Hi Gil! #2 material is made for creating filters / tuned circuits in the 10~40 MHz range, they are not adapted for HF broadband transformers (but they are in the 150~400 MHz). #43 is adapted for broadband transformers in the HF band. What you should have in mind is not only the impedance adaptation but also the efficiency. Do the test with a field strength meter : an unun based on #2 material radiates less than one made out of #43 material, all things equal otherwise.
Wonderful test .. a complete surprise to be honest with you (i told my self) T106-2 will win in 20 meter TX as its has a Narrower SWR responses around Band edges , However i wished to see more how both materials behave in Receiving some DX stations ... i am fully appreciate your time , efforts to do such a research and experiments hard to find in many Books and Magazines Thank U
If you are doing SSB QRP you will always do better with a resonant antenna. Radom wires are less efficient and poorer on receive. If you don't have the space for a half or quarter wave, a coil can help to reduce the length although this will start to introduce inefficiencies. The 9:1 and a wire does have the advantage of being always able to get a signal out albeit inefficiently pretty much anywhere, so there is a use case as a backup, potentially not even using an unun and just let the tuner match the wire (I have no information on whether the 9:1 plus tuner or just a tuner is more efficient).
my 1/2 wave verticals i use 49:1 with 140-43 (17m, 15m) swr is at 1:1 no need for tuner and work well for 40m,20m i use a 140-43 but as a 64:1 works best giving me good swr with no need for a tuner i have built some 9:1's but as yet not been able to test them
Interesting test Gil, experimenting with wires up in trees for an antenna is one of my favorite parts of the hobby. I use a 9:1 unun with somewhere around 58 feet of wire up about 40-45 feet in a tree in my back yard (no ground or counterpoise just 50 ft of RG8X) for my main antenna and basically the same for portable although I experiment with other antenna setups. It works quite well and tunes everywhere except for 160 meters using an LDG ATU but with the EMTECH I can tune in almost anything anywhere. I use a 9:1 built by Nelson Antennas that I bought on eBay so unfortunately I don't know what he uses for a core but I'm quite happy with this configuration only using 6 watts. I haven't used an RF choke yet but I'm curious now if I'd see any difference or not.
Radio Prepper Yes Gil it’s a lot of fun to experiment with wires and ununs so I think longer is better in some cases. If you are looking to tune up on most bands there are specific lengths you want to stay away from. The wavelengths on most bands or even multiples can cause issues when tuning up. Check this article on Hamuniverse, it’s interesting and has several wire lengths to try. Take care Gil. hamuniverse.com/randomwireantennalengths.html
Radio Prepper Hi Gil. Thanks for all you share with us! I also have Nelson Antennas 9:1 unun. I’m using appropriately 100 foot wire (didn’t measure) into a a tree about 50 or so feet up, running out my window about 7 feet off the ground, along with a 10 foot counterpoise. Only 6 foot coax to manual tuner, then coiled coax jumper from tuner to radio. Some bands internal tuner works. 80 and 160 needs external manual tuner. 40, 20, 17 and part of 6 works on internal. I only run 10 watts but have had great success. Several contacts to Europe. The wire was free, discarded antenna rotor control cable at a ham tailgate party. I had to make a jig to strip off sheath and unwind wire with a drill. Great wire and strong for its size! Very 73, de N4WLC Bill
Very informative! Thank you Gil! I'm hoping for a video about the best vertical(s) for a apartment situation, I will admit that's my living situation, so to be honest .. I'm asking for help 😉
@@RadioPrepper I know, that's why I asked ;-) I have a small loop, but I like to have a vertical. Anyway, thank you! If you come across a brilliant idea on this, I'd love to hear about it.
Good night Gil, a question I have with these antennas, I see that you use a tree to install the antenna, can or does it affect if the cable touches the branches, or can it touch, is there only a problem with metals? Thank you
Hello Gil. I bought a sotabeams wsprlite beacon last year and I decided to get a second one at the start of the lockdown and having two you can run them in sync into two antennas and get a direct comparison. I'm surprised at those results too though. I might have to replicate the test with my wsprlites on 20m and see how they compare to the other 20m antennas i'm testing
...and also, especially if you’re working portable (i.e. not limited in space), with EFHW you’re working with a RESONANT antenna , unlike a random wire. Thanks for your experiments, love your channel best 73!
