Been testing this out for a couple of weeks and I am really impressed. I have been using it for POTA and general portable applications mainly hooked up to a 60' random wire in a sloper configuration with counterpoise. Easy and fast to deploy with really strong results.
The SEA 1612B is a good coupler, we used them on tow boats on the inland waterways... before cell & sat comm's made Marine SSB irrelevant. Give it a chance, you'll like it. 73 mike
Thank you. They've got some distinct advantages for when you don't have a lot of space or setting up portable and want the maximum number of bands available to you.
I have had my IC706MK2G and an SG-230 linked through AA4PB interface, the function is fully auto, just press the tune button on the radio and a 10W carrier is emitted. The radio will also re tune on sending if it detects a mismatch. I'm frustrated not be able to do all that with my newest FT-710! Very nice presentation of the URT-1.
Those remote antena tuners have lots of great applications. My Hawiian buddy uses a similar tuner very effectively on his 30-foot vertical for portable deployments. I use an LDG remote tuner on my 160-meter fullwave loop at the end of a 250 ft. coax. They are pretty sweet for minimizing coax losses. KZ9V
I suppose being a "universal" tuner provides some assurance to the ham who is uncertain as to what radio will be used down the road. I had a universal LDG tuner that required I press its tune button when tuning. Bottom line, I thought it was just this side of annoying. Not a show stopper but having a dedicated cable from the radio to the tuner is a small price to pay for point-and-shoot operating. I will sing the praises all day long however, for having remote tuners over internal and shack based tuners. I have MFJ remote tuners on each of my doublet antennas and a MAT on the long wire. So to anyone wondering if they should switch to a remote tuner, the answer is most [often] YES! I's still recommend using chokes in the coax feed line; tuners are not typically designed to choke common mode currents, and besides, an external choke can be as robust as you want it to be.
My LDG auto tuner I take out portable behaves in much the same way. I guess I'm used to them operating in that fashion. Bu to your second point, I totally agree. Remote tuners are game changers for long wires and non resonant antennas.
Just be careful when tightening the connection to the beehive connector as accidentally rotating the bolt may turn the lug on the inside of the enclosure and short it to the case. Unless that has been redesigned from the MAT 40 design.
MFJ sells some "autotuners." I have two of them. They use a "Bias-T" box to send 12v over the coax cable to the tuner. I think they work very well, even if they are a little boxy. They handle coax fed and wire antennas. I also an AT-100M from Antuner (around 100 bucks on Aliexpress). It takes a coax antenna input.only (think balun if you have a wire antenna). 125w input. Autotuner at antenna feedpoint or at radio. Self-contained lithium battery for up to 15hrs of use. USB-C connetor. Very compact. I got it for my portable work. The Chameleon antenna looks pretty good, but 499 Euros in Germany is a rather steep price.
It would depend on the bandwidth of the antenna. I don't know what algorithm the tuner uses, but I'd assume that the tuner goes through the memories first to find the right matches. If it comes on a match that's within a predetermined SWR limit, it goes with it. Presumably you could be up to several KHz off in frequency of the memory tune, but still close enough for a good match. That's the behavior I'd seen other auto tuners demonstrate, so I would assume this works in the same fashion.
Hi Michael, when using this tuner with your 891 for POTA are you finding it frustrating having to keep going into the menus to lower the power for each tune, and then having to increase the power again to operate? Power is not one of those setting that is easy to change on the 891.
I don't find it frustrating, here's why. I'll use a constant carrier mode, like RTTY, for the tune process. The FT-891 has separate power settings for the modes, 16-01 HF SSB Power is for sideband, and I keep that set at 50 watts. 16-03 HF Power is for CW/DATA modes and I keep that set at 20 watts. When I switch to RTTY, the rig automatically uses the lower HF Power level and leaves my higher SSB power level undisturbed. So there is no need to adjust power levels in the settings menu unless you are using a higher power level for your data/cw modes.
I don't think there is a minimum distance. Reading the instructions, you can use this tuner right at the transceiver, like a conventional auto tuner, if you wish.
@@Chameleon_Antenna So are most others, like the AH-4, and all of LDG. Ok, they use a control cable, but my original LDG Z11 which I still use with my FT-817 did not use a control cable. BTW, still using my Hybrid mini and accessories for portable ops. Jerry wa2omu
If you had some software on a computer that was watching for frequency changes, you could possibly automate the process of “pushing” the button and keying up the radio on the right mode.
