eHam.net - Amateur Radio (Ham Radio) Community

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


Reviews Categories | Antennas: HF Directional: Yagi, quad, rotary dipole, LPD, etc | TGM Communications Hybrid Quad Help


Reviews Summary for TGM Communications Hybrid Quad
TGM Communications Hybrid Quad Reviews: 45 Average rating: 4.7/5 MSRP: $280.00
Description: Mini HF Beam 4-band/6-band
Product is in production.
More info: http://www3.sympatico.ca/tgmc/
Email Subscription
You are not subscribed to this review.

Subscribe!
My Subscriptions
Subscriptions Help

You can write your own review of the TGM Communications Hybrid Quad.

Page 1 of 5 —>

KG7TNT Rating: 4/5 Dec 26, 2012 23:19 Send this review to a friend
MQ-34SR Simply works !  Time owned: more than 12 months
I have the MQ-34SR :
in a nutshell ,
It has a small footprint / turning radius of just under 9 ft.
I have owned it for about 8 yrs .
At the time I figured I might as well get the best that I can for the money ;
It seemed like a lot , but I also figured the quality of the materials and the fact that The engineering was done for me , I just cant say enough good about it .
I use it almost exclusively on 15 & 20 Meters .
Problems ??? , the Spokes are rather delicate but that is to be expected , right ?
Had it mounted at about 30 ft ..... ON the roof ;
Closer to the roof of my home than was " Ideal " and it still
gave me great results !
Worked a station in the Marshal-Islands with only 100 watts
from the West coast ; Portland , Oregon ,USA
For the size ....... It's unbeatable !
Thanks to T.G.M.
 
VA3AQB Rating: 4/5 Nov 9, 2012 06:44 Send this review to a friend
Great on the higher Bands  Time owned: 6 to 12 months
Bought this for its compact size, works great!!
shines on 15m & 17m, SWR is fine on 10m,15,17m no tuner needed, 20m SWR is narrow.
Very easy to tune for each band, only real issue I have is the SWR freq shift when it rains, other people don't seem to have any issues.
On 10m is where this antenna works best, just using 100watts get great reports from Europe and Asia.
Tom at TGM is always there if you have a issues! Great service.
 
GD7JWR Rating: 5/5 Sep 9, 2011 14:52 Send this review to a friend
MQ26SR  Time owned: more than 12 months
The MQ-26SR i have owned for over four years, but it was taken down 12 months ago because of a change in qth,
since then i have been using a vertical and wire antennas including a g5rv which i think are a very noisy antenna, over the past two weeks the tower as been errected and the 26sr put back up, i can only say good things about this antenna, price is great, weight, looks and results are all great, no this is not a full size beam but i am sure you wont be dissapointed
 
2E1MPC Rating: 5/5 Oct 12, 2010 00:22 Send this review to a friend
tgm/mq1 hybrid  Time owned: 6 to 12 months
Having tested this aerial against ma5b , i found it to be equal in performance, and much easier on the eye , up at 15 meters above ground it hears stations my doublet doesnt on 20m , front to back rejection isnt great, but what do you expect from the design and size ,, I wouldnt swap mine for a gold pig ,,,, mike m0mpc
 
ZS1BOB Rating: 4/5 Apr 2, 2010 08:08 Send this review to a friend
TGM 36SQR  Time owned: more than 12 months
I bought the 36SR 5 yrs ago. I have a small property and my tower is situated at the rear corner of my home. A larger beam would have projected over the property of 2 neighbours. The TGM is ideal for my requirements.
I'm not going to expand on the merits & faults of this antenna, I accept that it is a compromise.
It does seem to work well enough.
I did notice that at 10m height it sometimes works equally well off the side. the tower has been upgraded to 12m, I expect that the side-effect will diminish. It does have Quad characteristics, after all.
The advice I would give to someone assembling it is to fill the spoke holes with a Silicone grease or an anti-seize compound ie. COPASLIP etc.
My TGM spent some time on the ground & was moved around through some shrubs by builders resulting in bent & broken spokes.
I found Tom to be quick to respond to e-mail queries and to be very helpful.
The adjustable spokes can be replaced with an aluminium welding rod of the same total length.
I used a brazing rod to replace a missing adjustable spoke on the reflector. I don't think that it will make a noticeable difference.
I did find that after 5 yrs, some of the screws holding the spokes needed to be retightened.
Thanks to the Silicone grease, the area of the spokes held by the screws were still shiny, despite corrosion on the outside.
I think that the screws loosen slightly due to temperature, expansion & contraction. The same happens to PL259's - I fill my plugs with Silicone grease and nip them tight with waterpump pliers, wipe them clean and tape them with vulcanizing tape, never had a loose plug or water egress in 10 yrs.
I would also use grease or anti-seize on the adjustable spokes during assembly, I find that after 5 yrs, some of the spokes have seized in the adjuster but still have electrical continuity.
I did consider replacing the spoke screws with stainless Allen cap screws, but here in South Africa, the American thread Allen Caps cost a fortune, so scrub that idea.
I found the boom to be a bit flexible & replaced it with a thicker-walled tube - I also mounted a short section of the same tube on the side (rear) of the boom to mount the reflector, thereby lining up the reflector with rest of the elements.
The reflector is usually slightly offset because it is mounted onto the rear of the boom & the elements are mounted under or above the boom.
Repositioning might lower the SWR slightly, and then might not - still works fine.Have just finished the service, will get it onto the tower soon, the bands are calling.










 
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 didnít 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 30í 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. Iím 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 Ė 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 canít 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 antennaís 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 antennaís 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 wonít 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.
 
Page 1 of 5 —>


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