Hi Vlad, that’s a very interesting concept, are you saying that one simple device could resolve the issues discussed for any random wire length? I would imagine losses due to heat are minimised. I’ve already over spent experimenting during lock down. Thanks for the heads up 👍🏻
@@mikes6844 Hi Mike! I guess device like MFJ16010 can help operate with random length wire (not resonant one). We can't use only 9 to 1 transformer without tuner, so I think it's better to use LC tuner specially designed for random wire antennas. In case of using 9:1 and automatic antenna tuner we have a kind of comfort, but loose efficiency. Last two years I use resonant end fed antenna - 20m wire with 64:1 transformer (PD7MAA) wich works on 40m, 20m and CB bands and have good results for local communications. I study using of random lenth antennas as quick deploying antennas for traveling and emergency when you can use 19m wire from 80 to 10m bands.
Very interesting Gil!! Great assembly, great analysis. Can the results also be expanded to a 49:1 or 64: 1 transformer? T106-2 works better too? 73 de PU5AMB
Always fun to experiment. Chud M1PUP QTH London Ps. I think we have different definitions when it comes to chick magnets, with or without ferrite core ;)
Gil My wife told me "please let him know I love the videos showing the precious beautiful nature and she enjoy it SO much" and by the way she is HAM too. (KM4ICQ) your videos are a JEWEL and very joyful to watch. Loving outdoor and camping a nice luxury. Thank you very much GIL beautiful country by the way
Thanks for another excellent presentation. I wonder if changes in propagation had any impact on the results. One could repeat the test with a local amateur operator and use ground wave propagation. Another option would be measurements taken with a field strength meter. It might be even more interesting to replace the antenna with a 450 ohm resistor and scan each device with a NanoVNA over the range 1.0 MHz to 30 MHz. The NanoVNA could be set up to display SWR and show the variation across the HF bands. You might see a significant difference between the two devices. This might be an interesting subject for a future video! One other consideration is that the optimum number of turns for each core may be different.
I work with an EFLW antenna for a number of years now, using a T200-2 UnUn. With no amplifier I get around much on the world (even on 80M). I think that's not bad for a 16 Mtr. wire @ 12 Mtr. high from Ground Level, sending from below sea level (I live in the Netherlands...). Maybe I'll put an EFHW antenna up, some day. Thanks for the fine video. 73 de PD0PSX
@@RadioPrepper a 49:1 UnUn would not work with a random wire antenna. Given about 650 Ohm in a random wire antenna, the 49:1 would bring it down 13 Ohms... The 49:1 UnUn will probably work with a End Fed Half Wave (which has about 2.5 kOhms) I'm planning to use a EFHW (such as the HyEndfed) some day...
Very rare to hear dx shooting on 80m anyways. 40m, 30m, 20m, 18m, 15m, and 12m are much more encouraging for dropping a cq and call, then proceeding to let them know you are proving out an emergency station assembly drill, with their cozy home base station and office chair's reception.
Gil, Appreciate your research and reporting. Value insights to be had. That said, I am tremendously surprised how the South of France resembles the climate of and topography of Southern California where I live. Maybe one day I will make the sojourn down there and see what it is like for reals! Adieu, William, k6whp
Belle vidéo Rèmy, j'aimerais faire une paire de dipôles pour 27mhz comment puis-je vous contacter pour des infos sur comment les faire avec le ft 140-43 ? merci Roby🙏
Gil have you tried your choke closer to your unun and then use a counterpoise. When I mean close I mean use a BNC to BNC male adaptor. BTW I learn a lot from your channel. Keep smiling and stay safe.
... great video.. I wonder what would happen if you glued the #43 core and the #2 core together, assuming they are the same physical size, and made an UnUn out of both...as you proved, it is well known that #2 shines 14 MHZ and above, whereas the 43 or even a 31 mix works better at the lower frequencies of 40 and 80... you have a NanoVNA so you could get an idea at home before heading to the hills for the test. Notice that the QRPGuys little POTA antennas for 40 and above use #2 material...their EFHW antennas which cover 80 use #43.
