Call Search
     

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Strays
Survey Question

Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation

Resources
Calendar
Classifieds
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
About eHam.net

   Home   Help Search  
Pages: Prev 1 2 [3]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Zero Five 10 - 40 meter Ground Plane - Really?  (Read 12791 times)
N6EY
Member

Posts: 107


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #30 on: November 08, 2010, 07:56:13 PM »

I am particularly amused by the ZL "RF Engineer". 

It's crap-tacular.  An antenna isn't about what your transmitter "sees" - it's about what radiates!
Logged

________________________________
73,
Jason N6EY
________________________________
VO1FZ
Member

Posts: 71




Ignore
« Reply #31 on: November 09, 2010, 02:49:20 PM »

Well, I think I found the problem.

Continuity on the 40 meter coil was perfect.  I shortened the 20 meter element about 2.5 feet and it is perfectly resonant on 14.200, however nothing changed for 40 meters.  It is still showing 5:1 at 6.500 MHz.

I'm thinking the problem is that the tree is de-tuning the coil itself so the 40 meter portion of the experiment is a bust for now - although the internal tuner on my ft990 handles it fine.

I'll probably try a separate 40 meter radiator which also promises a 3/4 vertical resonance for 15 meters in addition to much broader resonance on 40.
Logged
VO1FZ
Member

Posts: 71




Ignore
« Reply #32 on: November 09, 2010, 06:26:02 PM »

When I wrote the last update, I had in mind to try the full 40 meter element in a few days or so.

Well, despite very cold rain tonight, I had to give it a try, so I spliced a second rope up the tree and pulled up a 32.5 foot radiator right beside the 20 meter one.  Above 20 feet, it's an inverted L.

Sometimes a plan comes together.  If you're happy to change the plan as necessary.
20 meter resonance changed just a fraction.
40 meters is 1:1 at 7.00 Mhz and rises gently from there.
15 meters is also in very good shape - under 3:1.

This one's a winner - the difference in signals on 40 is amazing.  I can only be subjective, but at least double in strength from the previous situation with the one radiator and the 20 meter coil.
Overall lessons - close trees detune loading coils something wicked.  And fan verticals work well.  Duh!
Logged
W6GF
Member

Posts: 163




Ignore
« Reply #33 on: November 12, 2010, 06:50:04 PM »

These forums are full of bad information, and worse, lies.  Ask the man that owns a ZEROFIVE antennas.  Yes, I own two different ZEROFIVE products and I have several other antennas to compare them to.  And I have a lot of the best and newest radios to check them with.  Even if the antenna did not work, I would give it a five strictly on the basis of the mechanical construction.  It is over kill at its best.  But, it does work as advertised and work well.  I run full legal limit into the antenna with no problems.  Check my eham review. I personally do not care if the antenna uses some secret antenna technology or a bunch of trained flees.  I am an EE with an advanced degree, worked in electronics all my life, had my own compnay until I sold it 10 years age and retired.  I get real upset when people poke fun at a product and do not own it or perhaps have never seen one

George, W6GF
Logged
KJ4RWH
Member

Posts: 81


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #34 on: November 13, 2010, 05:35:19 PM »

Quote
but this is RF, not logic and there is no phantom resistor sucking up the power either or it would have over heated within minutes! There is something going on inside it and its something probably very fundamental that has been over looked for years in RF.


Wow! Actually, there is a pyramid in there, and the connections to it are soldered using a special flux made from tanna leaves.

I'm using the same razor blade going on 13 years as a side benefit from this great product!!   Wink
Logged
K6JPA
Member

Posts: 13




Ignore
« Reply #35 on: December 04, 2010, 03:44:54 PM »

Sorry, but while I don't claim to be an antenna expert, I have to agree with George on this one. 

I have one and it works well for what it is.  No, it isn't the world's most efficient vertical, but given it's build strength and ease of installation, I feel you certainly could do much worse.  It isn't a beam after all, and I doubt anyone purchasing one doesn't realize that it has some limitations regarding loss.  Mine replaced a 4BTV that was in the same location, and I'm very satisfied with the results.

