spring would not sleep as deep knowing that. On my little setup an after having my MQ-26 come down from 40' when I first put it up on a New 50' pushup, went with universal 30' tower which was priceeee, but well worth it on my end for me, When my setup came down the only thing that happened to the MQ-26 was it bent one of tubes on the front of the antenna, was able to straighten it but did get another one from Tom when I changed out my home made 30' pushup to the tower, you should have seen my R*** pushup it looked spaghetti, that told me a lot about the MQ-26 for sure...........73s.......an enjoy your new antenna, I sure enjoy this one......73s.......KB6HRT


Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: KA7NIQ on April 28, 2013, 02:30:46 PM
It was... A fan dipole 10 - 20 meter...  I think I can...

Thanks for stating the obvious....  thats why I included comparisons to a wire dipole at a similar height...


I did consider the other two until I stumbled upon the MQ - I was leaning towards the Mini 33 until I read about the difference between the loading systems ... then it was between the MA5B and the MQ... I believed both the MA5B and the MQ would have similar performance on 20 but better on 17 meters and higher, thus went with the MQ.

I doubt Tom was aware of the thread... Honestly another major reason I didnt go with the MA5B is due to poor past experience with MFJ.... So quality of the product and customer service in my opinion is 1/2 the value of any product.  I dont have time or patience to deal with issues and poor service.


The End Fed is about as high as the Antenna at the base (about 4 feet below it) and the top goes to about 40 feet up across my yard (its End Fed resonant on 40 and 20 as its a about a 1/2 wave on 40 and full wave on 20 with a tuning stub - No tuner needed for either band - about 200k bandwidth below 2:1 on 40 and less than 1.5 for entire 20).  I doubt there is an interaction, at least my analyzer tells me so - and nothing has changed since putting up the beam for the end fed.

I have since taken down the wire dipole as it didnt add any value other than clutter my yard... It was about 4 feet below the beam before I took it down perpendicular to the end fed... the dipole required a tuner similar to the mini beam.  Since the dipole and end fed I have had for about a year it was easy for me to compare between the 3.

I know you probably had hopped that the mini beam didnt work out... but for me I had pretty low expectations - In other works as good as my dipole, better than my end fed (because thats what I saw in general in comparison to my wire dipole)...  I find its slightly better than my dipole in receive, much better in noise and will probably never use my end fed for 20m now.. It pretty much meets what it advertises... I dont know what you expected?  Worse than the wire dipole?  If that was the case I would have ripped that sucker off my roof and bought a different antenna - probably the MA5B next then the Mini 33 if that didnt work out! 

BUT it did meet my expectations, I was able to get some directivity (albeit, not very much but .5 - 2s points helps on 20), nice nulls off the side which helps with the power lines north of me, I can get it now 4 feet higher at or above the 1/2 wave for 20m, I have about 4 -6s points higher on 15 - 10m over the wire dipole, did I say how much improved the S/N is?, and looks like a TV antenna....

Not really sure what the point of your response was? AND just realized I spent 10 minutes of my life typing this out... !

Anyway... Will post some pics later on..





Wanted give you all an update -  I finished up the tuning... Raised it to about 33 feet ag.  I needed to lengthen on 20, 17 and 15 meters tuning rods from default settings.  It was relatively easy since each band didnt have much of an effect on the other bands... All prescribed bands get a 1:1 - 1:5 match with a tuner.  At the center point of resonance it tunes (with no tuner) to a 1:1 - 1:3 on all bands.  On 20 meters its about 90 - 100k of below 2:1, on the other bands its just about the entire band you are below 2:1. 

The antenna is SIGNIFICANTLY quieter over my previous wire dipole and End Fed.  I would say 2S over my wire dipole and 2-4s points over my end fed.

 Generally the beams signal strength is 0 - 2s over my wire dipole and 0 - 3s over my end fed... Keep in mind its 2 - 3s quieter all the time over my other antennas... stations that I can not pull out on my end fed are crystal clear on the beam.  On the wire dipole I can copy them but with difficulty...


Example, this morning I could not make out a station in puerto rico on my end fed at all...  On my wire dipole i could hear him but could not copy him... On the beam I could copy him with no issues (he was 5/3!)... even though its a small difference over my wire dipole it was the difference of copying him or not... 

