TV Fool

TV Fool (http://forum.tvfool.com/index.php)
-   Help With Reception (http://forum.tvfool.com/forumdisplay.php?f=7)
-   -   Best gain for low-UHF antenna? (http://forum.tvfool.com/showthread.php?t=2208)

be236 23-Sep-2011 4:33 PM

Best gain for low-UHF antenna?
 
So, I went on this website: http://www.hdtvprimer.com/ANTENNAS/comparing.html

... and it says that for low UHF 14-30, say, that the best gain antenna is Winegard PR-8800 (though it's not rated for deep-fringe reception).

Initially I was thinking of getting the 91gx brand, which is best for deep fringe UHF (> 80 miles), but this 91gx shows higher gain when you're above channel 30...

So, given info and assuming that website is credible, should I get this PR-8800 instead, as the UHF deep fringe channels I want is UHF 17 - 35?

:confused:

John Candle 23-Sep-2011 4:38 PM

Tv Antennas and Reception
 
Here are more posts by , be236 , http://forum.tvfool.com/showthread.php?t=2186

Tower Guy 23-Sep-2011 5:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by be236 (Post 12169)
should I get this PR-8800 instead, as the UHF deep fringe channels I want is UHF 17 - 35?

Here is more data to confuse you.

http://www.antennahacks.com/AntennaComparison.htm

Your choice of a 91XG is fine.

No static at all 23-Sep-2011 5:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tower Guy (Post 12172)
Your choice of a 91XG is fine.

I have tried the original CM4228, Winegard PR-8800 & 91-XG in a deep fringe situation & the 91-XG was the clear winner.

The 91-XG was also best in both a metropolitan & far suburban environment between those 3 antennas.

be236 23-Sep-2011 5:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tower Guy (Post 12172)
Here is more data to confuse you.

http://www.antennahacks.com/AntennaComparison.htm

Your choice of a 91XG is fine.

Wow, thanks for the helpful tip, Tower Guy!

be236 23-Sep-2011 5:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by No static at all (Post 12175)
I have tried the original CM4228, Winegard PR-8800 & 91-XG in a deep fringe situation & the 91-XG was the clear winner.

The 91-XG was also best in both a metropolitan & far suburban environment between those 3 antennas.

I know I keep asking the same question.. But just want to make sure I buy the right antenna the first time...

..So you're saying the 91-XG can get good gain (about the same) as PR-8800 even for those low-UHF channels 14-35, right?

GroundUrMast 23-Sep-2011 5:57 PM

Despite the computer modeling, which I give credence too, my real world experience with the XG-91 vs the HD-8800 has been that the XG-91 beats the HD-8800 by quite a bit.

I hope to get a calibrated spectrum analyzer and antenna test range for Christmas so I would be able to measure the exact differences. :)

Both of the web sites cited are valuable reference sources, but not necessarily absolute.

No static at all 24-Sep-2011 2:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by be236 (Post 12178)
..So you're saying the 91-XG can get good gain (about the same) as PR-8800 even for those low-UHF channels 14-35, right?

The PR-8800 proved un-reliable on channels 16 & 19, but the 91-XG has no problem with them.

be236 24-Sep-2011 5:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by No static at all (Post 12192)
The PR-8800 proved un-reliable on channels 16 & 19, but the 91-XG has no problem with them.

Cool, thanks for the info. I'll get ready to order the 91-XG from Solid Signal then...

Billiam 26-Sep-2011 2:50 PM

Actually the Channel Master 3023 is probably the best antenna for UHF low signals. I bought one here this year and compared it to the 91XG and MXU 59, 4221 HD, 4228 old model and U 8000 and it was the clear winner on channels below channel 30 here. The 91 XG and MXU 59 perform virtually identically to one another on every channel and offer better gain on the higher UHF channels. If your primary concern is low UHF then go with the 3023.

http://www.summitsource.com/channel-...le-p-6678.html

be236 26-Sep-2011 4:42 PM

Hmmm...

What's the UHF gain on this CM 3023? The 91 XG has a -16.7 dB gain, which is pretty good... and it's rated for 70+ miles...

That CM 3023 is rated up to 45 miles...

I'm looking for a deep fringe UHF where most the channels is about 17 to 33, and Tvfools shows those channels at -6.8dB to -16 dB NM. These BC stations are about 110 miles away. I was able to get a fuzzy picture from them when they were in VHF and at about 300 kW.

Currently my old Radio Shack VU-190 once in a while shows a signal blimp on my Artec DTV converter box for that RF channel 22 at -6.8dB, but it's too weak to get a picture lock.. so I'm hopefully with either the 91XG or CM3023 I have a hope of picking up at least that one channel (if not more).