Even though there are more efficient verticals out there, I am very pleased with mine, and would purchase another should something happen to it.
Logged
KC0W
Member

Posts: 49




Ignore
« Reply #36 on: December 10, 2010, 05:45:46 PM »

Made 45,000+ QSO's in 2008 using a ZeroFive 43' vertical while DXing from St. Helena island as ZD7X. Thing worked GREAT but as they say, having a DX callsign gives one 10 dB in gain, hihi.

 From 10 meters to 40 the antenna played really well. Probably the BEST band for the antenna was 40 meters............As you can imagine, the antenna is a real dog on 80 & absolutely (as expected) unusable on 160.   


 Tom KC0W
Logged
KB6HRT
Member

Posts: 113




Ignore
« Reply #37 on: December 21, 2011, 07:43:52 PM »

I ordered a ZF10-40GP last week from Tom, after I install it an get it going will test it against a Cushcraft R8 that I have.
 Have a ZF 43' vertical that I use with a screwdriver mobile antenna in series with it, it works very well for what my needs are on my small lot.  If the 10-40 vertical is a marked differance in performance from the R8 I will post it down the road. What dealings I have had with Tom A9KW have always good, he is a man of his word. Smiley
Logged
VE7RF
Member

Posts: 212




Ignore
« Reply #38 on: December 22, 2011, 05:54:30 AM »

These forums are full of bad information, and worse, lies.  Ask the man that owns a ZEROFIVE antennas.  Yes, I own two different ZEROFIVE products and I have several other antennas to compare them to.  And I have a lot of the best and newest radios to check them with.  Even if the antenna did not work, I would give it a five strictly on the basis of the mechanical construction.  It is over kill at its best.  But, it does work as advertised and work well.  I run full legal limit into the antenna with no problems.  Check my eham review. I personally do not care if the antenna uses some secret antenna technology or a bunch of trained flees.  I am an EE with an advanced degree, worked in electronics all my life, had my own compnay until I sold it 10 years age and retired.  I get real upset when people poke fun at a product and do not own it or perhaps have never seen one

## 8' long radials ?  xfmr at the base?  Why 100' min of coax?     Why does the tuner have to be in the shack, why not an auto tuner at the base of the ant?   It would take all of 1-2 hrs to take some field strength readings in a few directions..and repeat for all bands. The best and newest radios  won't tell you much, except that from S1  to S6 = 6db.  You really need to A-B this ant  with some type of real world reference.....like say  a 33' tall vertical, with 35 x 1/4 wave radials below it..and compare the 2 x ants...just on 40M.   Then use a stepped attenuator and then it's easy to get a db difference between em.

Later... Jim  VE7RF

George, W6GF
Logged
VE7RF
Member

Posts: 212




Ignore
« Reply #39 on: December 22, 2011, 06:04:13 AM »

I am particularly amused by the ZL "RF Engineer". 

It's crap-tacular.  An antenna isn't about what your transmitter "sees" - it's about what radiates!

##  Agreed. That ZL engineer takes the cake. You guys just gotta read his drivel, deluxe.   It's the BEST entertainment in a long while.  E-ham just cracks me right up.   Mr ZL eng  should get togehter with mr EE from a few postings previous... and both of em should go back to their respective universities.....and ask for their money back.

##  I can't believe after QST did that expose years ago and x-rayed the maxcom box...and found a dummy pc board in there..plus a 50 ohm resistor [ which was probably either a  wire wound  or a "non inductive wire wound" ]   and folks still  bought the damned thing !   This ZL fella  spent HUGE $$ on his..since it had to be shipped to him.

##  I love it when folks rate ants at "5 kw" etc.  Bring it on over, we will stick the YC-156 onto it..then light it up like a roman candle.


