|
New to Ham Radio?
My Profile
Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Speak Out
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
|
|
You can
write your own review of the TGM Communications Hybrid Quad.
|
M1DPE
|
Rating: 3/5
|
Sep 19, 2009 05:29
|
Send this review to a friend
|
|
nothing heard
|
Time owned: 3 to 6 months
|
|
have had the mq-1 for 6 months but have not heard a lot with it so far it is at 30ft. but then the bands have not been that good so far.
|
|
VE2YMM
|
Rating: 5/5
|
Jul 15, 2009 19:34
|
Send this review to a friend
|
|
2nd Review. More information about this antenna
|
Time owned: more than 12 months
|
I own this antenna (MQ-24SR) since 1 year now, and I have some points to precise. I've done a lot of tests and compare with different other YAGI's antennas, and frankly speaking, for the size, this antenna is equivalent to others bigger quad 2 (or 3) elements antennas. Reception is better on the tuned bands than my very sensible dynamic loop (Wellbrook ALA1530S+), whatever the direction of this antenna is! In 20, 15 and 10 meters it is a great antenna, with a little bit shortest bandwidth, (normal for a compact antenna).
* The best results for me are for the 15 meters, low SWR (1.17:1) and good gain (22.10 dB @ 21.280MHz).
* On 20m., I Tuned my antenna for 14.150MHz (SWR 1.95:1) with 9.86dB
* And the 10m. (SWR @ 1.33:1) for 17.01dB.
* On 6 m., I've got some problems because the central frequency is tuned around 46MHz instead of 52MHz (50 to 54MHz). I use a small modification (Thanks to Tom) and add a trap (lambda/4) to improve the SWR, and results has been a little bit improved. Tests gives 3 curves with central frequencies at 45.850MHz (1.26:1 with large bandwidth), 50.350 (2.63:1 very short bandwidth) and 50.950 (1.43:1 very short bandwidth). Because I listen Often 50.125MHz, this modification is perfect for me ... but this antenna is not done to be tuned for the 6m.
Note all this tests has been done with 150 ft. of coax. LMR400 @ around 30 ft. from ground. Later, this antenna will be installed between 50 and 60 ft. from ground using a rotor.
Using a good tuner resolve of course all of this little imperfections... In General, this is a good antenna for a very compact size.
73 de Yves
ve2ymm.com
|
|
VA3VY
|
Rating: 2/5
|
Jul 6, 2009 17:52
|
Send this review to a friend
|
|
NOT IMPRESSED AT ALL
|
Time owned: more than 12 months
|
I too, am quite perplexed as WB4PAP was on all the high ratings this antenna has garnered.
It would seem that most reviewers have never experienced a full size directional antenna.
I have had the misfortune of moving from a large country acreage with multiple high towers, beams, delta loops ect., ect. to a small city type lot.
I decided to go with the TGM and a G5RV. 90% of the time the there is no noticeable difference between the G5RV and TGM on 10, 15 & 20M.
90% of the time it doesn't matter what direction the beam is pointing either, the signal is still the same.
In all farness to TGM, this antenna looks most like a TV antenna and that's why I bought it (but that is becoming a mute point now) so the neighbors would be none the wiser.
It also gives some performance on the WARC bands.
But knowing what I know now, and reading ALL the antenna reviews, I'm keeping my eye out for a small cubical quad or a hex beam and putting the TGM on eBay.
73's Rick
|
|
VE3TWM
|
Rating: 5/5
|
Jan 28, 2009 17:52
|
Send this review to a friend
|
|
A Solid Compact Antenna Choice
|
Time owned: more than 12 months
|
About 4 years ago I moved into the house I now live in. At my previous residence I had used first a Cushcraft R5 at 30 feet, then an Antennas and More G5RV installed as an inverted V with apex at 30 feet and the ends at 8 feet and 12 feet respectively. I made contacts with both antennas, but I wanted something more effective for the new place. The idea of having a directional HF antenna also appealed to me.
