EscapeVelocity

EscapeVelocity

I have confirmation that the top antenna number 1 there has aluminum elements.

The front ends look VERY similar....as do the Rotors and extras.

Antenna #1 has 5 directors and then the active UHF loop.
Antenna #2 has 4 directors and then the active UHF loop.


That leaves the back end VHF elements and reflectors to be pondered.

HTNut

It has aluminum elements, but what's the square material that's holding the elements? I could maybe see that wearing down after a few years if it's a cheap plastic? I dunno though?? Don't mind me, just commenting.

EscapeVelocity

Its probably a standard 1" square aluminum boom.

EscapeVelocity

Antenna #1 has just a basic folded dipole which looks to be round about VHF High territory in length.

Antenna #2 has 2 folded dipoles, 2 in funky designs, though the rear looks just to be a reflector.

If I had to guess, Antenna #2 is a more balanced antenna between UHF and VHF High.....with its VHF High sized reflector and ?2 VHF High sized dipoles? and one fewer UHF director.

Antenna #1 having a bit more gain on UHF than Antenna #2 with its 5 directors and UHF sized Curved Mesh Screen reflector..... but less on VHF High (with no VHF High sized reflector).....that is of course if the crazy 3 VHF High dipole arangement isnt actually making things worse on Antenna 1!

Im leaning towards getting Antenna #1, to test.

What say you?

Piggie

I can't see well enough to tell what is what. I noticed on these antenna a lot of the feed wires and matching sections are hidden so you can't even tell sometimes if a cover is cosmetic or a real "radome" to protect it from weather.

One some of the elements on these antennas you can tell their are passive easier than tell which ones might be active per what I said above.

I would be guessing on a lot of them and there are a lot of them. If I had multiple views it would help on some.

Good example. EV-ANT-108. The pull out UHF section is probably passive, but it might not be. I feel pretty sure the rear folded dipole element has to be active, probably.... How they match UHF energy is covered with plastic and could even be an element totally hidden.



This looks like a classic wideband design with lots of cute red rubber tips to give the impression such as racing strips do to a car.

I think you about pegged it, but again, guessing from a blurry blown up picture.

The directors do seem to be DC ground cut to the upper channel they wished for the antenna to cover.

I think but not sure, the upper and lower longer elements are the UHF feed elements in parallel, tuned to the middle or a little lower in the band. I think I can see wires from each one. The reflector appears to be circular from the angle I see in the picture with the classic lowest desired frequency to receive if this antenna were only UHF, but it's not.

The image is blocked but it looks like the folded dipole is continuous on top and broken on the bottom with feed wires. This would make sense anyway. It's really hard to tell. It probably has a little VHF gain from the reflector but not much or I would be surprised if it's much.

If it's stacked it's stacked really close. It follows more of the idea behind the XG91. More of a variation on the X-Directors like the Blake or the XG91.

Typical stacking distance for 600 Mhz for vertical stacking is about 20 inches (normally horizontal also, though the Blake is suggested at 44 inches probably more for multipath than gain).

__________________
The more I understand, the less I know.

EscapeVelocity

So the reflector on the Nitro isnt parabolic but circular and cut at the lower end of the UHF spectrum (I should have known that). I got that.

So which one should I get?

The Nitro
Antenna 1
or
Antenna 2

Which is the most interesting?

BTW, Id give you a thanks, which seems be the thing on this forum, but for some reason Thanks only shows up sporadically. Maybe I need to collect some Thanks to give it. LOL!

Piggie

Normally my first reaction to saying what to you comes out as an OINK!!

I think both #1 and #2 of those antennas both seem to be seeped in some traditional antenna design.

These Chinese Lava clones all seem like a step up (maybe and you are the man to compare them) from a lot of the current indoor antennas. They all look too delicate to me to put outside.

Some of them as Divx has shown are solutions for urban reception. I know he is a couple dozen miles from towers, but to me with that look down angle from the mountain in LA, it's not typical of so much of the country.

In other words in many towns his distance would be suburban to near fringe. In LA he is definitely urban at that distance.

So could these be the answer to people living in an apt? Or very urban environment and put in the attic?

The way the rotors appear to work on them, going either direction, not sure if they have stops could lead to a mess and I can't see the rotor lasting very long. But for a lot of people this would not even matter, as many towns have everything in one direction.

__________________
The more I understand, the less I know.

Piggie

The no name though bothers me saying this
26 inches wide and works on 45 MHz???????????????????????

That is a classic folded dipole and even a little short for Ch13 in the states.

One thing that drives me up the wall about all these antennas is they add the pre-amp gain as though the antenna has that much gain. It Does Not....
Nor do any of them seem to list noise figure of the amps.

This though as I said in another post in this thread preclude them from being the next generation of better urban indoor antennas. But most urban antennas cough up blood with that much amplifier gain.

Your tests will be darn interesting.

__________________
The more I understand, the less I know.

EscapeVelocity

Yeah the rotors are probably not very robust.....I can imagine plastic bearings in them (Hell even Channel Master put plastic bearings in there 9251 classic rotor apparently). And Ive been pondering the stops as well. Did Divx test it for this? Ill watch the video again, since I was doing other stuff the first time I watched it.