## has anybody modelled the zero 5 on EZNEC Huh


Later...Jim  VE7RF
Logged
KF7DS
Member

Posts: 191




Ignore
« Reply #40 on: December 22, 2011, 12:25:12 PM »

Asking if someone has modeled this is a good question.

But, I would not be so cynical until one has actually witnessed the antenna in action, or at least politely asked the designer why it may work when most people think it should not.

It is interesting to me how so many experienced hams have written good things about this antenna, and so many others dis it based on theory. I do not doubt that the doubters may have a good reason, but sometimes things just do not work "by the book". A bit of open mindedness is probably a better way to approach the discussion, and would lead the discussion in a positive direction that can benefit most of us, rather than what most posters on this thread have contributed so far.

Personally, I would love it if Tom would participate in this discussion, but given the level of discourse I understand why he would not. That is a shame.

Don Singer
Portland, OR
KF7QZB
Logged
VE7RF
Member

Posts: 212




Ignore
« Reply #41 on: December 23, 2011, 08:04:38 AM »

Asking if someone has modeled this is a good question.

But, I would not be so cynical until one has actually witnessed the antenna in action, or at least politely asked the designer why it may work when most people think it should not.

It is interesting to me how so many experienced hams have written good things about this antenna, and so many others dis it based on theory. I do not doubt that the doubters may have a good reason, but sometimes things just do not work "by the book". A bit of open mindedness is probably a better way to approach the discussion, and would lead the discussion in a positive direction that can benefit most of us, rather than what most posters on this thread have contributed so far.

Personally, I would love it if Tom would participate in this discussion, but given the level of discourse I understand why he would not. That is a shame.

Don Singer
Portland, OR
KF7QZB

## Yes, at least show us the EZNEC results.  OK, why have their been NO QST reviews on ANY ZF products ??   What happened there ??    I can't find any..[ under Zero Five].  On a similar note, I see Stepir folks  make 2 x  verticals.  Now these things may well be the ticket. Then u end up with virtually flat swr all the time. The 18' version covers  20-6M continuous.  The 32' version covers 40-6m continuous.  They also have a 80m coil for the 32' one.  All version's rated at 3 kw key down.


##  BTW, in "SSB systems and circuits".. they show all the various configs for matching ship board verticals..like a 30' whip.  This is with the tuner right at the base of the vertical.   However, the step ir version looks a lot simpler to me.  Then again, the stepir version is probably not inexpensive either.

Later... Jim   VE7RF
Logged
WD4ELG
Member

Posts: 875




Ignore
« Reply #42 on: December 23, 2011, 06:13:30 PM »

I found some analysis of the ZF 43 footer...I referenced it in my blog.

http://wd4elg.blogspot.com/2009/09/much-maligned-and-commended-43-foot.html
Logged
HS0ZIB
Member

Posts: 424




Ignore
« Reply #43 on: December 23, 2011, 09:10:03 PM »

I own both a Zero-Five 43 feet vertical and a 6-40 GP antenna. I purchased them as a result of the 5/5 reports by Eham reviewers.

I must say that for both antennas, I have been very disappointed with their on-air performance.  The mechanical and build quality is excellent, but I could never get them to  perform correctly, with high SWRs and resonances in all the wrong places. I had the GP antenna mounted 25 feet up on my water tower with no close trees or buildings, but still couldn't get it to operate to spec.

I did contact Tom on several occasions and he provided useful advice, but I finally concluded that the problems must be down to my particular QTH or some other unknown factor - the 5/5 reviews could not all be wrong.  Perhaps I should award my ability to install amateur antennas a 0/5?

In any case, I now have a useful stock of aircraft aluminium tubing and several UNUNs - and I'm using the GP base mount as the baseplate for a 'compromise' 4-spreader hex beam that I'm constructing.

Simon
Logged
KF7DS
Member

Posts: 191




Ignore
« Reply #44 on: December 23, 2011, 10:21:47 PM »

Usefull feedback. Would like to see more:)

Don
KF7QZB
Logged
Pages: Prev 1 2 [3]   Go Up
  Print  
 
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!