- Amateur Radio (Ham Radio) Community

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

Reviews Categories | Antennas: HF: Yagi, Quad, Rotary dipole, LPDA | Mosley MP 33 Help

Reviews Summary for Mosley MP 33
Reviews: 8 Average rating: 5.0/5 MSRP: $$558 11/2011
Description: A smaller lighter version of the TA 33, with a 12 foot boom and lighter coils on the reflector and director.
Product is in production.
More info:
Email Subscription
You are not subscribed to this review.

My Subscriptions
Subscriptions Help

You can write your own review of the Mosley MP 33.

K5AX Rating: 5/5 Jun 3, 2016 06:54 Send this review to a friend
For a 3 El Tribander its great.  Time owned: more than 12 months
I have an MP-33N on one tower at 62', and a TA-33M on another tower at 50'. The TA-33M (even though at 50') normally produces about half an S-Unit better signal than the MP-33N. Sometimes they are equal. Compared to my HF6V on 20-15-10M, there is no comparison. Both Tri-banders are heads and shoulders above the HF6V. The MP-33N has a 12' boom and the TA-33M has a 14' boom. Both, are however excellent tribanders. I had a TH-11DX up at 62' I put the TA-33M up on the 50' tower and was surprised that the TA-33M was equal and sometimes better than the TH-11DX on 10-15-20. So I replaced the TH-11DX with the MP-33N, and an A3WS stacked. Lighter and more reliable.
VK2FSTU Rating: 5/5 Nov 12, 2015 21:32 Send this review to a friend
Great antenna  Time owned: more than 12 months
I must say this, my first beam and I'm so happy with it's performance. It's been up for just over a year now, and performs as a good quality beam should.
KC2PUF Rating: 5/5 Jul 28, 2015 05:55 Send this review to a friend
Update after install  Time owned: 0 to 3 months
Wrote a small review on project up to install.
Now installed. Had a buckmaster ocf as my wire. worked well. But-bang-zoom-to-the-moon after plugging this beam in. Bandscope lit up with signals never before heard. Started working middle east, africa, yada yada yada. Nothing but big signal report. I do use amp. So far so good. Felt was a cost effective way to get into the beam game.
Only 35 feet up, not best location, but ya run what ya got.
swr was on the money btw
Will post again after the beam gets some time on it, as well as some weather, etc.
K2LGO Rating: 5/5 Jul 2, 2014 17:39 Send this review to a friend
GREAT BEAM  Time owned: more than 12 months
I had an MP-33 called the Tigarray (wrong spelling I know) but that's what Mosley called it in the early 70-s. I had mine at 60 feet, and was loving life, and 10-15 & 20 meters...It really played, and I got almost 20 years service out of it, and still have one or two of the traps down in the basement..
That was my DX phase, and I really got a lot of wallpaper with that antenna...
W6GEE Rating: 5/5 Jul 2, 2014 11:23 Send this review to a friend
Once deaf now I can hear again!!!  Time owned: 0 to 3 months
My opinions of the MP-33-N are based upon comparisons of vertical antennas I've used in the past. I haven't owned a beam since the late 60s when conditions weren't quite as challenging as they are now, and besides, I can't remember that long ago to make any comparisons that far back!

My most recent antenna before the MP-33 was a Butternut HF9 vertical which has been an excellent performer on 10-15-20m. In a side-by-side comparison of the MP-33 with my vertical, there's a distinct difference in gain especially with low-power modes such as PSK31. Sigs that were once buried in QRN now jump out on the waterfall. I'm also able to make sustained contacts with weak CW stations as well, whereas in the past, those QSOs would sink into the noise.

I mounted my MP-33-N on an 8' Glen Martin Tower on a second-story 25' high roof, with a 7' aluminum mast (.25" wall). Overall, my beam height is about 38' above ground and lots of free space around my town lot. At this height and tuned to CW specs, SWR is near flat on 10 and 15m, and 2:1 on 20m. Since my beam is only about 12' above a symetrically sloped roof, the antenna seems to show some theoretical coupling with the roof on the lowest band (20m) as discussed in numerous articles.

