Hi Anthony,
Thanks for the heads up. I will look into those reviews before I buy anything.
73,
Dave, W7OQ
At 04:55 AM 6/30/2009, you wrote:
>--=======AVGMAIL-335601BE=======
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
>Hi Dave;
>
>I had a Carolina Windom.
>
>It was put up very well by a friend of mine who is proficient in antenna
>installations.
>
>Anyway, I had grounding issue with that antenna.
>
>I went with it because I was using a G5RV and the feed line kept breaking
>off the antenna in relatively high winds.
>
>You may want to read internet reviews also and form your own opinion.
>
>73 De Anthony W2AJV
>[log in to unmask]
>ECHOLINK NODE NUMBER: 74389
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "David R. Basden" <[log in to unmask]>
>To: <[log in to unmask]>
>Sent: Tuesday, June 30, 2009 12:51 AM
>Subject: Re: Alpha Delta DXCC VS. B and W D-90?
>
>
> > Hi Tom,
> >
> > As long as you are still in the looking stage, take a peak at the
> > Carolina Windom made by Radio Works:
> >
> > http://www.RadioWorks.Com That's what I am seriously
> > considering for low band coverage to supplement my quad.
> >
> > 73,
> >
> > Dave, W7OQ
> >
> >
> > At 05:18 PM 6/29/2009, you wrote:
> >
> >>--=======AVGMAIL-4DF8363F=======
> >>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> >>
> >> Howard:
> >>
> >>Well, because of what you and others are saying, including quite a few
> >>less
> >>than positive reviews of the B and W on e ham, I am now leaning toward the
> >>Alpha Delta DXCC. I also am looking at the Cobra Light line of antennas,
> >>although I think they might be a bit long for the property lot we'll be
> >>renting out in Colorado.
> >>
> >>Will keep you posted.
> >>
> >>73 from Tom Behler: KB8TYJ
> >>
> >>----- Original Message -----
> >>From: "Howard Kaufman" <[log in to unmask]>
> >>To: <[log in to unmask]>
> >>Sent: Monday, June 29, 2009 8:01 AM
> >>Subject: Re: Alpha Delta DXCC VS. B and W D-90?
> >>
> >>
> >>Tom I have used the Alpha Delta at field day and it is very good. Just
> >>run
> >>a wire from the center to ground, if the model you have requires that. I
> >>have also had the B&w, and it is a terrible antenna, on 80 meters. Most
> >>of
> >>the power is absorbed rather than radiated. Who cares if you see a flat
> >>SWR, you see one on a dummy load as well. How well does that radiate?
> >>
> >>--=======AVGMAIL-4DF8363F=======
> >>Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
> >> boundary="=======AVGMAIL-012C4CD0======="
> >>
> >>--=======AVGMAIL-012C4CD0=======
> >>Content-Type: text/plain; x-avg=cert; charset=us-ascii
> >>Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> >>Content-Disposition: inline
> >>Content-Description: "AVG certification"
> >>
> >>
> >>No virus found in this incoming message.
> >>Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> >>Version: 8.5.339 / Virus Database: 270.12.94/2208 - Release Date: 06/29/09
> >>0=
> >>5:54:00
> >>
> >>--=======AVGMAIL-012C4CD0=======--
> >>--=======AVGMAIL-4DF8363F=======--
>
>--=======AVGMAIL-335601BE=======
>Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
> boundary="=======AVGMAIL-7A664217======="
>
>--=======AVGMAIL-7A664217=======
>Content-Type: text/plain; x-avg=cert; charset=us-ascii
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>Content-Disposition: inline
>Content-Description: "AVG certification"
>
>
>No virus found in this incoming message.
>Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>Version: 8.5.339 / Virus Database: 270.12.94/2208 - Release Date: 06/29/09 0=
>5:54:00
>
>--=======AVGMAIL-7A664217=======--
>--=======AVGMAIL-335601BE=======--
|
