Topics

HF9V vs. 43' Vertical experience??

Nolan - KI5IO
 

Over the years I've had two Butternut antennas (HF6V and HF9V) that I rescued, rebuilt and used for many years. They both have since been moved along to new homes.

My last antenna change involved getting a 43' Zero Five vertical that is not bad, but not great ... but then all are verticals and have their limitations.

Regardless, I'm considering investing in another HF9V and will plan to replace the 43' vertical.  FWIW, I have upwards of over 50 radials and will be adding more this fall when I scalp the grass and that will make that task a bit easier and just let the grass again grow over the added copper.

I'm interested in observations from other users about their experience with their Butternut verticals and if any have tried the 43' (or similar) vertical antennas.

I'm considering that I might make the change later this year, maybe October or November, but there is not any definitive date in place for now.

Thanks in advance.

73 - Nolan K.
KI5IO

Brian N2MLP <n2mlp@...>
 

I have had both and for me the zero 5 is better  on 30 and 40 meters (but needs a tuner)

Butternut if setup correct, is a good all band antenna but need more maintenance

Both need a good ground system

 

 

 

 

 

========================

         de N2MLP Brian

       Monroe County PA

 

 

========================

 

 

From: Butternut@groups.io [mailto:Butternut@groups.io] On Behalf Of Nolan - KI5IO
Sent: Monday, July 9, 2018 2:44 PM
To: Butternut@groups.io
Subject: [butternut] HF9V vs. 43' Vertical experience??

 

Over the years I've had two Butternut antennas (HF6V and HF9V) that I rescued, rebuilt and used for many years. They both have since been moved along to new homes.

My last antenna change involved getting a 43' Zero Five vertical that is not bad, but not great ... but then all are verticals and have their limitations.

Regardless, I'm considering investing in another HF9V and will plan to replace the 43' vertical.  FWIW, I have upwards of over 50 radials and will be adding more this fall when I scalp the grass and that will make that task a bit easier and just let the grass again grow over the added copper.

I'm interested in observations from other users about their experience with their Butternut verticals and if any have tried the 43' (or similar) vertical antennas.

I'm considering that I might make the change later this year, maybe October or November, but there is not any definitive date in place for now.

Thanks in advance.

73 - Nolan K.
KI5IO

Ron Notarius W3WN
 

Nolan,

I've owned both an HF6V and an HF2V since the days that WØDN was still running Butternut as a separate company.  I've also experimented with several 43 foot (or similar) verticals.

At present, I have an HF6V up in one  part of the backyard, and a homebrewed 48 foot vertical (in dear need of more radials, but that's another story) that I'm trying to get to work on 160.

IMHO, the biggest advantage of the Butternuts is that, when correctly configured AND when set up with a proper radial field, they can easily be made resonant on the Amateur bands, which makes use of them simple.  Turn on the rig, go to the frequency desired, and transmit; no fuss, no muss.

The 43 foot verticals are by their very nature non-resonant.  That has the advantage of making them multi-band -- WITH use of a proper transmatch.  That's a very important thing to note.  I know that when S9 first came out with their verticals, they (along with many others) advertised or claimed that using a 4:1 balun was all someone would need to get a good match -- good being a subjective term.  But IMHO, a 4:1 (or 6:1 or 9:1 etc.) balun only masks the resonance issue on a multi-band vertical, it doesn't always or actually give you a good match.  

It's been a long time since I studied physics in college, but suffice to say that for a ground-mounted 1/4 wave antenna to properly work, it needs a good radial system.  It doesn't matter if it's a Butternut, Cushcraft, Hygain, MFJ, Newtronics/Hustler... or even if it's a commercial vs. a homebrew.  If it's built to be a variation of a 1/4 wave ground mounted vertical, it needs a radial system.  Skimp on the radials, or buy into the advertising that they're not needed (note that this does NOT apply to vertically-polarized dipoles that are center-fed or close to it, such as some of the GAP and other antennas), and the vertical will perform poorly.

It is that simple.

73, ron W3WN




-----Original Message-----
From: Nolan - KI5IO <Nolan@...>
To: Butternut <Butternut@groups.io>
Sent: Mon, Jul 9, 2018 2:43 pm
Subject: [butternut] HF9V vs. 43' Vertical experience??

Over the years I've had two Butternut antennas (HF6V and HF9V) that I rescued, rebuilt and used for many years. They both have since been moved along to new homes.

My last antenna change involved getting a 43' Zero Five vertical that is not bad, but not great ... but then all are verticals and have their limitations.

Regardless, I'm considering investing in another HF9V and will plan to replace the 43' vertical.  FWIW, I have upwards of over 50 radials and will be adding more this fall when I scalp the grass and that will make that task a bit easier and just let the grass again grow over the added copper.

I'm interested in observations from other users about their experience with their Butternut verticals and if any have tried the 43' (or similar) vertical antennas.

I'm considering that I might make the change later this year, maybe October or November, but there is not any definitive date in place for now.

Thanks in advance.

73 - Nolan K.
KI5IO

Federico IK3UMT
 

Agree with Ron, 

Once a good radial field is properly set up, performance is somewhat guaranteed

Butternut is tuned on all bands where 43ft is not 

43ft lenght can badly affect takeoff angle on higher bands but increase performances on low bands

As usual..... a compromise.

Federico
ik3umt