After reading many reviews on the various models available, I purchased the TGM MQ-24SR in the fall of 2004. While expensive, it had a small footprint which made it ideal for my mounting location (my tower is only 5 feet away from my property line). I stretched my budget to get the MQ-24SR; in retrospect I regret I was not able to spend the extra and get the model which also covers 17m and 12m.
The antenna took me about twelve hours to assemble, working a couple of hours a night after work for 6 nights. I know others have built theirs more quickly, but I intentionally took my time. The manual does need a serious overhaul. I found some of illustrations difficult to read.
To tune the antenna, I mounted the assembled antenna on a 5 foot mast inserted into a cast iron umbrella stand. Knowing that I would be using an automatic antenna tuner, I didn’t tune it too carefully. I was able to bring the resonant points inside the three bands without much effort.
Once tuned, I put it on top on a 30’ Delhi TV tower with a heavy duty Channel Master TV rotator. I used a DX Engineering DXE-BAL050-H05-P Balun. Once installed, the SWR did not change from my measurements on the ground
4 years later, the antenna is still up and intact. It has seen some fierce wind and ice, but as near as I can tell, has suffered no damage at all. The SWR remains very close to where it was the day the Mini-Quad was erected. I’m not surprised as there was no question when I built it that the materials were solid.
I will note here and now I am neither a contester nor a DXer. I am perhaps amongst the most casual of Hams. 99% of my time with the radio is spent listening to other operators when the bands are open. I will occasionally sit down for a few hours during a contest to log contacts via search and pounce. I use lower end radio gear; most of the contacts made with the TGM were made with an Icom IC-706 Mk IIG through an LDG Autotuner (at first an AT-11MP and more recently an AT-100Pro). The antenna is connected through approximately 50 feet of RG-8U cable. I do not use a station ground (based upon the opinions of 3 different tower installers that I have used over the years – all were of the opinion that a grounded system would be more likely to attract lightning than deter it).
Given the fact we have been at the low end of the solar cycle since the antenna went up, my only real observations are with regard to performance on the 20m band. I just have not been on the air often enough to spend significant time on the 15m and 10m bands while they have been open.
It is my impression that the TGM is a quieter antenna than either the R5 or the G5RV; while at the same time delivering higher signal strengths on receive. I have found the difference to be noticeable rather than dramatic. When I respond to CQs, I routinely have the other operator come back to me and it usually does not take very long to get through a pileup. Of course, there are times when I can’t get through the pile up or be heard by the other station. This antenna does allow me to make more contacts but it is not a magic bullet that works everything.
Initially my biggest disappointment with the Mini-Quad was its lack of directivity on 20m. I have also done testing on signals on both 15m and 10m and observed the same results. I can spin the antenna 360 degrees and the received signal strength may go up or down 2 or 3 S-Units as the direction changes but that's it. Last year I had another 10 foot section added to the tower to see if the directivity would be improved but to no avail. Yes, the antenna is up in the clear with no nearby obstructions. At this point I have actually disconnected the rotator control box and am using the antenna as an omni. I will add that I have come to terms with this and I am in no way unhappy with the antenna’s performance otherwise. I actually prefer not having to worry about whether I am missing something should the antenna be pointed in the wrong direction.
The last piece of information I will impart is an A-B receiving test I did with the TGM and a Par End-Fedz EF-20 last summer. The Par antenna was installed with the fed end at about 35 feet on the tower, sloping down to a 20 foot Jackite pole in the backyard. On two consecutive evenings I monitored more than 20 stations in both the US and Europe and found the signals were (in the vast majority of cases) within 1 or 2 S-Units of each other. In some instances signals received with the Par had the better signal strength and sometimes the TGM had the edge. It should be noted that the Par is designed for 20m and in the case of the TGM, 20m is expected to be its weakest band due to the antenna’s physical size. If your primary interest is in the 20m band, the Par may be a better (and much more cost effective) choice. Until the sunspots come back, I just won’t know about 15m and 10m.