Hi I am a huge fan of 9:1 random wires , and also make my own . I use one about 20 meters long as my main base antenna in an inverted V . The swr on all bands does not need a tuner at all , ( I don't use 160m band) my worst swr is a 1.4 on 40m and 15m all other bands less than 1.2 swr . I also have a commercially made off center fed dipole that is supposed to need no tuner but no band is less than 2:1 swr and it is also much higher than the random wire and does not work anywhere near as well...... I tried an EFHW with a 49:1 and it was just terrible.... also brought online . I have to say my home built 9:1 unun antenna is awesome and performs great . Maybe it's my location , but I also have the same type antenna I take camping with my 5 watt sdr radio and it gets the same great swr and I usually make lots of contacts and get great reports. As proven with most antenna's your mileage may vary . Even though they call it a random wire antenna there are lengths of wire that work better than others , it's definitely worth experimenting with. Thanks for the great video's Gil I am a long time watcher 73
@@RadioPrepper It was a commercial made EFHW , I never measured it but would expect it to be a half wave length . It just never performed as advertised so I went to playing with the 9:1 random wire antenna's and had fantastic results and now I still use it today as my base antenna and for mobile opps and work the world on it....... a lot of france lately too.
Another great video Gil, loving the Minion SDR. Our of curiosity, what is the SWR on the antenna side of the tuner? It would be good to see the loss to see how much of your RF is actually making its way to the antenna. 100% agree with the 49 or 64 to 1 transformer on a better option.
Random wire 9 :1 unun is really a bad description for this antenna as the wire length is not really random and needs to be chosen so that their is no half wave length high impedance match. There are charts available on the internet of suitable lengths for this type of antenna. Great videos by the way.
@@RadioPrepper How about - Non resonent end fed wire antenna. I am not criticising your use of the name for this antenna it is quite commonly used to describe it. I watched a review of such an antenna on UA-cam recently where they cut down the length such that it ended up at half a wave length on one of the bands and consequently wouldn't tune up. They contacted the manufacturer who explained the issue. It was then retested with the supplied antenna length and they were quite happy with its performance. It's just that the name given suggests that it will work with any length antenna wire.
Your test is flawed, a random wire antenna is a non resonant antenna requiring the tuner to bring it to resonance, for this to happen efficiently the random wire requires a sufficient rf ground system not a short counterpoise, also any antenna requiring the use of a tuner requires a low loss feeder to minimize loss due to a higher attenuation from swr being in the line, if these requirements are implemented then you probably fine little noticeable difference in performance if any
Hi Gil - in the test, did I hear correct, you were using 43 ft of wire with the 49:1 ? That would explain why it didn't work well, it wasn't a half wavelength. Hey, I need that chick-magnet T-shirt, I must buy one 😂
Now Gil, we are not to be bamboozled! I'm beginning to watch.. and the UNUN on my right, your left, is clearly marked 'Z' and then 1:6. The Z ratio is 1:6. Oh, this being about 30 seconds into the video. I think you may have, uh, written upside down :)
I believe you said you had 8 meters of wire. This user ( ua-cam.com/video/9eaAFTo5IQY/v-deo.html ) used 29 feet of antenna and had feed line significantly longer than 16 ft. She got on 40m and was able to make a contact from Wisconsin to West Virginia. The Smokin Ape (ua-cam.com/video/9KPZO2-K76g/v-deo.html) was using 29.5 feet of antenna wire. I have ordered up my transformer materials and am going to make this and see what happens. Thanks for your videos. Maybe trying some different lengths of feed and counterpoise would be all it would take to give it another band.
You need to follow your dreams, and get back out on your boat, your story was, such a wonderful story, but now you are sidetracked. Time to change tracks, and do your ham radio on your boat.
Yes, quite often, people don't care about the underlying science about the material with which a transformer is made. Any transformer is good for a range of frequencies and not below or above. Then comes the properties like saturation, bulk resistivity, Curie temperature and so on that characterise the behavior of the transformer. Fundamental facts remain unaltered.
Excellent comparison - Thank you for sharing !
Hi Gil!
#2 material is made for creating filters / tuned circuits in the 10~40 MHz range, they are not adapted for HF broadband transformers (but they are in the 150~400 MHz).
#43 is adapted for broadband transformers in the HF band.
What you should have in mind is not only the impedance adaptation but also the efficiency. Do the test with a field strength meter : an unun based on #2 material radiates less than one made out of #43 material, all things equal otherwise.
Yep, I am building a field strength meter right now..
