- 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 | T.G.M. Communications Six Band MQ-26 2 element "Hybrid Quad" bea Help

Reviews Summary for T.G.M. Communications Six Band MQ-26 2 element "Hybrid Quad" bea
T.G.M. Communications Six Band MQ-26 2 element Reviews: 30 Average rating: 4.5/5 MSRP: $369.95 US
Description: 6 Band Mini Beam hybrid "Quagi" Traps on the diamond quad reflector and traps also on dipole driven element.
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 T.G.M. Communications Six Band MQ-26 2 element "Hybrid Quad" bea.

<— Page 2 of 3 —>

M1REK Rating: 1/5 Apr 27, 2010 16:52 Send this review to a friend
Poor antenna  Time owned: more than 12 months
Replaced it with a cobwebb and could not believe the DX I was working. I have used the MQ 26 for 2 years and have been very disappointed when comparing it with my vertical or dipole. It is a very expensive aerial that returns poor results.
KE5WIQ Rating: 5/5 Aug 8, 2009 14:21 Send this review to a friend
Very Good Niche Antenna  Time owned: 3 to 6 months
I bought this antenna because of serious space restrictions on my property. See my QRZ for photos and comparisons to a rotatable dipole.

It works very well within its significant design compromises. It does show nominal gain, F/B, and side nulls over a dipole, but none of which are comparable to a full-size beam. As such, the advantages over dipole increase in frequency from 14 MHz; they do exist on 20M all the same.

I chose this over other mini-beams based on 6 bands on driven and reflector elements. To get around the bandwidth limitations I use ladder line with a balanced tuner. The reflector's efficacy varies by the frequency the active element is tuned, but advantage over the dipole is present over a much wider range than you'd expect. MMANA and EZNEC don't model these shrunken designs all that accurately, which explains part of the discrepancy between theory and experience with the beam.

So, I rate it a 5 based on its build quality - which you are paying for and the performance compared to my expectation, which was low. I expected it would be better than a dipole, but it is better than I thought it would be. I highly recommend it only if your situation is similar to mine. If you can get a beam with a bigger boom up, do that instead. Once I can get a tower and beams on another property, I will... but this is a good fit for this property and the neighbors don't mind.

Be sure to get it up at least 1/2 wavelength for 20M. A Channel Master telescoping mast does well guyed even in high winds.
KE4NU Rating: 5/5 Jul 7, 2009 10:03 Send this review to a friend
Great for the size  Time owned: more than 12 months
I've owned one for 9 years and worked over 200 countries with it. It is narrowed banded, but you have to remember it is a compromise antenna and don't expect full size performance (size does matter). Support is real good as I broke a nylon bushing during one move and had a new one in a week. It was my primary upper hf antenna for several years. It will work with a tv rotator but don't expect it to stay calibrated if you live in a windy area. It has survived 60+ mph winds here in Montana, along with ice and snow. I finally replaced it last year with a homebrew broadbanded hexbeam. Do I recommend the TGM? You betcha!
VA3VY Rating: 2/5 Jul 7, 2009 08:58 Send this review to a friend
NOT IMPRESSED AT ALL  Time owned: more than 12 months
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 it may be a better choice.
WB2SZR Rating: 5/5 Dec 14, 2008 11:23 Send this review to a friend
Really Works  Time owned: 0 to 3 months
After several years of using a multiband inverted V at 60 feet supported by a tree, found a 50 foot AB-577 Tower ( highly recommended) and mounted a MQ-26, expecting a modest improvement. Was I suprised, by the performance of the MQ-26. First off the noise level improved 2 S units on my FT-2000, that alone was worth its weight in gold. While the Front to Back is not great, but what was specified, signals seemed to be 2 S units better then the inverted in all directions. So while some may call this a compromise antenna, I will take the 2 S units reduction in noise level and 2 S Units increase in gain anytime. I realize that there is no way the Antenna can produce 8 db of gain over my inverted V from a theortical stand point, but all I can say is that it did and does. I strongly recommend this antenna.
NB2N Rating: 4/5 Dec 7, 2008 09:04 Send this review to a friend
Between OK and good  Time owned: more than 12 months
I used mine for about 2 years. It put out a good signal in the limited range where the SWR was acceptable. The SWR was affected when it rained. It is very well made. On receive it was not a particularly quiet antenna, owing to the fact that its front to back ratio was essentially 1:1. This was confirmed on several occasions using the 4U1UN beacon, which broadcasts 8 miles approx. west of my QTH. I replaced it with a Traffie hexbeam which is far quieter, and has a 16-20 db f/b ratio receiving 4U1UN - right on spec. If you absolutely do not have the room for anything else, then the TGM antenna is a reasonable choice and might be called a 4 or 5 considering its size - but I found it did not receive better than a dipole. I'd be curious to know if anyone has found a f/b ratio close to the manufacturers spec. In hindsight, I should have purchased the hexbeam to begin with, since I have sufficient room. I would score the TGM from OK to good, i.e., it a bit less than a 4.
WB8ISG Rating: 5/5 Jun 12, 2007 12:22 Send this review to a friend
an excellent antenna  Time owned: 0 to 3 months
Since my "restricted covenant" is the XYL, I needed a small profile antenna. Since this one 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.
M0TNX Rating: 5/5 Dec 31, 2006 04:02 Send this review to a friend
2 years (almost!) later..  Time owned: more than 12 months
Just taken the tower over due to high winds forecast here on the coast, NEVER touched this antenna in nearly two years, It has stood up to 60 MPH constant winds, 100 MPH gusts... All the hardware is slightly tarnished, but with a quick wire wool up, it returns to shiny!!!

I have worked with some larger antennas since purchasing this QUALITY MADE mini beam, and sure the directivity and gain are better, but for a small (80 feet front to back) lot, this antenna has been worth every penny/cent paid.

(this is for the MQ1 Mini Beam)
MW0JZE Rating: 5/5 Nov 29, 2006 08:49 Send this review to a friend
So good get 2 of them!  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 doesnít 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 letís 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.
G7USC Rating: 5/5 Nov 11, 2006 15:15 Send this review to a friend
Survived a 25 foot fall  Time owned: 0 to 3 months
Well I've had my MQ26SR about 2 months now. I'm quite impressed with it, espically as it just survived a mast failure. The mast failed and sheared about 5 foot from the top this evening which meant the MQ26SR fell about 20 - 25 foot to the ground along with a stub mast, colinear, rotator and five foot of mast. It made quite a bang !
The only damage to this antenna was a few bent spokes and the 20m driven spoke snaped where it connects to the antenna.
So the damage has been Absolutely minimal!
Proformance when up is quite qood for a 2 element beam, with quite a bit of directivity even on 20.
FB ratio is what I would expect but at least I can work stations off the back of the beam as well.
Not had much DX recently due to poor band conditions/pileups but certainly geting good solid reports out to 3-4000 miles.
Well now that the antenna is down I'm going to tune it properly for parts of the bands i'm interested in. So my Antenna analyer is going to be busy in the near future :)

Tom this beam is Excellant! Very good workmanship. Solidly made.


Gary G7USC
<— Page 2 of 3 —>

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