I hear it's a misconception to think that reflected power is lost. If my understanding is correct, the true motive for getting a good match is to avoid high current/voltages at your transmitter output. Aside from that, whether your VSWR is low or high (assuming no other problems), the same amount of power will be delivered to your antenna, regardless. PS: I'm no engineer, it's just what I heard from another YT video, which seemed pretty credible. ua-cam.com/video/6P6UJuMATBY/v-deo.html
I'm not an engineer either, I've got a BA degree so I wouldn't have to take college math. But I believe the problem is that there is a misinterpretation of what SWR is and a poor understanding of how feed line impedance affects the antenna system. That video capitalizes on the poor understanding of impedance and instead of educating the role of feed line has in an antenna system, it instead tries to 'debunk' SWR. Standing Wave Ratio is the quantification of forward vs return power based on the impedance of your feed line. For example, a common dipole will have an impedance of 70 ohms at the feed point. The transceiver is expecting a 50 ohm impedance. The mismatch is characterized having an SWR of 1.5:1. Our antenna is resonant, and the load is purely resistive, yet we have an slight inductance on the coaxial feed line. But with a purely resistive load, all power is being delivered to the antenna regardless of the SWR. (If I were to feed my dipole with 75 ohm RG-11 coax, I would have a perfect 1:1 SWR at the transmitter). Now, take for example a non resonant antenna, like a long wire. This piece of wire is not resonant on any frequency on any amateur HF band. The impedance at the feed point can be anywhere from 400 - 900 ohms. (400 ohms is 8:1 SWR). All power that can be delivered to the antenna will be radiated. But the impedance mismatch of a 50 ohm feed line will result in a high SWR. Because a big impedance mismatch on the feed line will cause any number of things to happen: power fold back at the transceiver, losses due to resistive heating of the 50 ohm coax, and potentially transceiver destruction due to high current/voltage (Ohms law). We tend to characterize this mismatch as high SWR and there-in lies the confusion (and creation of the aforementioned mostly accurate video). Because, yes, the power is still there. Reflected power is not lost power, but it's doing things we don't want to happen. Back in the old days they would feed non resonant antennas with 600 ohm line (which results in a much more manageable SWR) and use the final loading of the tube finals to eliminate any capacitance at the transmitter. On a practical level, we want to keep the transmitter happy. That means presenting to it a 50 ohm impedance match. We do that in one of few ways. Using an antenna that's close to 50 ohms at the feed point (by using a resonant antenna or feed point transformer), using a tuner at the transmitter, or using a tuner at the feed point. The closer we can get to 50 ohms, the better the impedance match, the less the SWR. (again SWR isn't the culprit, it's just a characterization of the mismatch). I'm not sure if this totally answers your question, but it does illustrate the bigger picture of the role of feedline impedance in an antenna system.
@@KB9VBRAntennas Thanks for your answer! Based on the very small understanding I have, it seems like Mark The Florida Man (referenced video) and you (based on your response) are not in contradiction and essentially saying the same thing: - You both seem to agree that reflected power is not lost - You both seem to agree on the fact that a high VSWR can damage your radio, or have adverse side effects (like heating) I'm not exactly sure if there are any points you disagree on. Maybe your point is that we conflate VSWR and impedance mismatch, when they might be 2 different things? (I don't know if that's the case, but in any case, there does seem to be a strong relationship between the 2)
We do say similar things, with one exception. In order to hold onto his tenuous argument, he will not admit that impedance mismatch (characterized by high SWR) can damage your transceiver. There is no hard and fast rule on how much of a mismatch it will take. For the most part, anything below 2:1 is just fine for extended periods of time. Anything higher than 3:1 is ok for short time periods. The power fold back can protect the transceiver in those cases. But extended operation of a transmitter at high SWR will stress the components and result in premature failure. Plus that's wasted power that can be put to use with a more efficient impedance matching system.
@@KB9VBRAntennas "[...] he will not admit that impedance mismatch (characterized by high SWR) can damage your transceiver. " At 3:15 he does say that it is the impedance mismatch that heats up your finals. I any case, I found both of your videos helpful, I appreciate the response. I can't really debate much more as that's about as much as my understanding goes. :) --73
@KB9VBRAntennas florida man does indeed state its the impedance not the reflected power that causes radio to heat up ,it seems from the many videos I've watched on the subject that they all mis quoting him also
Learn about antennas. Ideally, the impedance at the input to the transmission line should be equal to the characteristic impedance of the line. Ideally, the output impedance is equal to the characteristic impedance of the line. If you have a 50 ohm line, voila, that's already matched. No tuner at the transmitter is needed. A remote tuner can supply a 50 ohm output impedance for the transmission line and transfer the power to the antenna. Pretty simple concept. Remote antenna tuners is the only real way to go when a tuner is needed. That is if you want maximum efficiency.