Wonderful test ..
a complete surprise
to be honest with you (i told my self) T106-2 will win in 20 meter TX as its has a Narrower SWR responses around Band edges , However i wished to see more how both materials behave in Receiving some DX stations ...
i am fully appreciate your time , efforts to do such a research and experiments hard to find in many Books and Magazines
Thank U
If you are doing SSB QRP you will always do better with a resonant antenna. Radom wires are less efficient and poorer on receive. If you don't have the space for a half or quarter wave, a coil can help to reduce the length although this will start to introduce inefficiencies. The 9:1 and a wire does have the advantage of being always able to get a signal out albeit inefficiently pretty much anywhere, so there is a use case as a backup, potentially not even using an unun and just let the tuner match the wire (I have no information on whether the 9:1 plus tuner or just a tuner is more efficient).
I guess the 9:1 is an assurance that the tuner will be able to tune the system. I'd take an EFHW any day over a random wire!
Thanks Gil, quite a surprise! cheers, Keith
Thanks, Gil. Interesting results!
Great video! Can you please say a bit more about the choke you used?
Thanks, it's a 31-materiel core with a few turns of coax..
my 1/2 wave verticals i use 49:1 with 140-43 (17m, 15m) swr is at 1:1 no need for tuner and work well for 40m,20m i use a 140-43 but as a 64:1 works best giving me good swr
with no need for a tuner i have built some 9:1's but as yet not been able to test them
Your locations are breathtaking
Interesting test Gil, experimenting with wires up in trees for an antenna is one of my favorite parts of the hobby. I use a 9:1 unun with somewhere around 58 feet of wire up about 40-45 feet in a tree in my back yard (no ground or counterpoise just 50 ft of RG8X) for my main antenna and basically the same for portable although I experiment with other antenna setups. It works quite well and tunes everywhere except for 160 meters using an LDG ATU but with the EMTECH I can tune in almost anything anywhere. I use a 9:1 built by Nelson Antennas that I bought on eBay so unfortunately I don't know what he uses for a core but I'm quite happy with this configuration only using 6 watts. I haven't used an RF choke yet but I'm curious now if I'd see any difference or not.
I should try a longer wire, thanks!
Radio Prepper Yes Gil it’s a lot of fun to experiment with wires and ununs so I think longer is better in some cases. If you are looking to tune up on most bands there are specific lengths you want to stay away from. The wavelengths on most bands or even multiples can cause issues when tuning up. Check this article on Hamuniverse, it’s interesting and has several wire lengths to try. Take care Gil.
hamuniverse.com/randomwireantennalengths.html
Radio Prepper Hi Gil. Thanks for all you share with us!
I also have Nelson Antennas 9:1 unun. I’m using appropriately 100 foot wire (didn’t measure) into a a tree about 50 or so feet up, running out my window about 7 feet off the ground, along with a 10 foot counterpoise. Only 6 foot coax to manual tuner, then coiled coax jumper from tuner to radio. Some bands internal tuner works. 80 and 160 needs external manual tuner. 40, 20, 17 and part of 6 works on internal.
I only run 10 watts but have had great success. Several contacts to Europe.
The wire was free, discarded antenna rotor control cable at a ham tailgate party. I had to make a jig to strip off sheath and unwind wire with a drill. Great wire and strong for its size!
Very 73, de N4WLC Bill
Gotta love repurposed junk! :-)
I really enjoy your channel. While I learn from almost anyone, I much prefer your empirical home brew approach to the hobby. Cheers!
Thanks Steve.
Which do you think is better for a 49:1 or a 64:1 EFHW?
49:1 for 20m and up, 64:1 for 20m and below..
EFHW ? NOOB here
Multi-tap with a choice. And always, always, including at least 75:1 or even better, 81:1.
@@judd_s5643 nah not a noob good questions 7 3
@@judd_s5643 End-Fed Half-Wave, a type of wire antenna.
Very informative! Thank you Gil! I'm hoping for a video about the best vertical(s) for a apartment situation, I will admit that's my living situation, so to be honest .. I'm asking for help 😉
That's a tough one. My magnetic loop has been a life saver...
@@RadioPrepper I know, that's why I asked ;-) I have a small loop, but I like to have a vertical. Anyway, thank you! If you come across a brilliant idea on this, I'd love to hear about it.
Good night Gil, a question I have with these antennas, I see that you use a tree to install the antenna, can or does it affect if the cable touches the branches, or can it touch, is there only a problem with metals? Thank you
Branches do not seem to cause any troubles..
Interesting field test Gil, thank you.
