Which antenna would be better?

The General forum is where users can discuss any topic regarding Motorola communications equipment - hardware, software, etc. There are also several focused forums on this board, so please take the time to ensure that your questions doesn't fall into one of those categories before posting here!

Moderator: Queue Moderator

Post Reply
User avatar
Andre
Batboard $upporter
Posts: 141
Joined: Sat Oct 29, 2005 10:04 am

Which antenna would be better?

Post by Andre »

8505644V02 VHF Helical Antenna 150-162 7.3"
or
8505834W02 VHF Antenna 150-162 5"

Which antenna would be better? I use an XTS5000 and XTS2500, primarily in the 150-160 range.

before anyone suggests, got a bunch of the 8.1" Dipole wideband antennas, and I don't like 'em.

Andre
Will
Posts: 6823
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2001 4:00 pm

Post by Will »

The 8505644V02 VHF Helical Antenna 150-162 7.3" is the better choice.
Grog
On Moderation
Posts: 783
Joined: Sat Nov 17, 2001 4:00 pm

Re: Which antenna would be better?

Post by Grog »

Andre wrote:
before anyone suggests, got a bunch of the 8.1" Dipole wideband antennas, and I don't like 'em.
Why not?
bellersley
No Longer Registered
Posts: 872
Joined: Tue Feb 22, 2005 7:03 am

Post by bellersley »

They're friggin huge! I have one on an HT1550 (with the SMA antenna adaptor), it pokes you in the arm pit :evil:
User avatar
Bruce1807
Posts: 1203
Joined: Mon Jan 16, 2006 7:18 am

Post by Bruce1807 »

The bigger the better, but the down side is that the larger ones put stress on the connector, tickle your underarm whilst worn on the belt, and are pretty much not worth the effort unless you are in a fringe area.
But they are great for poking kids in the ribs with.
NickH
Posts: 67
Joined: Wed May 10, 2006 9:19 am

Post by NickH »

8505644V02 VHF Helical Antenna 150-162 7.3

This is what I have on my XTS2500 and it works great, even better than the dipole which was just a huge pain.

-Nick
RadioSouth
Batboard $upporter
Posts: 2884
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2001 4:00 pm

Post by RadioSouth »

That 5" you mention was initially intended for the Visar but wound up also as a low profile Jedi antenna when many complained about the Jedi length.
I did informal testing of this antenna (Base station with 'S' meter and using about 15 test locations switching antenna's back and forth). When you got to the outer fringes about a S2 difference became apparent. Worked for us as this was acceptable after noticing some of the guys were actually bending the larger antenna's over in an upside down kinda U
and taping them in place this way :o
User avatar
phrawg
Posts: 690
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 4:00 pm

Post by phrawg »

Really the huge armpit tickling wide band dipole mounted on
a PS speaker mic has to be the ultimate hamsexy ! :x :roll: Phrawg
BBbzzzzz... ZAP.. GULP !!! ahhhh GOOD fly !
User avatar
Max-trac
Batboard $upporter
Posts: 941
Joined: Sat Sep 08, 2001 4:00 pm

Post by Max-trac »

RadioSouth wrote: Worked for us as this was acceptable after noticing some of the guys were actually bending the larger antenna's over in an upside down kinda U
and taping them in place this way :o
Arrghh!!! Some of our guys were coiling the speaker mic cable about half way up their VHF duckies,,,, no clue!
Good strain relief for the spkrmic cable I suppose.
Will
Posts: 6823
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2001 4:00 pm

Post by Will »

Max-trac wrote: Arrghh!!! Some of our guys were coiling the speaker mic cable about half way up their VHF duckies,,,, no clue!
Good strain relief for the spkrmic cable I suppose.
Yup, the police explorers do that and wonder why the radio does not talk to well. Hint: RF feedback into the spkr/mike cable.. Not good on the PA with the mismatch.
User avatar
Andre
Batboard $upporter
Posts: 141
Joined: Sat Oct 29, 2005 10:04 am

Post by Andre »

Thanks for all yer input
Post Reply

Return to “General Motorola Solutions & Legacy Radio Discussion”