One other positive - Stage 1 of getting the XYL to accept any antenna on the roof is complete "Wow not that bad... looks like a TV antenna"  This is only stage 1...
Stage 2 comes in time for a bigger better antenna Muahahahah!  It really does look like a TV antenna!  Whats stage 2?  Not sure - I really want that hex beam, but I suspect that will need to be a stage 3 or 4... Maybe a full size 2 element beam (still has more gain over the mini beam)...  OR maybe just get the antenna higher (with a tripod on the roof or something)... time will tell..


So... All objectives met with little disappointment...   And as another positive, Tom was amazing on assisting on just about everything; he responded within 24 hours on all emails... Very high quality parts no quality issues at all!





Unless your end fed is at the same height, and is a dipole on the bands you are comparing it to your antenna, comparisons are well meaning, but meaningless.

I am not accusing you of being a shill, but this is almost a perfect Shill Thread !
The title of it lists the 2 major competitors to the antenna you say you purchased!
Thus, anyone considering the proven Cush Craft MA 5B or Mosley Mini 33 WARC will probably read this thread, and be made aware of that antenna you say you purchased.

Then, you say "And as another positive, Tom was amazing on assisting on just about everything; he responded within 24 hours on all emails... Very high quality parts no quality issues at all!"

LOL, I will BET he was  ::)
I am sure he is aware of this thread, at the very least, EH ?

Could you please take some pictures of your antenna installation, and also some pics of the End Fed Antenna in relation to your antenna. Try to show both antennas in the same picture, so we can see if there is any interaction taking place.


Any antenna cut to be 1/2 wave on 40 meters, will display slight gain, and very deep Nulls, when used on bands higher then 40 meters.
Thus, it is not possible to compare your new antenna with it on 10,15, and 20 meters.


You can not compare your antenna to a dipole at a similar height, unless your dipole was a multi band dipole, cut for all the bands your antenna covers.
I mean you CAN compare (it is a free country), however, unless you compare your antennas performance on let's say 15 meters, vs a full size 15 meter dipole, at or near the same height, you can not say it "performs as good as a dipole".



No, you can't really compare, because your "Fan Dipole" required a tuner!
Suddenly your wire dipole is now being called a "fan dipole".
You can call it whatever you want, but I have news for you, Fan Dipoles do not REQUIRE Tuners, especially ones for 20 through 10 meters!

Here are your own words "I have since taken down the wire dipole as it didnt add any value other than clutter my yard... It was about 4 feet below the beam before I took it down perpendicular to the end fed... the dipole required a tuner similar to the mini beam.  Since the dipole and end fed I have had for about a year it was easy for me to compare between the 3."

You talk about having an MFJ Analyzer (you used on on the MW 26), yet why did you not try to tune your "fan dipole" with it, since you had it for a full year ?

And, if your "fan dipole" required a tuner, it was not a working Fan Dipole array, thus the supposed "comparison" you made to the MQ 26  is about as useful as balls on a priest.

No where, in pages of this thread, have you called your wire dipole a Fan Dipole array, until now!

What's up, with that  :o







Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: KD2CJJ on April 28, 2013, 04:25:01 PM
I would admit that I could have spent the time to tune the fan dipole but honestly it would have not made much difference.. Similar to my MQ26, tuning or not tuning....  As long as the antenna is resonant within the band I am in it wont make much of a difference hearing when tuned with a tuner...  Your grasping for straws to make a point which in my opinion is mute.. Unless your sitting here in front of my rig you cant say what works, what doesnt, how well it should, blah blah blah... I can only tell you what my experience is..  If you dont believe me then turn to another thread, hang out on 313, or what ever.   ::)



It was... A fan dipole 10 - 20 meter...  I think I can...

Thanks for stating the obvious....  thats why I included comparisons to a wire dipole at a similar height...


I did consider the other two until I stumbled upon the MQ - I was leaning towards the Mini 33 until I read about the difference between the loading systems ... then it was between the MA5B and the MQ... I believed both the MA5B and the MQ would have similar performance on 20 but better on 17 meters and higher, thus went with the MQ.

I doubt Tom was aware of the thread... Honestly another major reason I didnt go with the MA5B is due to poor past experience with MFJ.... So quality of the product and customer service in my opinion is 1/2 the value of any product.  I dont have time or patience to deal with issues and poor service.