Billiam 26-Sep-2011 5:04 PM

Check out this link.

http://www.hdtvprimer.com/ANTENNAS/comparing.html

Net Gain for UHF Only antennas. Antenna L shows real world gain figures for the 3023 aka the 4228. The 91XG is a very good antenna but its gain on the lower UHF channels is a couple db lower than the 3023. I've used both and my own tests on channel 17, 19, 21 and 24 confirms this.

be236 26-Sep-2011 6:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Billiam (Post 12278)
Check out this link.

http://www.hdtvprimer.com/ANTENNAS/comparing.html

Net Gain for UHF Only antennas. Antenna L shows real world gain figures for the 3023 aka the 4228. The 91XG is a very good antenna but its gain on the lower UHF channels is a couple db lower than the 3023. I've used both and my own tests on channel 17, 19, 21 and 24 confirms this.

Yes, I've been to that HDTVPRIMER site and even mentioned it in my earlier post about my concern for low-UHF channels and two people (see above posts) say that the 91XG is still better than the PR-8800, which is better than the CM 3023...

So your findings conflict with the other two people who wrote me above saying the 91XG is fine for low UHF as well.. hmm.... I dont know what to make of that...

... but again, the CM 3023 shows it's range is spec-ed up to 45 miles, while the 91GX goes to 70+ miles...

What was your broadcast tower distance in miles when you did your comparisons at those low UHF channels?

Also, that chart shows at channel 24 and higher, then the 91GX beats the CM 3023...

Billiam 26-Sep-2011 6:10 PM

Mileage comparisons for antennas are generally a sales gimmick.

My channel 17 is 85 miles away and a 2 edge signal. I also have a channel 15 that is 74 miles away and that was also improved with the CM 3023. The other signals are semi local at around 35 to 40 miles.

The 91XG is a decent antenna on the lower channels but if you need maximum gain then the best antenna out there right now is the CM 3023. Unless you can get your hands on a CM 4251 7 foot parabolic dish (now discontinued) you won't find a better retail store antenna for UHF low than the CM3023.

GroundUrMast 26-Sep-2011 8:30 PM

Back to your original request for help with reception of Canadian stations in Victoria and Vancouver, BC... http://www.tvfool.com/?option=com_wr...60b56f2de6febd

CHAN, real channel 22 will have significant co-channel interference when KCPQ builds their CH-22 transmitter on Capitol Hill.

CBUT, real channel 43 is predicted to arrive at your location with a NM of -10.7 dB but that does not include the effect of the adjacent channel interference from KFFV, real channel 44.

As you go down the list further, the prospects for Canadian channels gets even worse.

From your location, a 260' tower and a Wade PB-81-BB or PB-82-BB would offer line of sight access and possibly the F/B ratio and directivity needed to receive several of the Canadian signals.

A remotely operated HTPC or SlingBox in Bellingham would seem more piratical, IMO.

be236 26-Sep-2011 11:05 PM

So what's your NM dB signal for those two distance 70+ mile broadcasters?

be236 26-Sep-2011 11:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GroundUrMast (Post 12289)
Back to your original request for help with reception of Canadian stations in Victoria and Vancouver, BC...

CHAN, real channel 22 will have significant co-channel interference when KCPQ builds their CH-22 transmitter on Capitol Hill.

CBUT, real channel 43 is predicted to arrive at your location with a NM of -10.7 dB but that does not include the effect of the adjacent channel interference from KFFV, real channel 44.

As you go down the list further, the prospects for Canadian channels gets even worse.

From your location, a 260' tower and a Wade PB-81-BB or PB-82-BB would offer line of sight access and possibly the F/B ratio and directivity needed to receive several of the Canadian signals.

A remotely operated HTPC or SlingBox in Bellingham would seem more piratical, IMO.

Arg.. I hope it's not "hopeless." I guess we won't know until I try it out with new antenna... If I can't pick up those BC stations, I guess I'll have to give up and be content with getting KVOS RF 35 at 63 miles away...

Just for fun, I put my location on top of Everett's Boeing plant and got like all PLUS value dBs for those stations, for example, CHAN RF 22, showed up with like 8dB, etc... nice.. location... wish it was residential so I could move into that location.. it must be at top of hill.

Also, a few nights back, I got a "blip" of a signal on meter bar (but not watchable) on these Vancouver stations (RF 17, 26, 24 from Orcas Island, and 43)... so must be isotropic atmosphere to give me that "blip." It lasted all night.. but because of my mutiple cable run and probably 3 combiners, I lost maybe 10 db from the cable run?? I really need to just buy a 100 feet RG 6 cable and hook it directly from antenna to TV tuner and see if that helps.

Billiam 27-Sep-2011 2:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by be236 (Post 12293)
So what's your NM dB signal for those two distance 70+ mile broadcasters?

Ch. 15 which is 74 miles is a plus 9.7. Ch. 17 which is 85 miles is a minus 9.8.

be236 27-Sep-2011 2:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Billiam (Post 12307)
Ch. 15 which is 74 miles is a plus 9.7. Ch. 17 which is 85 miles is a minus 9.8.

Ah ha! If you can receive a -9.8 dB, then that gives me hope to receive my -6.8 and maybe -10 dB signals from 110 miles away.

GroundUrMast 27-Sep-2011 2:39 AM

Put some metal in the air. :)


All times are GMT. The time now is 5:21 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright © TV Fool, LLC