Other than the "over promise under deliver" production schedules of Mosely (and Glen Martin Towers), my jump from using vertical antennas to my new "compact" beam has produced OUTSTANDING results. I just hope this beam has the longevity that's been touted, because my roof mounting project was quite an adventure (joist bracing, boom lift rental, etc.), but well worth the effort! I just don't want to get back up on the roof for major fixes/adjustments any time soon.

My only negative comment for the MP-33-N is that the instructions seemed fairly abstract, so you might have to use some common sense assumptions to "fill in the blanks". Mosley's instructions were downright sketchy, with illustrations resembling 3rd-grade artwork! But then again, the critical pieces were color-coded, so the instructions weren't a big deal.
WW3ZZ Rating: 5/5 Jan 10, 2014 13:38 Send this review to a friend
Outstanding Antenna  Time owned: more than 12 months
I've owned my Mosley MP-33-N for more than 5 years. I run the legal limit into it on a fairly regular basis and NO issues. Always great reports and this antenna is durable and reliable. Since Mosley builds their antennas as they received the order it took two months to get it, but well worth the wait. MY previous antenna was a Mosley and it gave out with about 30 years of use. I bought it used around 1980. Another reason I purchased the MP-33-N is because it weighs only 21 pounds. Most Tri-banders weight around 30 to 35 pounds. It's been thru ice and wind storms here on the east Coast and is holding up great.
KE5OQV Rating: 5/5 Feb 1, 2013 21:25 Send this review to a friend
A great classic antenna  Time owned: 0 to 3 months
I now have joined the "big guns" with the installation of the MP-33-N Trap Master HF Beam antenna. This antenna replaced a Mosley Mini-33-A HF antenna that had been in service for 2 1/2 years and had made QSOs with over 200 countries.

The MP-33-N has a longer boom (12 feet vs 6 feet), longer elements (26 feet vs 19.5 feet) and can handle 2500 watts PEP. It is fairly lightweight, weighing only 8 pounds more than the mini-beam.

Assembly was easy and quick once all the sharp edges were removed by deburring. The antenna was mounted on top of my house using a Glen Martin roof tower. Observed SWR readings were within specifications even though the elevation of the antenna was only 40 feet.

The new antenna's performance has been simply amazing. Signal reports of 5x9 +10db from distant contacts halfway around the world are not unusual. Counties like Japan, previously heard faintly if at all now come thru 2 to 3 S-units or better. The high front-to-back ratio for all three bands is also readily apparent. As the beam antenna is rotated toward a contact, the signal seems to jump out of the noise level.

Last but not least, its classic look compliments the 1200+ watt signal from my Collins KWM-2 / 30S-1 station, a classic in its own right.
KQ0C Rating: 5/5 Nov 1, 2011 10:49 Send this review to a friend
Fine performance, handles 1500 watts  Time owned: 3 to 6 months
I am a real fan of hex beams having several. They are light, simple, small, neighbor friendly when painted black and give me essentially all the gain I need. But I had space for a larger antenna in a new QTH so I put up one Hex beam and a second MP 33. I use military surplus crank up towers and this was all the weight and windage I thought prudent. The two antennas are perhaps 150 feet apart at the same height and both on a cliff edge. On receive they perform very close to each other... but I have on occassion gotten as much as a 2 s-unit difference with the MP 33 beating the hex into Europe. That's more difference than there should be, but it is what I have had reported.

I just ran the MP 33 for CQWW SSB at 1500 watts for a whole weekend, without an issue. I was initially a bit concerned by the lighter duty coils on the reflector and director, but these seem to be up to the task.

If you have any questions, problems, or suggestions about Reviews, please email your Reviews Manager.