@@Pioneer936 What's your goal? Mine is maximum efficiency. Yours is apparently just to get something on the air. That's fine if you don't want every last S-unit. When I try to work someone and they just can't make out my call/report, and I have left some efficiency on the table, that's on me. I coulda shoulda had that one, but I didn't transmit as much power as I could have. In this hobby, you can do whatever you want and it will probably work. Making an antenna that works is like falling off a log. Making an antenna that is optimized is the next level. Cheers. N9XR
You do such beautiful, complete work, competently, that it leaves me gasping for air. True! Thank you for your generosity. Wonderful!
Been testing this out for a couple of weeks and I am really impressed. I have been using it for POTA and general portable applications mainly hooked up to a 60' random wire in a sloper configuration with counterpoise. Easy and fast to deploy with really strong results.
update: I have been experimenting with a new configuration, URT1 using a telescoping mast, loosely wrapped 40-foot wire and 6-8 counterpoise wires.
I was given a SEA 1612B marine ATU that had been used on a yacht. You have encouraged me to try it again with my verticals. VO1OK
The SEA 1612B is a good coupler, we used them on tow boats on the inland waterways... before cell & sat comm's made Marine SSB irrelevant.
Give it a chance, you'll like it. 73 mike
Nice review and explanation of the benefits of the URT1. Great to hear someone like non-resonant antennas as much as I do.
Thank you. They've got some distinct advantages for when you don't have a lot of space or setting up portable and want the maximum number of bands available to you.
I have had my IC706MK2G and an SG-230 linked through AA4PB interface, the function is fully auto, just press the tune button on the radio and a 10W carrier is emitted. The radio will also re tune on sending if it detects a mismatch. I'm frustrated not be able to do all that with my newest FT-710! Very nice presentation of the URT-1.
I always used an ah 4 tuner with great results. But is some what limited to icom. I like that this isnt reliant on one brand of radio
Those remote antena tuners have lots of great applications. My Hawiian buddy uses a similar tuner very effectively on his 30-foot vertical for portable deployments. I use an LDG remote tuner on my 160-meter fullwave loop at the end of a 250 ft. coax. They are pretty sweet for minimizing coax losses.
KZ9V
I suppose being a "universal" tuner provides some assurance to the ham who is uncertain as to what radio will be used down the road. I had a universal LDG tuner that required I press its tune button when tuning. Bottom line, I thought it was just this side of annoying. Not a show stopper but having a dedicated cable from the radio to the tuner is a small price to pay for point-and-shoot operating. I will sing the praises all day long however, for having remote tuners over internal and shack based tuners. I have MFJ remote tuners on each of my doublet antennas and a MAT on the long wire. So to anyone wondering if they should switch to a remote tuner, the answer is most [often] YES! I's still recommend using chokes in the coax feed line; tuners are not typically designed to choke common mode currents, and besides, an external choke can be as robust as you want it to be.
My LDG auto tuner I take out portable behaves in much the same way. I guess I'm used to them operating in that fashion. Bu to your second point, I totally agree. Remote tuners are game changers for long wires and non resonant antennas.
I had something similar, cost me an arm and a leg. But, this will be great for the home. It will match any wire!
Great explanation and review, gonna get one of these since my swr is 9 with my 75 foot coax run. Thanks
Thanks for the great review!
Just be careful when tightening the connection to the beehive connector as accidentally rotating the bolt may turn the lug on the inside of the enclosure and short it to the case. Unless that has been redesigned from the MAT 40 design.
That's good to know. Adding a lock washer may not be a bad idea to help mitigate over-tightening the connector.
Great information Michael , thanks for the video
Great video Mike !
Great review Michael.. I was curious how this tuner worked. I’m looking forward to seeing your future videos using it. Bill, KC2KNA
I've got some oddball ideas stewing in my head. We'll see if I can push the limits of the tuner.
AWSOME ... tnx for the Video Michael 💯👊
Great review. Thanks
Great video 👍 Thanks for sharing
Nice to see me on your map de VO1OK
It's great to get you in the log
MFJ sells some "autotuners." I have two of them. They use a "Bias-T" box to send 12v over the coax cable to the tuner. I think they work very well, even if they are a little boxy. They handle coax fed and wire antennas. I also an AT-100M from Antuner (around 100 bucks on Aliexpress). It takes a coax antenna input.only (think balun if you have a wire antenna). 125w input. Autotuner at antenna feedpoint or at radio. Self-contained lithium battery for up to 15hrs of use. USB-C connetor. Very compact. I got it for my portable work. The Chameleon antenna looks pretty good, but 499 Euros in Germany is a rather steep price.