Hello Gil. Nice vid. Like always. Q: Which antenna tuner do you use?
ZM2 and T1.
Hello Gil. I bought a sotabeams wsprlite beacon last year and I decided to get a second one at the start of the lockdown and having two you can run them in sync into two antennas and get a direct comparison. I'm surprised at those results too though. I might have to replicate the test with my wsprlites on 20m and see how they compare to the other 20m antennas i'm testing
That would be interesting!
Very good video👍 and I totally agree with you I love ❤️ my EFHW 49/1 and 64/1 UNUN’s and I gave all my 9/1 UNUN’s away. 73 KV5P
Gil this is great info for me. Thank you.
...and also, especially if you’re working portable (i.e. not limited in space), with EFHW you’re working with a RESONANT antenna , unlike a random wire.
Thanks for your experiments, love your channel
best 73!
Absolutely!
I heard that LC coupling (like MFJ 16010) is more efficient than transformers on ferrite, but not tested yet... RA9QAT
Hi Vlad, that’s a very interesting concept, are you saying that one simple device could resolve the issues discussed for any random wire length? I would imagine losses due to heat are minimised. I’ve already over spent experimenting during lock down. Thanks for the heads up 👍🏻
@@mikes6844 Hi Mike! I guess device like MFJ16010 can help operate with random length wire (not resonant one). We can't use only 9 to 1 transformer without tuner, so I think it's better to use LC tuner specially designed for random wire antennas. In case of using 9:1 and automatic antenna tuner we have a kind of comfort, but loose efficiency. Last two years I use resonant end fed antenna - 20m wire with 64:1 transformer (PD7MAA) wich works on 40m, 20m and CB bands and have good results for local communications. I study using of random lenth antennas as quick deploying antennas for traveling and emergency when you can use 19m wire from 80 to 10m bands.
Very interesting Gil!! Great assembly, great analysis. Can the results also be expanded to a 49:1 or 64: 1 transformer? T106-2 works better too? 73 de PU5AMB
#2 material is not used for 49:1/64:1 transformers...
Always fun to experiment.
Chud M1PUP QTH London
Ps.
I think we have different definitions when it comes to chick magnets, with or without ferrite core ;)
Ah, the difference between theory and the real world! That's why these videos are so useful.
Gil My wife told me "please let him know I love the videos showing the precious beautiful nature and she enjoy it SO much" and by the way she is HAM too. (KM4ICQ) your videos are a JEWEL and very joyful to watch. Loving outdoor and camping a nice luxury. Thank you very much GIL beautiful country by the way
Thank you very much from the both of you, I really appreciate it :-)
Thanks for another excellent presentation. I wonder if changes in propagation had any impact on the results. One could repeat the test with a local amateur operator and use ground wave propagation. Another option would be measurements taken with a field strength meter.
It might be even more interesting to replace the antenna with a 450 ohm resistor and scan each device with a NanoVNA over the range 1.0 MHz to 30 MHz. The NanoVNA could be set up to display SWR and show the variation across the HF bands. You might see a significant difference between the two devices. This might be an interesting subject for a future video! One other consideration is that the optimum number of turns for each core may be different.
I might do that thanks.
i just ordered a ZM-2 tuner to use with my ic705
It is a good choice!
@@RadioPrepper thanks i will put it to good use
I work with an EFLW antenna for a number of years now, using a T200-2 UnUn. With no amplifier I get around much on the world (even on 80M). I think that's not bad for a 16 Mtr. wire @ 12 Mtr. high from Ground Level, sending from below sea level (I live in the Netherlands...).
Maybe I'll put an EFHW antenna up, some day.
Thanks for the fine video. 73 de PD0PSX
Give it a try, with a 49:1, it works awesomely!
@@RadioPrepper a 49:1 UnUn would not work with a random wire antenna. Given about 650 Ohm in a random wire antenna, the 49:1 would bring it down 13 Ohms...
The 49:1 UnUn will probably work with a End Fed Half Wave (which has about 2.5 kOhms)
I'm planning to use a EFHW (such as the HyEndfed) some day...
Very rare to hear dx shooting on 80m anyways. 40m, 30m, 20m, 18m, 15m, and 12m are much more encouraging for dropping a cq and call, then proceeding to let them know you are proving out an emergency station assembly drill, with their cozy home base station and office chair's reception.
