Call Search

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Friends Remembered
Survey Question

DX Cluster Spots

Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers

Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement

donate to eham
   Home   Help Search  
Pages: Prev 1 [2]   Go Down
Author Topic: Hustler Super Resonators  (Read 5898 times)

Posts: 5688

« Reply #15 on: February 07, 2010, 07:39:14 AM »

From the look of the older loading coil set, which are rather long in the tooth looking and have likely been out in the elements and on the mobile for some length of time, the comparison to the new coils and then deciding that you have a true empirical test is likely to be flawed. 

In other words, it could very well be that the Super coils, being brand new, are working better than your older coil set simply because the older set may be suffering from bad internal connections, problems due to overheating (you ran that amp through them for some time, right?) -- but you have no standard or control with which to do a safe comparison. 

That said, ham radio is a hobby. 

Have fun with it! 


Posts: 7718

« Reply #16 on: February 07, 2010, 10:33:50 AM »

We have an impass until better measurements are taken.

That the super resonators exhibit greater bandwidth yet the on-the-air testing says they produce greater field strength is contrary to physics.

I will run tests at my QTH in the coming week with 80 meter resonators. I have the RM80 and the RM80S, and both are new. Presented will be relative field strength measurements, input impedance, and VSWR bandwidth. Simulations will be performed to as a check of the measurements. A statistical analysis might be included.

I always match theory (mathematical analysis or simulation) against measurements at my engineering job. This is the way to ferret out bad measurements and/or bad theory. Most measurements performed for the first time (new to the practitioner) are 'bad' and often lead to the wrong engineering decision. Such a measurement and the practitioner can be replaced by a coin (flip it).

Posts: 10248


« Reply #17 on: February 07, 2010, 10:45:20 AM »

I agree with Clark on this issue. As I mentioned before, one of the major drawbacks to the Hustler coil array, is their propensity to collect moisture under the vinyl covering. I've seen a few where the corrosion was bad enough, you could see the bubbling under the vinyl. If you cut an old one apart, it's also evident that the end connections (a press-in rivet) isn't all that good in most cases.

Their other weak point is the fold over mast. I don't think I have ever seen one that wasn't floppy. Worse, they screw into the coil with about 5 turns. If you tighten them enough to hold them into place, you run the risk of loosening the press-fit ferrule.

My opinion is, they're passible, but they're not something one would want to use on a full-time mobile install.


Posts: 21764

« Reply #18 on: February 07, 2010, 03:14:38 PM »

FWIW, I've run 1 kW PEP on SSB into the standard Hustler resonators.

This was at a "home station" in 1988 when I lived a while in a rented condo and my "home" antenna was a Hustler 54" fold over mast with the 4-way bracket at the top to accommodate four resonators (three tilted, one straight up) at the same time.  I had a Henry 3K Mark III in the garage "shack" and put a kilowatt into the "standard" Hustlers many times.

I wouldn't "tune up" like that, but once tuned, I could switch to the Hustler, run a kW and nothing ever failed.

The main reason I didn't use the "Super" resonators was their weight!  They weigh probably triple what the standard ones do, and I didn't think the top bracket could support all that atop a 54" unguyed radiating mast.

My mast was attached using a 3/8-24 L-bracket screwed to a roof top air conditioning unit, with about 20 radials hanging off the bracket and laying on the roof of the condo.

Amazingly (condx were good, it was the peak of Cycle 22) I worked 186 DX entities on 10-12-15-17-20m with that setup in about six months.  It actually broke a few pileups.  :-)

Posts: 6

« Reply #19 on: February 09, 2010, 04:31:42 PM »

Hi Al,great site you have.ive read it fully a few times over since im 100% mobile and any problem i get,usually go there for advice.

i rarely tune below 40meters due to efficiency  factors and in the main.stick to 10,11,17 and 20.
ive ordered a used  mo-3 with 20m super res hustler(i know little about what either of these items supposed to do).but as it has not yet turned up(waiting for the check to clear) i decided to attach my 102inch steel whip and play around on 20m with this,tuned through my mfj versatune.......
what can i say.i was gob was awsome.using 35 watts( most of which would have been reflected/dissipatted i assume) i was easliy getting into pileups both stateside and ZL from G/M land lowest report being 5/5 albeit 600ft asl.(however this is the same location all my antennas are tested)

the question is this.have any of you done side by side comparisons of these hustler 20s next to  a 102inch tank whip.what were the results.
Also is the M0-3 an antenna in its own right,or simply a mast?

Posts: 10248


« Reply #20 on: February 09, 2010, 05:35:07 PM »

Yes, and no.

It really doesn't matter what you use for an antenna. There will always be at least a modicum of radiated power, even from a dummy load. Under the right conditions, you can make around the world contacts with one milliwatt ERP. It is when band conditions are terrible, that ERP (and other factors) come into play.

Part of the issue is the effective transfer of power from the source to the radiator, and back. That requires a good ground plane, and some form of matching for radiators under a 1/4 wave. If you know all of the factors involved, you don't have to do a side-by-side comparison to know what the answer will be. It's sort of like trying to force a quart of water into a pint jar. Most folks won't even try, because they know they can't.

As a side light; base loaded whips (auto coupler driving a CB whip for example), will be less efficient than the same whip with a load in the center. On average, the efficiency will about double, all else being equal. Hereto, you don't need to do any testing, as the theory suffices.

Lastly, you mentioned 40 meters, and you're correct. The ERP is fairly low compared to the same antenna resonated on say 20 meters. But... you can still make contact with just a few watts ERP when conditions allow you to.

Pages: Prev 1 [2]   Go Up
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!