I have written this in the hope that I can add to the knowledge base gathered on the TGM MQ-24SR. I am satisfied with its performance, its durability and its small size. I like having an antenna that can accommodate three bands with a single feedline that is resonant across most of the bands that it covers. In my case, it fits my needs.
|
|
VE2YMM
|
Rating: 5/5
|
Nov 29, 2008 17:07
|
Send this review to a friend
|
|
Easy to mount and great performances
|
Time owned: 0 to 3 months
|
Fantastic dipole ! I'm using the MQ-24SR model and didn't have big experience with this kind of antenna. I can say the performances are really impressive. I'm using it most of the time in 20m., and do DX nearly every day with Europe! I live in town (Montreal, Canada), so space is a little bit limited. Antenna is around 15m. (50 foot) from the ground, using a rotor.
Cons. Price is a little bit high and SWR a bit high in 6m.
|
|
N2QQF
|
Rating: 3/5
|
Apr 28, 2008 13:13
|
Send this review to a friend
|
|
Just OK (at best)
|
Time owned: more than 12 months
|
I reviewed this antenna previously and decided to write an honest review again after giving it some considerable thought and lessons learned. I had this antenna (MQ-36) up about 30-40 feet in the air and I had my G5RV and other wire dipoles located about 60+ feet in the air smoked which I may add smoked this antenna hands down. My G5RV and other dipoles was about a good (3-5) S-units better on every signal on everyband except for 10 & 6 meters where the MQ-36 performed at its best.
This is very much a compromise antenna and will not give you the performace normally found with a full sized beam. This antenna has alot of quirks with it such as required height as well as a few other issues but overall you are not going to get the perforomace of a full sized beam or half wave wire. Put two wires in the sky and have one in North / South direction and the other in a East / West fasion and it would be certainly alot cheaper than this price and i can assure you the wire at 50' will perform better. I would hate to have soemone else buy this beam and expect a miracle that isn't going to happen and spend alot of their hard earned money doing it. The antenna quality was very good and durable that is for sure.
A full sized beam isnt that much bigger but it is also alot less noticable than this antenna which sticks out quite a bit. The rear element is quite big and cumbersum. All I can say is take your time and spend your money wisely and remember a full size tribander will work great and isn't that much bigger. So before you throw alot of money into the beam take the time and think unless you have no choice in space. If this is the case you might want to try the MA5B by cushcraft. Again, I have no issues with the company as they seem responsive to questions but the prices they charge are a bit astronomical for what you are getting.
I am not the stereo typical cheap ham that doesnt spend money. I have spent lots of money on gear, most great and a few not so good items. I would hope you take my advise with some consideration in order to do your research. No one likes to admit they have garbage or bought something that isn't good so notice I am writing my review after it is gone.
|
|
HB9DSU
|
Rating: 5/5
|
Jul 8, 2007 03:11
|
Send this review to a friend
|
|
Follow-up review
|
Time owned: months
|
This is a follow-up to the review I published a few months back. The reason I am writing now is that I have recently had the chance of comparing the performance of the mini quad to the one of a trusted companion of many years - the Cushcraft R7000. I put the vertical back up again to get 30 and 40 meters coverage and - boy was I blown away!
The mini quad (roughly at the same height as the top of the vertical) shows CONSISTENTLY 1 to 2 S points of gain! I know - this in unscientific, but anybody who's ever done an A/B antenna comparison knows well what I'm talking about.
I do not honestly understand how such a small antenna can pack such a performance. If there is one Holy Grail of effectiveness, I believe I've found it.
Hope this is useful. 73 Pete HB9DSU
|
|
WB8ISG
|
Rating: 5/5
|
Jun 21, 2007 23:42
|
Send this review to a friend
|
|
Excellent antenna!
|
Time owned: 0 to 3 months
|
Since my "restricted covenant" is the XYL, I needed a small profile antenna. Since this one (MQ-26) looks like a TV antenna on steroids, it was acceptable--a full size beam, tower etc. was NOT.
