I would think so.  Probably philistrand which is very strong and expensive. 

Alan R. Downing
Phoenix, AZ


-----Original Message-----
From: For blind ham radio operators [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
On Behalf Of Jim Gammon
Sent: Saturday, August 31, 2013 8:01 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: hf verticals

You must have to guy those things with some sort of rope right?  Jim WA6EKS


-----Original Message----- 
From: Steve Forst 
Sent: Saturday, August 31, 2013 2:38 PM 
To: [log in to unmask] 
Subject: Re: hf verticals 

43 foot verticals are all the rage now.   I don't remember the rationale 
behind that particular height, but some people swear by them and others 
say it is hocus pocus.   Lot's of reviews on e-ham dealing   with these 
antennas.

73, Steve KW3A


On 8/31/2013 5:02 PM, Richard Fiorello wrote:
> Hi;
> Still wondering which hf verticals folks have good success with and were
> moderately straight forward to assemble.  Curtis has given a vote for
> his high gain 640.  I liked the cushcraft r8 but it was very top heavy
> and didn't do well in my wind.  I'm currently doing battle with an hf9v
> and the antenna is currently winning.  I'd love to try the step ir but
> don't think it would do well roof mounted.  Also not clear as to the
> difference between the two versions.
> Finally a friend who is a retired engineer has suggested that all one
> needs to do is put up a random length pipe although 40 feet would be his
> length of choice.  No traps, no matching just a good external tuner at
> the antenna. Although I haven't talked with him directly I think there
> is someone else locally using a similar arrangement.  Back when I
> thought I knew a thing or two, I thought a tuner was basically just a
> means of tricking the radio and or amplifier into being happy but didn't
> think it increased the performance of the antenna.  Anyone else ran
> across anything similar?
>     --
> richard
>
>
>