The End Fed is about as high as the Antenna at the base (about 4 feet below it) and the top goes to about 40 feet up across my yard (its End Fed resonant on 40 and 20 as its a about a 1/2 wave on 40 and full wave on 20 with a tuning stub - No tuner needed for either band - about 200k bandwidth below 2:1 on 40 and less than 1.5 for entire 20).  I doubt there is an interaction, at least my analyzer tells me so - and nothing has changed since putting up the beam for the end fed.

I have since taken down the wire dipole as it didnt add any value other than clutter my yard... It was about 4 feet below the beam before I took it down perpendicular to the end fed... the dipole required a tuner similar to the mini beam.  Since the dipole and end fed I have had for about a year it was easy for me to compare between the 3.

I know you probably had hopped that the mini beam didnt work out... but for me I had pretty low expectations - In other works as good as my dipole, better than my end fed (because thats what I saw in general in comparison to my wire dipole)...  I find its slightly better than my dipole in receive, much better in noise and will probably never use my end fed for 20m now.. It pretty much meets what it advertises... I dont know what you expected?  Worse than the wire dipole?  If that was the case I would have ripped that sucker off my roof and bought a different antenna - probably the MA5B next then the Mini 33 if that didnt work out! 

BUT it did meet my expectations, I was able to get some directivity (albeit, not very much but .5 - 2s points helps on 20), nice nulls off the side which helps with the power lines north of me, I can get it now 4 feet higher at or above the 1/2 wave for 20m, I have about 4 -6s points higher on 15 - 10m over the wire dipole, did I say how much improved the S/N is?, and looks like a TV antenna....

Not really sure what the point of your response was? AND just realized I spent 10 minutes of my life typing this out... !

Anyway... Will post some pics later on..





Wanted give you all an update -  I finished up the tuning... Raised it to about 33 feet ag.  I needed to lengthen on 20, 17 and 15 meters tuning rods from default settings.  It was relatively easy since each band didnt have much of an effect on the other bands... All prescribed bands get a 1:1 - 1:5 match with a tuner.  At the center point of resonance it tunes (with no tuner) to a 1:1 - 1:3 on all bands.  On 20 meters its about 90 - 100k of below 2:1, on the other bands its just about the entire band you are below 2:1. 

The antenna is SIGNIFICANTLY quieter over my previous wire dipole and End Fed.  I would say 2S over my wire dipole and 2-4s points over my end fed.

 Generally the beams signal strength is 0 - 2s over my wire dipole and 0 - 3s over my end fed... Keep in mind its 2 - 3s quieter all the time over my other antennas... stations that I can not pull out on my end fed are crystal clear on the beam.  On the wire dipole I can copy them but with difficulty...


Example, this morning I could not make out a station in puerto rico on my end fed at all...  On my wire dipole i could hear him but could not copy him... On the beam I could copy him with no issues (he was 5/3!)... even though its a small difference over my wire dipole it was the difference of copying him or not... 

One other positive - Stage 1 of getting the XYL to accept any antenna on the roof is complete "Wow not that bad... looks like a TV antenna"  This is only stage 1...
Stage 2 comes in time for a bigger better antenna Muahahahah!  It really does look like a TV antenna!  Whats stage 2?  Not sure - I really want that hex beam, but I suspect that will need to be a stage 3 or 4... Maybe a full size 2 element beam (still has more gain over the mini beam)...  OR maybe just get the antenna higher (with a tripod on the roof or something)... time will tell..


So... All objectives met with little disappointment...   And as another positive, Tom was amazing on assisting on just about everything; he responded within 24 hours on all emails... Very high quality parts no quality issues at all!





Unless your end fed is at the same height, and is a dipole on the bands you are comparing it to your antenna, comparisons are well meaning, but meaningless.

I am not accusing you of being a shill, but this is almost a perfect Shill Thread !
The title of it lists the 2 major competitors to the antenna you say you purchased!
Thus, anyone considering the proven Cush Craft MA 5B or Mosley Mini 33 WARC will probably read this thread, and be made aware of that antenna you say you purchased.

Then, you say "And as another positive, Tom was amazing on assisting on just about everything; he responded within 24 hours on all emails... Very high quality parts no quality issues at all!"

LOL, I will BET he was  ::)
I am sure he is aware of this thread, at the very least, EH ?