The antenna arrived in a narrow long box--partially assembled and just a matter of repositioning items to get the majority together. The instructions are very sraightforward. The antenna is mounted on a fiberglas mast @40' via a chimney mount; an inverted "V" dipole is mounted lower on the same mast. The rotator is a heavy duty TV type and is very adequate for this antenna (and inexpensive on EBay). Performance is better than I expected--I'm quite critical, and having taught Physics and Astronomy at the local university, I tend to be very objective about wild performance claims. Since I run a lot of digital modes (PSK31, SSTV,etc.), you can actually see the difference in quality (less noise in SSTV images, very strong "waterfalls")with and without the beam, as well as very good directionality. There is no question I can pick up stations and work them better than with my dipole--New Zealand on 17M, most of Europe on 20m, etc. Where the signal may be unintelligble using the dipole, this beam will lift the signal enough to make an "impossible" station almost routine. Just yesterday while sending an SSTV pic to a US ham, an eastern Russian station broke in to tell me my signal was "5 and 8"! Unsolicited and the first time that has ever happened to me!
Remember, this is not a full size beam, but a great compromise. I'm very happy with this purchase, and Tom McKay (owner/manufacturer)is a pleasure to deal with (always cheerful and AVAILABLE). Don't hesitate to email me for more info--and I'd be glad to send you a few pics of my installation.
|
|
MW0JZE
|
Rating: 5/5
|
Nov 29, 2006 08:39
|
Send this review to a friend
|
|
Dont delay get yours TODAY!
|
Time owned: more than 12 months
|
Hi all,
Just been looking for some reviews on the Acom 1000 amp and thought I would also post my comments on my MQ 26 SR antenna. I have now had the beam up for 2 years and have 210 DXCC worked in this time (not enough time on radio due to starting my own business and moving house) from 20M up to 6M. Ok I have had a bit of help from my ranger 811H amp which helps a bit, but you still have to hear who you are talking to. The beam is up at 40 foot on a free standing tennamast over clear space with good take off all around, this also helps. I am so pleased I have just ordered the extra element to convert it to a MQ 36 SR to improve the ears on receive.
Have done quite a few tests with some local amateurs testing the directivity. At first I was disappointed but it was only 35 foot high to start but I found it was better at 40 foot, the swr was also improved by increasing the height. My tip to you if you are thinking about getting one of these is this, get it 36 to 40 foot above ground and in the clear, a few friends of mine have one of these on a lean to mast against the house and swr is altered when beaming over the house, this is also effecting the performance of the antenna. These friends are also that impressed that this doesn’t bother them but I am a bit of a fussy bugger!
Most of my contacts are on 20m, 17m, and 15m I have plenty of contacts on 12m, 10m and 6m but let’s not forget we are at the bottom of the cycle. In my log I have JA, VK, ZL, ZK1, K7C, 3Y0, CY9 and CY0 OK some are more exotic than other but you get the picture.
My final word is yes it is a compromise but a very good compromise, do not compare with a monobander or you will be disappointed, compare to any other multiband minibeam antenna and you will be impressed. Have a Carolina Windom 80 special up at 35 feet and it is deaf in comparison to the MG 26 SR! Have read lots of reviews on this antenna but not many people tell you how high it is set up etc, my advice again is 36 to 40 feet high and in the clear! This should also be applied to ALL antenna installations to get the best results, or a review is compromised.
|
|
MM0NDX
|
Rating: 5/5
|
Aug 20, 2006 09:35
|
Send this review to a friend
|
|
Excellent
|
Time owned: more than 12 months
|
Owned the MQ1 for approx 18 months. Was bought second hand for £100(pounds) and is probably the best 100 pounds i've spent!
I use a 5BTV vertical too and without doubt, the MQ1 outperforms the vertical on 14,21 and 28Mhz.
Examples of recent DX worked using the MQ1 (when the 5BTV couldn't even hear the stations!) were VP9 on 20m and 3B9FR on 10m.
During this period of minimal solar activity, i really am wondering just how good the antenna will perform when the sunspots are at max. Especially on 10m.
In truth i have nothing but good to say about the MQ1.
Here's a pic of the MQ1 at my QTH, just 30ft in the air:
http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b330/Dxer/PICT0059.jpg
|
|
If you have any questions, problems, or suggestions about Reviews,
please email your Reviews Manager.
|
|
|
|
|