I tried to find your location on Google maps and La Vesubie search came back as a River 🙄. Just wondering which Mountain you where up. Lovely scenery.
Forgot to mention I like the Hat👍 Reminds me of the Sandimans Port Man on the Label of my late Mother's favourite drink.👍😊
LOL. Search "Granges de la Brasque."
Super Video! 73 from Zurich!
hi Radio Prepper whats the best length of wire to use with a 9-1 Random wire unun
Google "unun random wire best length"
Can you build and test the Wolfgang 9.1 unun please
I'll look it up..
It is the same as the EARCHI UNUN I tested and used in a few of my videos.
@@RadioPrepper No the lay out and spacing of the coils are very important here is a link ua-cam.com/video/sk2ZZdJJrgY/v-deo.html
Do correct me if I am mistaken my friend
Ah thanks, I didn't see this because it was held for review, because of the link.. I'll have a look..
For great results try a Guenella 9:1 UnUn on three FT114-43 cores.
Do you have a link for that?
@@RadioPrepper www.qsl.net/kh6grt/page4/balun/balun.htm
@@RadioPrepper See CJ link below
I use 10 bifilar turns of #22 wire on three FT114-43 cores. Works better than everything else I have ever tried.
Here are my SWR's with a 71 ft wire about 12 ft high in trees:
80M 5.1 - 4.2
40M 2. 3
20M 1.4 - 2.2
17M 2.9
15M 1.3
12M 2.3
10M 2.5 - 1.9
Great comparison 👏
Great test! I am like you - I thought he dash 2 would not be as good as dash 43.
Indeed!
Gil,
Appreciate your research and reporting. Value insights to be had.
That said, I am tremendously surprised how the South of France resembles the climate of and topography of Southern California where I live. Maybe one day I will make the sojourn down there and see what it is like for reals!
Adieu,
William, k6whp
I'll show you around then :-)
again perfect explenation.. thank you Gil.. de ta3le... 73...
Belle vidéo Rèmy, j'aimerais faire une paire de dipôles pour 27mhz comment puis-je vous contacter pour des infos sur comment les faire avec le ft 140-43 ? merci Roby🙏
Rèmy? Pas besoin de toroid pour une dipole... Voyez ma vidéo: "une antenne cb pour luc."
Gil have you tried your choke closer to your unun and then use a counterpoise. When I mean close I mean use a BNC to BNC male adaptor. BTW I learn a lot from your channel. Keep smiling and stay safe.
Not in this case, but I could have done that yes, it makes better sense. I guess the tuner was closer ;-)
It more a suggestion to remove the other “random” wire ie the coax braid, radio and DC power cable.
... great video.. I wonder what would happen if you glued the #43 core and the #2 core together, assuming they are the same physical size, and made an UnUn out of both...as you proved, it is well known that #2 shines 14 MHZ and above, whereas the 43 or even a 31 mix works better at the lower frequencies of 40 and 80... you have a NanoVNA so you could get an idea at home before heading to the hills for the test. Notice that the QRPGuys little POTA antennas for 40 and above use #2 material...their EFHW antennas which cover 80 use #43.
Probably wouldn't work IMHO.
Gil, What is the best way to learn CW, in your opinion? 73 Kenneth LB9YH
ua-cam.com/video/YJixhiExOcs/v-deo.html
Interesting comparison. I thought the other one would have won. Like you say, radio is about experimenting. 73
What about a -61 ?
?
Hi I am a huge fan of 9:1 random wires , and also make my own . I use one about 20 meters long as my main base antenna in an inverted V . The swr on all bands does not need a tuner at all , ( I don't use 160m band) my worst swr is a 1.4 on 40m and 15m all other bands less than 1.2 swr . I also have a commercially made off center fed dipole that is supposed to need no tuner but no band is less than 2:1 swr and it is also much higher than the random wire and does not work anywhere near as well...... I tried an EFHW with a 49:1 and it was just terrible.... also brought online . I have to say my home built 9:1 unun antenna is awesome and performs great . Maybe it's my location , but I also have the same type antenna I take camping with my 5 watt sdr radio and it gets the same great swr and I usually make lots of contacts and get great reports. As proven with most antenna's your mileage may vary . Even though they call it a random wire antenna there are lengths of wire that work better than others , it's definitely worth experimenting with. Thanks for the great video's Gil I am a long time watcher 73
Surprising that the 49:1 did not perform, as it is the best antenna I have ever tried. Did you use a half-wave wire?