Could you please take some pictures of your antenna installation, and also some pics of the End Fed Antenna in relation to your antenna. Try to show both antennas in the same picture, so we can see if there is any interaction taking place.


Any antenna cut to be 1/2 wave on 40 meters, will display slight gain, and very deep Nulls, when used on bands higher then 40 meters.
Thus, it is not possible to compare your new antenna with it on 10,15, and 20 meters.


You can not compare your antenna to a dipole at a similar height, unless your dipole was a multi band dipole, cut for all the bands your antenna covers.
I mean you CAN compare (it is a free country), however, unless you compare your antennas performance on let's say 15 meters, vs a full size 15 meter dipole, at or near the same height, you can not say it "performs as good as a dipole".



No, you can't really compare, because your "Fan Dipole" required a tuner!
Suddenly your wire dipole is now being called a "fan dipole".
You can call it whatever you want, but I have news for you, Fan Dipoles do not REQUIRE Tuners, especially ones for 20 through 10 meters!

Here are your own words "I have since taken down the wire dipole as it didnt add any value other than clutter my yard... It was about 4 feet below the beam before I took it down perpendicular to the end fed... the dipole required a tuner similar to the mini beam.  Since the dipole and end fed I have had for about a year it was easy for me to compare between the 3."

You talk about having an MFJ Analyzer (you used on on the MW 26), yet why did you not try to tune your "fan dipole" with it, since you had it for a full year ?

And, if your "fan dipole" required a tuner, it was not a working Fan Dipole array, thus the supposed "comparison" you made to the MQ 26  is about as useful as balls on a priest.

No where, in pages of this thread, have you called your wire dipole a Fan Dipole array, until now!

What's up, with that  :o








Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: VA2FSQ on April 28, 2013, 06:15:21 PM
Hey, anyone know w2irt?  The guy over there on the DX forum, on the honour role or close to it?  The guy with the huge beam on a 75 foot high tower?

Well, when I got started, he recommended the TGM antenna.  He has first hand experience with it and says it works well.

I've looked at all three of these antennas, and will probably go for the tgm. Did you know, they sell an add on boom and element to get it to three elements?

You know, no matter what anyone says, antennas can perform better than they think.  My lowly vertical, while it generates 10db more noise than my dipole, it also has signals 10db up on it.  I have worked everywhere with it, and in the last month added a ton from south asia. And just around the beginning of the month, one of the honour role guys told me I could not work the areas that I did. From what I heard, the TGM is way better.

Enjoy your antenna. I'll be getting one too.


Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: KA7NIQ on April 28, 2013, 08:49:32 PM
I would admit that I could have spent the time to tune the fan dipole but honestly it would have not made much difference.. Similar to my MQ26, tuning or not tuning....  As long as the antenna is resonant within the band I am in it wont make much of a difference hearing when tuned with a tuner...  Your grasping for straws to make a point which in my opinion is mute.. Unless your sitting here in front of my rig you cant say what works, what doesnt, how well it should, blah blah blah... I can only tell you what my experience is..  If you dont believe me then turn to another thread, hang out on 313, or what ever.   ::)



It was... A fan dipole 10 - 20 meter...  I think I can...

Thanks for stating the obvious....  thats why I included comparisons to a wire dipole at a similar height...


I did consider the other two until I stumbled upon the MQ - I was leaning towards the Mini 33 until I read about the difference between the loading systems ... then it was between the MA5B and the MQ... I believed both the MA5B and the MQ would have similar performance on 20 but better on 17 meters and higher, thus went with the MQ.

I doubt Tom was aware of the thread... Honestly another major reason I didnt go with the MA5B is due to poor past experience with MFJ.... So quality of the product and customer service in my opinion is 1/2 the value of any product.  I dont have time or patience to deal with issues and poor service.


The End Fed is about as high as the Antenna at the base (about 4 feet below it) and the top goes to about 40 feet up across my yard (its End Fed resonant on 40 and 20 as its a about a 1/2 wave on 40 and full wave on 20 with a tuning stub - No tuner needed for either band - about 200k bandwidth below 2:1 on 40 and less than 1.5 for entire 20).  I doubt there is an interaction, at least my analyzer tells me so - and nothing has changed since putting up the beam for the end fed.

