[Antennas] Re: increased ant bandwidths...

Sun Apr 30 14:45:17 EDT 2006

I see I had replied directly to you Bob. As you correctly replied on the 
reflector I am posting my prior response here to you so others might better 
understand you answers.
Danny
At 07:06 AM 4/30/2006, you wrote:
>If someone will refresh my memory as to the month and year when QST last did
>a review of several tuners, I will look it up - Hi Danny - how've you been?

Just fine Bob,
Yes, I've read those and, as I recall, most of the tuners they tested, when 
matching what I would call a reasonable range of impedances (25-2,000ohms) 
most losses were around 10% or less. That would be about 0.4dB. That small 
amount would not be detectable by most receiving stations.
I feel the real plus in using a tuner is that it provides the transmitter 
to load into its design impedance resulting in cooler more efficient 
operation thus producing a better quality signal with less distortion. 
That's why I almost always use a tuner. In those cases where I happen to 
have a correct match I just take the tuner out of the loop by using the 
bypass switch.
Problems arise when one tries to push the envelope too far - such as trying 
to load an 80-meter dipole on 160-meters. That will spells disaster as far 
as efficiency is concerned, but, you know that already. :-) Overall, I 
feel, using a tuner does more good than harm. (Probably opening a Pandora's 
box here.)
Tuners - like any tool - can be misused.
73,
Danny, K6MHE
-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.5.1/327 - Release Date: 4/28/2006