@@RadioPrepper It was a commercial made EFHW , I never measured it but would expect it to be a half wave length . It just never performed as advertised so I went to playing with the 9:1 random wire antenna's and had fantastic results and now I still use it today as my base antenna and for mobile opps and work the world on it....... a lot of france lately too.
Always makes me laugh when you have the Foo Foo lol
This microphone could have its own channel ;-)
Another great video Gil, loving the Minion SDR. Our of curiosity, what is the SWR on the antenna side of the tuner? It would be good to see the loss to see how much of your RF is actually making its way to the antenna. 100% agree with the 49 or 64 to 1 transformer on a better option.
Good question, I didn't check!
Gil. I think you should now use the ft140-43 to load up a Chick Magnet!
Random wire 9 :1 unun is really a bad description for this antenna as the wire length is not really random and needs to be chosen so that their is no half wave length high impedance match. There are charts available on the internet of suitable lengths for this type of antenna. Great videos by the way.
Right, but what do we call it?
@@RadioPrepper How about - Non resonent end fed wire antenna. I am not criticising your use of the name for this antenna it is quite commonly used to describe it. I watched a review of such an antenna on UA-cam recently where they cut down the length such that it ended up at half a wave length on one of the bands and consequently wouldn't tune up. They contacted the manufacturer who explained the issue. It was then retested with the supplied antenna length and they were quite happy with its performance. It's just that the name given suggests that it will work with any length antenna wire.
That does sound better!
good video
Really enjoy your videos.
73 de
Aiden EI8HJB.
The foufou mic is back!
Your test is flawed, a random wire antenna is a non resonant antenna requiring the tuner to bring it to resonance, for this to happen efficiently the random wire requires a sufficient rf ground system not a short counterpoise, also any antenna requiring the use of a tuner requires a low loss feeder to minimize loss due to a higher attenuation from swr being in the line, if these requirements are implemented then you probably fine little noticeable difference in performance if any
Hi Gil - in the test, did I hear correct, you were using 43 ft of wire with the 49:1 ? That would explain why it didn't work well, it wasn't a half wavelength. Hey, I need that chick-magnet T-shirt, I must buy one 😂
9:1, not 49:1
Indded, 41ft with a 9:1. See: ua-cam.com/video/0zF7bDoqkG4/v-deo.html
Oops, I will still have to use up my supply of FT-140-43 toroid's. Thanks for the excellent videos Gil.73's kd9oam
Make 49:1 and 64:1 transformers, plus a choke!
@@RadioPrepper Or use a counterpoise, it weights less ;)
#43 material is ideal for 9:1 UNUNs since it is designed for broadband HF transformers ;)
@@RadioPrepper Thank you my friend, I will use them. I never toss anything anyway cheers! kd9oam
Now Gil, we are not to be bamboozled! I'm beginning to watch.. and the UNUN on my right, your left, is clearly marked 'Z' and then 1:6. The Z ratio is 1:6. Oh, this being about 30 seconds into the video. I think you may have, uh, written upside down :)
LOL!
Chick Magnet! 🤣🤣🤣
I'm sorry I can't not see you talking into a troll doll. :) Thanks for the video however.
😆
I believe you said you had 8 meters of wire. This user ( ua-cam.com/video/9eaAFTo5IQY/v-deo.html ) used 29 feet of antenna and had feed line significantly longer than 16 ft. She got on 40m and was able to make a contact from Wisconsin to West Virginia. The Smokin Ape (ua-cam.com/video/9KPZO2-K76g/v-deo.html) was using 29.5 feet of antenna wire. I have ordered up my transformer materials and am going to make this and see what happens. Thanks for your videos. Maybe trying some different lengths of feed and counterpoise would be all it would take to give it another band.
You need to follow your dreams, and get back out on your boat, your story was, such a wonderful story, but now you are sidetracked. Time to change tracks, and do your ham radio on your boat.
I couldn't agree more...
excellent idea that would be wonderful to see this. 7 3
Yes, quite often, people don't care about the underlying science about the material with which a transformer is made. Any transformer is good for a range of frequencies and not below or above. Then comes the properties like saturation, bulk resistivity, Curie temperature and so on that characterise the behavior of the transformer. Fundamental facts remain unaltered.
Are you no the wrong Ch with that in your face lol 73