I have since taken down the wire dipole as it didnt add any value other than clutter my yard... It was about 4 feet below the beam before I took it down perpendicular to the end fed... the dipole required a tuner similar to the mini beam.  Since the dipole and end fed I have had for about a year it was easy for me to compare between the 3.

I know you probably had hopped that the mini beam didnt work out... but for me I had pretty low expectations - In other works as good as my dipole, better than my end fed (because thats what I saw in general in comparison to my wire dipole)...  I find its slightly better than my dipole in receive, much better in noise and will probably never use my end fed for 20m now.. It pretty much meets what it advertises... I dont know what you expected?  Worse than the wire dipole?  If that was the case I would have ripped that sucker off my roof and bought a different antenna - probably the MA5B next then the Mini 33 if that didnt work out! 

BUT it did meet my expectations, I was able to get some directivity (albeit, not very much but .5 - 2s points helps on 20), nice nulls off the side which helps with the power lines north of me, I can get it now 4 feet higher at or above the 1/2 wave for 20m, I have about 4 -6s points higher on 15 - 10m over the wire dipole, did I say how much improved the S/N is?, and looks like a TV antenna....

Not really sure what the point of your response was? AND just realized I spent 10 minutes of my life typing this out... !

Anyway... Will post some pics later on..





Wanted give you all an update -  I finished up the tuning... Raised it to about 33 feet ag.  I needed to lengthen on 20, 17 and 15 meters tuning rods from default settings.  It was relatively easy since each band didnt have much of an effect on the other bands... All prescribed bands get a 1:1 - 1:5 match with a tuner.  At the center point of resonance it tunes (with no tuner) to a 1:1 - 1:3 on all bands.  On 20 meters its about 90 - 100k of below 2:1, on the other bands its just about the entire band you are below 2:1. 

The antenna is SIGNIFICANTLY quieter over my previous wire dipole and End Fed.  I would say 2S over my wire dipole and 2-4s points over my end fed.

 Generally the beams signal strength is 0 - 2s over my wire dipole and 0 - 3s over my end fed... Keep in mind its 2 - 3s quieter all the time over my other antennas... stations that I can not pull out on my end fed are crystal clear on the beam.  On the wire dipole I can copy them but with difficulty...


Example, this morning I could not make out a station in puerto rico on my end fed at all...  On my wire dipole i could hear him but could not copy him... On the beam I could copy him with no issues (he was 5/3!)... even though its a small difference over my wire dipole it was the difference of copying him or not... 

One other positive - Stage 1 of getting the XYL to accept any antenna on the roof is complete "Wow not that bad... looks like a TV antenna"  This is only stage 1...
Stage 2 comes in time for a bigger better antenna Muahahahah!  It really does look like a TV antenna!  Whats stage 2?  Not sure - I really want that hex beam, but I suspect that will need to be a stage 3 or 4... Maybe a full size 2 element beam (still has more gain over the mini beam)...  OR maybe just get the antenna higher (with a tripod on the roof or something)... time will tell..


So... All objectives met with little disappointment...   And as another positive, Tom was amazing on assisting on just about everything; he responded within 24 hours on all emails... Very high quality parts no quality issues at all!





Unless your end fed is at the same height, and is a dipole on the bands you are comparing it to your antenna, comparisons are well meaning, but meaningless.

I am not accusing you of being a shill, but this is almost a perfect Shill Thread !
The title of it lists the 2 major competitors to the antenna you say you purchased!
Thus, anyone considering the proven Cush Craft MA 5B or Mosley Mini 33 WARC will probably read this thread, and be made aware of that antenna you say you purchased.

Then, you say "And as another positive, Tom was amazing on assisting on just about everything; he responded within 24 hours on all emails... Very high quality parts no quality issues at all!"

LOL, I will BET he was  ::)
I am sure he is aware of this thread, at the very least, EH ?

Could you please take some pictures of your antenna installation, and also some pics of the End Fed Antenna in relation to your antenna. Try to show both antennas in the same picture, so we can see if there is any interaction taking place.


Any antenna cut to be 1/2 wave on 40 meters, will display slight gain, and very deep Nulls, when used on bands higher then 40 meters.
Thus, it is not possible to compare your new antenna with it on 10,15, and 20 meters.