We can’t do much than that! Germany has a 19% VAT.
@@Chameleon_Antenna even worse here in greece. 24%!
I always think of John Candy when I watch. Orange whip?
He was a comic genius
Great video!!!!
great video! What is the flag base and clamp you use? That looks handy!
The base is a heavy duty feather flag base. I've got links to it and the clamp in the video description.
@@KB9VBRAntennas looked right past it 🤦♂️Your service to ham radio is greatly appreciated!
de KI5DPA, thanks Michael! One question. 16,000 frequency memory. How precisely do we have to hit a frequency in memory to trigger the fast tune?
It would depend on the bandwidth of the antenna. I don't know what algorithm the tuner uses, but I'd assume that the tuner goes through the memories first to find the right matches. If it comes on a match that's within a predetermined SWR limit, it goes with it. Presumably you could be up to several KHz off in frequency of the memory tune, but still close enough for a good match. That's the behavior I'd seen other auto tuners demonstrate, so I would assume this works in the same fashion.
Hi Michael, when using this tuner with your 891 for POTA are you finding it frustrating having to keep going into the menus to lower the power for each tune, and then having to increase the power again to operate? Power is not one of those setting that is easy to change on the 891.
I don't find it frustrating, here's why. I'll use a constant carrier mode, like RTTY, for the tune process. The FT-891 has separate power settings for the modes, 16-01 HF SSB Power is for sideband, and I keep that set at 50 watts. 16-03 HF Power is for CW/DATA modes and I keep that set at 20 watts. When I switch to RTTY, the rig automatically uses the lower HF Power level and leaves my higher SSB power level undisturbed. So there is no need to adjust power levels in the settings menu unless you are using a higher power level for your data/cw modes.
@@KB9VBRAntennasI ordered one :)
Where would one install an RF Choke in such a system with a nonrez wire ???
@@tlebryk doesn’t matter remember the tuner is part of the antenna so at the feed point the 50ohm coax sees a 50ohm load.
What's the minimum distance the control head can be near the tuner box? I have very limited space outside.
I don't think there is a minimum distance. Reading the instructions, you can use this tuner right at the transceiver, like a conventional auto tuner, if you wish.
wear are the ham fest in wi
The Madison hamfest is in Stoughton, WI on Saturday April 13: w9hsy.org/hamfest-2024/
How soon to a fully auto tuner? Jerry wa2omu
Probably never because it’s independent from the radio used.
@@Chameleon_Antenna So are most others, like the AH-4, and all of LDG. Ok, they use a control cable, but my original LDG Z11 which I still use with my FT-817 did not use a control cable. BTW, still using my Hybrid mini and accessories for portable ops. Jerry wa2omu
If you had some software on a computer that was watching for frequency changes, you could possibly automate the process of “pushing” the button and keying up the radio on the right mode.
wish they made one for 1200 Watts
We're currently making a prototype to handle 1,500W!
Oh yeah
@@Chameleon_Antenna woo hoo! How can I get notified when it’s ready? 10-160 ?
I hear it's a misconception to think that reflected power is lost. If my understanding is correct, the true motive for getting a good match is to avoid high current/voltages at your transmitter output. Aside from that, whether your VSWR is low or high (assuming no other problems), the same amount of power will be delivered to your antenna, regardless. PS: I'm no engineer, it's just what I heard from another YT video, which seemed pretty credible.
ua-cam.com/video/6P6UJuMATBY/v-deo.html
I'm not an engineer either, I've got a BA degree so I wouldn't have to take college math. But I believe the problem is that there is a misinterpretation of what SWR is and a poor understanding of how feed line impedance affects the antenna system. That video capitalizes on the poor understanding of impedance and instead of educating the role of feed line has in an antenna system, it instead tries to 'debunk' SWR.
Standing Wave Ratio is the quantification of forward vs return power based on the impedance of your feed line. For example, a common dipole will have an impedance of 70 ohms at the feed point. The transceiver is expecting a 50 ohm impedance. The mismatch is characterized having an SWR of 1.5:1. Our antenna is resonant, and the load is purely resistive, yet we have an slight inductance on the coaxial feed line. But with a purely resistive load, all power is being delivered to the antenna regardless of the SWR. (If I were to feed my dipole with 75 ohm RG-11 coax, I would have a perfect 1:1 SWR at the transmitter).
