Another antenna or quit
- Thread starter branchbouncer
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 45
- Views 8K
teamerickson said:
the 91xg minus the front 30" section=43xg
I have a ch 3,5,9 analog here. I was surprised by the results.
ch3 poor which I expected
ch5 good...the cm 4228 was poor...I was surprised that the 91xg would receive it this well
ch 9 very good
seems to improve as you go up in frequency.
keep in mind the antennaweb results are in the yellow, green and lt green for those channels at my home plus the signal was amplified with the hdp 269 preamp.
Last edited:
Then I'm gonna have a problem later...one of my locals is wanting to move back to RF8 from RF55. So that means I'm gonna have to throw the 91XG out then.Rick0725 said:
So what do you think? I would not have thought, that the 91Xg would compare that good to your Winegard. I would have thought the 91XG couldn't hold the candle...
Any suggestions which one for my distance? I changed amps, and got the CM7777, and threw out the CM7775, so that would work fine with the seperate VHF input and an additional VHF antenna then, right?Rick0725 said:
I've got an Antennas Direct DB4 myself. Always heard the great reviews on the 4228, but my DB4 gives me such great results that I don't feed the need to try out the 4228! I get awesome results now. I've heard stories of guys putting the 91XG on 60ft towers and drawing in stations hundreds and hundreds of miles away.
branchbounder-
You being on top of a mountain, I think you should go for it! Put one of those 91XGs on an antenna rotor and see what you can get. You know how much us OTA guys would give anything to be on top of a mountain? Jeez! Just make sure that you put it as high as you can possibly get it. 5ft of height makes a BIG difference! As far as antennaweb.org, try this site ( http://www.2150.com/broadcast/ ). Kinda like antennaweb on 'roids! Good luck and keep us posted!
branchbounder-
You being on top of a mountain, I think you should go for it! Put one of those 91XGs on an antenna rotor and see what you can get. You know how much us OTA guys would give anything to be on top of a mountain? Jeez! Just make sure that you put it as high as you can possibly get it. 5ft of height makes a BIG difference! As far as antennaweb.org, try this site ( http://www.2150.com/broadcast/ ). Kinda like antennaweb on 'roids! Good luck and keep us posted!
this would not do the trick
you would combine a high band vhf antenna with the 91xg through the cm7777 preamp.
You would need a 10 element vhf yagi antenna for ch 7-13 like a winegard model YA-1713.
http://www.winegard.com/offair/vhf.htm
I tried this site myself. Pretty much the same as antennaweb and it doesn't take 1/2 hour to figure out everything. Magnetic declination is a hard one to figure. If you don't do that right you'll end up way of on the suggested aim. It is more accurate though and I like the tower info.dashaund said:
Range is not a measurement that is cut and dry in antenna science. There are just too many reception issues that come into play.
The 13 element yagi has about 10 dbd gain on high band vhf.
I like the design of the winegards especially the vhf antenna I mentioned and the hd series because of design, construction, and longevity.
The rivet and cross element design does not hold up long term. The wade fm antenna I removed today was of that design. The rivets were rusted, the cross members were loose with poor contact...this aging process does nothing good for reception with this design.
The wade fm is going to the dump.
The 13 element yagi has about 10 dbd gain on high band vhf.
I like the design of the winegards especially the vhf antenna I mentioned and the hd series because of design, construction, and longevity.
The rivet and cross element design does not hold up long term. The wade fm antenna I removed today was of that design. The rivets were rusted, the cross members were loose with poor contact...this aging process does nothing good for reception with this design.
The wade fm is going to the dump.
Well, the point is, I saw several Winegard VHF models there, and I couldn't figure out which one to get for about 90 miles from the towers.Rick0725 said:
ralfyguy said:
winegard YA-1713...about 10 dbd gain. 90 miles from towers may be a challenge and you will not know till you try.
http://www.winegard.com/offair/pdf/Ya-1713.pdf
going to put the cm 4228 up today again this afternoon to compare on a tripod at the peak this time with a 3 way switch all antennas unamplified.
liking the 91xg more. still can't believe how good ch 5 and 9 is received.
Last edited:
I have had success pulling stations over 90 miles,but as Rick says there are a lot of factors tnat come into play.The first is the distance,as a lot of articles say the signals just aren't there after 70 miles,but given the right equipment and situation it's do-able,one advantage that i have is an elevatiion over 1700 feet.Have had success pulling most of the DC channels,and also the Richmond stations.Richmond is 90 miles(or so) and DC is over 100 miles
impressed here...
with the 91xg this morning receiving buffalo 120+ miles and rochester digitals 80 miles with mid 40-50-80's signal. not all the stations but maybe half of them, with rest in the mid teens to 20's...but received nothing before.
My low power ch 14 is cyrstal clear no snow. cm4228 and hd8200p not even close. it appears that hdtvprimer comparison is really simulation not actual gain. the cm4228 should have more gain in the lower channels, but the 91xg is outperforming.
I have been trying for years to get that ch 14 to receive decent
with my current setup I am running dual preamps, a hdp269 on each antenna. I ran the hd8200p through a cm0549 vhf splitter combiner (.5 db insertion loss and 30db isolation between vhf and uhf ports), the vhf out to an amp and terminated the uhf port (not used).
thus only amping the vhf off the antenna...this resulted in the ability to amplify vhf without interference from uhf. then combined both amped lines through another cm0549 to the distribution.
pictures are very clean no interference and no overloading.
happy camper here.
with the 91xg this morning receiving buffalo 120+ miles and rochester digitals 80 miles with mid 40-50-80's signal. not all the stations but maybe half of them, with rest in the mid teens to 20's...but received nothing before.