You can not compare your antenna to a dipole at a similar height, unless your dipole was a multi band dipole, cut for all the bands your antenna covers.
I mean you CAN compare (it is a free country), however, unless you compare your antennas performance on let's say 15 meters, vs a full size 15 meter dipole, at or near the same height, you can not say it "performs as good as a dipole".



No, you can't really compare, because your "Fan Dipole" required a tuner!
Suddenly your wire dipole is now being called a "fan dipole".
You can call it whatever you want, but I have news for you, Fan Dipoles do not REQUIRE Tuners, especially ones for 20 through 10 meters!

Here are your own words "I have since taken down the wire dipole as it didnt add any value other than clutter my yard... It was about 4 feet below the beam before I took it down perpendicular to the end fed... the dipole required a tuner similar to the mini beam.  Since the dipole and end fed I have had for about a year it was easy for me to compare between the 3."

You talk about having an MFJ Analyzer (you used on on the MW 26), yet why did you not try to tune your "fan dipole" with it, since you had it for a full year ?

And, if your "fan dipole" required a tuner, it was not a working Fan Dipole array, thus the supposed "comparison" you made to the MQ 26  is about as useful as balls on a priest.

No where, in pages of this thread, have you called your wire dipole a Fan Dipole array, until now!

What's up, with that  :o






I remember very well your antenna, it was once called the Hybrid Products Company Mini Quad, before TGM bought out the design, and named it the MQ 26.
TGM has made some changes, that have made the tuning easier to do.
It was a nightmare to tune before, as one band greatly influenced the other.
Regardless of the changes TGM has made, or how "nice a guy" Tom is (whatever that has to do with anything), the laws of Physics can not be changed.
It is quite simply, much too small to have little, if any gain, over a dipole.

So, when you come here to EHAM, and start making claims of even 1 to 2 S Units difference (6 to 12 db) between your little TGM 26 POS Glorified Dummy Load Antenna, and a "reference dipole", please do not "freak out" when your claims are challenged.

It is NOT "personal" Mike  :)
Hell, the other day, someone said to me "Chris, your Kenwood TS 850 S WAS a great radio, in it's day, but it is a POS now, by today's standards"

I think your TGM MQ 26 is a POS, and little more then a glorified, expensive, rotating dummy load, with less gain then a dipole.

In fact, there is a review here on EHam where the Ham  had a TGM MQ 26, then put a Cobbweb antenna in it's place. The Cobbweb Antenna is an array of 1/2 wave dipoles that have been folded, into a square that is 1/8 wave per side.
Not surprisingly to me, this Ham reports vastly better performance for the Cobbweb Antenna, vs the TGM MQ 26.














Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: KD2CJJ on April 29, 2013, 07:54:48 AM
Well....  It is what it is... Works better than my fan dipole and my end fed, I guess those were/are worse dummy loads.  Maybe next year I will upgrade again to something else that finally wont be a dummy load..


Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: KA7NIQ on April 29, 2013, 08:08:25 AM
Well....  It is what it is... Works better than my fan dipole and my end fed, I guess those were/are worse dummy loads.  Maybe next year I will upgrade again to something else that finally wont be a dummy load..

Did you see that N6BT Q 52 antenna Mike ?
Tom Schiller, who was the designer behind all the Force 12 Antennas formed a new company, and is selling that small antenna.
I have a friend who is space challenged, and we were looking at that antenna, but the guy never answered any emails.
He finally put up a used Cush Craft R 5 vertical he bought for 100.00 at a local Ham Fest.

He is "tickled pink" with the Cush Craft R 5 Vertical, and talks all over on it.



Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: KD2CJJ on April 29, 2013, 08:50:18 AM
Yes - and he didnt answer my emails either.  Customer service or as you guys say "nice guy" syndrome is in my mind 25 -50% of the factor of buying from someone.

I have tried verticals at my QTH and the noise level just makes verticals unusable... Im just too close to the darn high power lines (15 meters for me actually completely useless right due to electrical power noise pulses - even with a dipole)...  Dipoles work far better for me due to this fact.

Honestly the MQ26 is not all that bad...