Now, take for example a non resonant antenna, like a long wire. This piece of wire is not resonant on any frequency on any amateur HF band. The impedance at the feed point can be anywhere from 400 - 900 ohms. (400 ohms is 8:1 SWR). All power that can be delivered to the antenna will be radiated. But the impedance mismatch of a 50 ohm feed line will result in a high SWR. Because a big impedance mismatch on the feed line will cause any number of things to happen: power fold back at the transceiver, losses due to resistive heating of the 50 ohm coax, and potentially transceiver destruction due to high current/voltage (Ohms law). We tend to characterize this mismatch as high SWR and there-in lies the confusion (and creation of the aforementioned mostly accurate video). Because, yes, the power is still there. Reflected power is not lost power, but it's doing things we don't want to happen.
Back in the old days they would feed non resonant antennas with 600 ohm line (which results in a much more manageable SWR) and use the final loading of the tube finals to eliminate any capacitance at the transmitter.
On a practical level, we want to keep the transmitter happy. That means presenting to it a 50 ohm impedance match. We do that in one of few ways. Using an antenna that's close to 50 ohms at the feed point (by using a resonant antenna or feed point transformer), using a tuner at the transmitter, or using a tuner at the feed point. The closer we can get to 50 ohms, the better the impedance match, the less the SWR. (again SWR isn't the culprit, it's just a characterization of the mismatch).
I'm not sure if this totally answers your question, but it does illustrate the bigger picture of the role of feedline impedance in an antenna system.
@@KB9VBRAntennas Thanks for your answer! Based on the very small understanding I have, it seems like Mark The Florida Man (referenced video) and you (based on your response) are not in contradiction and essentially saying the same thing:
- You both seem to agree that reflected power is not lost
- You both seem to agree on the fact that a high VSWR can damage your radio, or have adverse side effects (like heating)
I'm not exactly sure if there are any points you disagree on. Maybe your point is that we conflate VSWR and impedance mismatch, when they might be 2 different things? (I don't know if that's the case, but in any case, there does seem to be a strong relationship between the 2)
We do say similar things, with one exception. In order to hold onto his tenuous argument, he will not admit that impedance mismatch (characterized by high SWR) can damage your transceiver. There is no hard and fast rule on how much of a mismatch it will take. For the most part, anything below 2:1 is just fine for extended periods of time. Anything higher than 3:1 is ok for short time periods. The power fold back can protect the transceiver in those cases.
But extended operation of a transmitter at high SWR will stress the components and result in premature failure. Plus that's wasted power that can be put to use with a more efficient impedance matching system.
@@KB9VBRAntennas "[...] he will not admit that impedance mismatch (characterized by high SWR) can damage your transceiver. " At 3:15 he does say that it is the impedance mismatch that heats up your finals.
I any case, I found both of your videos helpful, I appreciate the response. I can't really debate much more as that's about as much as my understanding goes. :) --73
@KB9VBRAntennas florida man does indeed state its the impedance not the reflected power that causes radio to heat up ,it seems from the many videos I've watched on the subject that they all mis quoting him also
73, w3rrm
Learn about antennas. Ideally, the impedance at the input to the transmission line should be equal to the characteristic impedance of the line. Ideally, the output impedance is equal to the characteristic impedance of the line. If you have a 50 ohm line, voila, that's already matched. No tuner at the transmitter is needed. A remote tuner can supply a 50 ohm output impedance for the transmission line and transfer the power to the antenna.
Pretty simple concept. Remote antenna tuners is the only real way to go when a tuner is needed. That is if you want maximum efficiency.
Not always, a doublet works well with the tuner in shack
@@Pioneer936 What's your goal? Mine is maximum efficiency. Yours is apparently just to get something on the air. That's fine if you don't want every last S-unit. When I try to work someone and they just can't make out my call/report, and I have left some efficiency on the table, that's on me. I coulda shoulda had that one, but I didn't transmit as much power as I could have. In this hobby, you can do whatever you want and it will probably work. Making an antenna that works is like falling off a log. Making an antenna that is optimized is the next level. Cheers. N9XR
@@BusDriverRFI you obviously don't understand a doublet
@@Pioneer936 a doublet is a very effective vertically polarized antenna.
@BusDriverRFI any configuration it's efficient
Thanks for QSO Galih de YC2VOC
MAT 40 TUNER
No it's not - It's a totally different tuner because you can also use a SO-239 OUPUT to feed a BALUN or UNUN.
The similarity ends with the branding on the outer box. In the video I list the key differences between the URT-1 and the MAT 40.
@@Chameleon_Antenna I would like one of these for free!!😉😆😆