My low power ch 14 is cyrstal clear no snow. cm4228 and hd8200p not even close. it appears that hdtvprimer comparison is really simulation not actual gain. the cm4228 should have more gain in the lower channels, but the 91xg is outperforming.
I have been trying for years to get that ch 14 to receive decent
with my current setup I am running dual preamps, a hdp269 on each antenna. I ran the hd8200p through a cm0549 vhf splitter combiner (.5 db insertion loss and 30db isolation between vhf and uhf ports), the vhf out to an amp and terminated the uhf port (not used).
thus only amping the vhf off the antenna...this resulted in the ability to amplify vhf without interference from uhf. then combined both amped lines through another cm0549 to the distribution.
pictures are very clean no interference and no overloading.
happy camper here.
Last edited:
Rick0725 said:
This morning the conditions are favorable toward Buffalo. I wouldn't be so fast to credit the antenna. http://www.dxinfocentre.com/tropo.html
Yes, the 4228 does fall off on channel 14, so the 91XG is a better choice for you.
That hdtvprimer chart is a simulation, approximation, may not be highly accurate. I suspected this and am trying different antennas so I can check it out for myself.
There are good and bad points to the cm4228, hd8200p and 91xg.
Close up distances (19 miles from towers)- all three antennas perform similarly.
The cm4228 and 91xg uhf antennas are of different design and there are good and bad points to both the cm4228 and 91xg because of the design differences.
One of the big pluses for the cm4228 was its abiliity to receive high band vhf. Yesterday I discovered that the 91xg does a rather good job on high band vhf. Even down to ch 5. This is not a big plus for the cm4228 any longer.
the 91xg and hd8200P will be helpful because of its directivity and high front to back properties where the user suspects high multipath. The cm 4228 did not do as well at my home.
The 91xg should not be used where the stations are spaced far apart especially close up under 25 miles. The cm 4228 has a wider beamwidth and a rotor may not be necessary with the cm4228.
The 91xg is lighter in weight.
91xg - about 6lbs.
cm4228 - about 15 lbs.
The 91xg would be an opportunity if you are thinking of using multiple antennas on a single mast with less wind load, putting less strain on the rotor.
Thing to consider with the 91xg is snow load. The directors are space very closely towards the active element at the rear of the antenna and the 91xg would need to be securely attached to the mast as a precaution.
The hd8200p is well constructed, does an excellent job on vhf, handles multipath well and does a very respectable job on uhf...but not as good as the 91xg or the cm4228 (on some channels) in my case.
One of the hardest parts of dealing with antenna testing and reception issues is that conditions are not repeatable. Even an A/B test is not really possible because, with signal propogation being inexact, both antennas would need to occupy the exact same space at the exact same time which, last I checked, is theoretically possible and practically impossible.
The cm4228 is a very popular uhf antenna and I can justify the following with the 91xg.
The 91xg improved reception on my problem low power channel 14. I tried a ton of different antennas...cm3671, hd8200p, cm4228 and the 91xg was the best of all of them. this challenging ch 14 has become my benchmark.
Had mediocar reception receiving digital from a town 54 miles to my east. high 40's to mid 60's was the norm with the cm4228 and hd8200p. Low 70's to low 80's with the 91xg so far.
I recommend the antennas direct 91xg and I am keeping my hd8200p.
Good luck with your antenna and preamp choices.
There are good and bad points to the cm4228, hd8200p and 91xg.
Close up distances (19 miles from towers)- all three antennas perform similarly.
The cm4228 and 91xg uhf antennas are of different design and there are good and bad points to both the cm4228 and 91xg because of the design differences.
One of the big pluses for the cm4228 was its abiliity to receive high band vhf. Yesterday I discovered that the 91xg does a rather good job on high band vhf. Even down to ch 5. This is not a big plus for the cm4228 any longer.
the 91xg and hd8200P will be helpful because of its directivity and high front to back properties where the user suspects high multipath. The cm 4228 did not do as well at my home.
The 91xg should not be used where the stations are spaced far apart especially close up under 25 miles. The cm 4228 has a wider beamwidth and a rotor may not be necessary with the cm4228.
The 91xg is lighter in weight.
91xg - about 6lbs.
cm4228 - about 15 lbs.
The 91xg would be an opportunity if you are thinking of using multiple antennas on a single mast with less wind load, putting less strain on the rotor.
Thing to consider with the 91xg is snow load. The directors are space very closely towards the active element at the rear of the antenna and the 91xg would need to be securely attached to the mast as a precaution.
The hd8200p is well constructed, does an excellent job on vhf, handles multipath well and does a very respectable job on uhf...but not as good as the 91xg or the cm4228 (on some channels) in my case.
One of the hardest parts of dealing with antenna testing and reception issues is that conditions are not repeatable. Even an A/B test is not really possible because, with signal propogation being inexact, both antennas would need to occupy the exact same space at the exact same time which, last I checked, is theoretically possible and practically impossible.
The cm4228 is a very popular uhf antenna and I can justify the following with the 91xg.
The 91xg improved reception on my problem low power channel 14. I tried a ton of different antennas...cm3671, hd8200p, cm4228 and the 91xg was the best of all of them. this challenging ch 14 has become my benchmark.
Had mediocar reception receiving digital from a town 54 miles to my east. high 40's to mid 60's was the norm with the cm4228 and hd8200p. Low 70's to low 80's with the 91xg so far.
I recommend the antennas direct 91xg and I am keeping my hd8200p.
Good luck with your antenna and preamp choices.
Last edited:
Rick0725 said:
No!!!!
If you have to recycle that bad boy no antenna how crummy should ever go to a dump!
Similar threads
