- 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: Vertical, Wire, Loop | Q-TEK PENETRATOR Help

Reviews Summary for Q-TEK PENETRATOR
Reviews: 13 Average rating: 1.3/5 MSRP: $305
Description: 1.8 to 30MHz HF Vertical, 15 feet high, no ATU or ground radials required, 200W PEP
Product is in production.
More info: http://
Email Subscription
You are not subscribed to this review.

My Subscriptions
Subscriptions Help

You can write your own review of the Q-TEK PENETRATOR.

<— Page 2 of 2

MW3MCD Rating: 0/5 Mar 31, 2002 11:29 Send this review to a friend
An Expensive  Time owned: 0 to 3 months
Having read the Advertising "Blurb" I decided that this Antenna was ok for my restricted HF location. What an expensive mistake."S" readings are many points down on the 1/2 Size G5RV. Stations at S5 on the G5RV cannot be heard on the Q-TEK.A 6 foot Earthing Rod has been used on the Q-TEK.Matching is ok , so is a Dummy Load.
EI0ARS Rating: 2/5 Mar 14, 2002 10:46 Send this review to a friend
Not as good as i hoped  Time owned: 6 to 12 months
The first thing i noticed about the penetrator is that it is of very poor construction. It is cheaply built and i would not have bought it if i had seen it before laying down my money. I thought it would be fibre glass but it wasn't it is aluminimum wrapped in a plastic coating.

It needs a good earth and will not work well without being properly grounded. There is a warning on the instructions that water pipes etc will not suffice.

On the air performance was ok not as good as expected it was a bit better than my long wire on the higher bands and not as good as the long wire on the lower bands. However the Penetrator cost a lot more than my long wire!! I would'nt buy one again and i will be replacing mine shortly.

In a nut shell it works ok, you will get out but you could do a lot better for your money.

M5MKW Rating: 3/5 Dec 30, 2001 17:10 Send this review to a friend
One or Two Problems  Time owned: 3 to 6 months
Impressions are the receive is excellent and the need for no ATU is correct as long as the earthing rod is in good condition. But the build quality is much to be desired. The central joint is the problem area and needed much work to strengthen. Any TX problems are not seen due to the non reactive loading at the bottom of the aerial even if an SWR meter is inline. A bit cheaply made with minimum components supplied and poor waterproofing. The performance is better the higher frequency range. The top section can be extended with wire to aid using it on top band. OK for use in a small, restrictive areas. It does what it said on the box but can be improved.
<— Page 2 of 2

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