In the two weeks I have had the antenna countries/continents that I have hit with no issue on 20m :

Australia (my furthest contact so far)* - SSB
Austria - SSB
Finland* - SSB
Siberia* - SSB
Italy - SSB, Digital
Peru - Digital
Spain - SSB
France - SSB, Digital
Nigeria* - SSB
Cuba - Digial
Canada (Western Province)* - SSB
Puerto Rico - SSB
Everywhere in the US including Washington State - SSB

I know that with the right band conditions in a good sun cycle a light bulb could hit these countries but honestly that was in the last Sun cycle and this sun cycle you could NEVER hit these countries with a dummy load.  Could I have hit them with my fan dipole?    The ones with the * are new for me since the new antenna - I dont know.. Maybe, Probably, Maybe not...

With that said the antenna works though I do submit that its no 3 element beam or even a Hex Beam but I do believe it is slightly better than a dipole under most circumstances and maybe equal on many... But I surely dont believe that it is worse.. In other words it is NOT a dummy load (I have actually tried to just tune my feed-line since this discussion as you guys have successfully put doubt in my head as to the decision and I heard NOTHING JUST Electrical static !!!)... So I repeat it is NOT a dummy load and my feed line is NOT radiating!  I tested that theory too by disconnecting my RF ground!

You guys almost had me...!

Though I would love to upgrade already but not yet  ;D)


Well....  It is what it is... Works better than my fan dipole and my end fed, I guess those were/are worse dummy loads.  Maybe next year I will upgrade again to something else that finally wont be a dummy load..

Did you see that N6BT Q 52 antenna Mike ?
Tom Schiller, who was the designer behind all the Force 12 Antennas formed a new company, and is selling that small antenna.
I have a friend who is space challenged, and we were looking at that antenna, but the guy never answered any emails.
He finally put up a used Cush Craft R 5 vertical he bought for 100.00 at a local Ham Fest.

He is "tickled pink" with the Cush Craft R 5 Vertical, and talks all over on it.




Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: M0TTB on April 29, 2013, 10:57:09 AM


With that said the antenna works though I do submit that its no 3 element beam or even a Hex Beam but I do believe it is slightly better than a dipole under most circumstances and maybe equal on many.



Don't worry, it's an ok antenna.  Besides, on 10m and to a lesser extent 12m, it's very close to a hex beam. I came joint 2nd in CQ marathon ssb category in 2011 with 90% of the qso's on the little TGM. It will beat a Cobwebb most of the time above 17m,  I know, I had both up at the same time at the same height and A/B'ed.... a local to me has found the same, albeit he has the older TGM
Enjoy it!  ;D


Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: KA7NIQ on April 29, 2013, 04:42:39 PM
Speaking of feedline radiation, you DO have a choke on the TGM MQ 26, right ?
You know you can wind one out of coaxial cable, if you don't have one.
I bought an MFJ Current Sniffer, a cool little tool actually.
You can use it to make sure a vertical is seeing it's ground, or see if there is RF, on your feedline.


Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: KD2CJJ on April 29, 2013, 06:55:53 PM
Of course... I always use a current balun on my feed line due to how close my antenna is to my shack. 
Speaking of feedline radiation, you DO have a choke on the TGM MQ 26, right ?
You know you can wind one out of coaxial cable, if you don't have one.
I bought an MFJ Current Sniffer, a cool little tool actually.
You can use it to make sure a vertical is seeing it's ground, or see if there is RF, on your feedline.



Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: K2GWK on April 30, 2013, 10:13:59 AM
Give it a rest KA7NIQ. The guy is happy with his TGM antenna. Don't piss on him because you don't like the damn antenna. Grow up a bit huh!


Title: RE: Mosley Mini-33-WARC vs. Cushcraft MA5B - Any opinions from the experienced?
Post by: KA7NIQ on April 30, 2013, 05:13:59 PM
Of course... I always use a current balun on my feed line due to how close my antenna is to my shack. 
Speaking of feedline radiation, you DO have a choke on the TGM MQ 26, right ?
You know you can wind one out of coaxial cable, if you don't have one.
I bought an MFJ Current Sniffer, a cool little tool actually.
You can use it to make sure a vertical is seeing it's ground, or see if there is RF, on your feedline.

I once had an old Hy Gain TH 3 Tribander, the Balun looked bad, so I just threw it away, and used the antenna w/o one.
Then, I told an old timer what I did, and he gave me a new balun he had lying around for a Hy Gain Beam, for free!
I was amazed at the difference in rejection I got, just by the addition of the balun.