Another Antenna Question

[761]

So what is the difference between a Shakespeare $$ and a cheaper antenna of the same gain and length?
Physical Strength?
Reliability?
Is it really worth paying double the price?
I know, I don't want to trust my life on the water with a cheap piece of gear. I just want to know what the differences are, not some philosophical reasons to spend more money.
Thanks.

 

[Texasmark]

Re: Another Antenna Question

You maybe could answer that better than anyone else if you have access to both. You asked the questions, compare the antennas (hence your reply) to one another.....how will the mast tolerate abuse, how strong is the mounting base, do you have numerous mounting options or are you limited to a horiz or vert mounting surface, is there a spring (whip) to allow for excessive movement, connectors sealed, is the interconnect cable part of the purchase price, do you need an impedance matching transformer and is it included.....sorta things.

If all answers are withing reason then there must be manufacturing cost differences, like one may come from offshore and the other possibly domestic which usually makes for pricing disparities.

HTH

Mark

 

[761]

Re: Another Antenna Question

Thanks, that helps. Now I know what to look for.
Thanks again

 

[Boatist]

Re: Another Antenna Question

There can be a big difference on what inside the antenna. Example some cheap antennas use a peice of tuned Coax as the radiator where high quality antennas will use a brass tube or a silver plated brass tube. Some Cheap antennas will be small diameter and flex alot and not hold up well where better antennas will be 1 inch at the base and not flex much at all.

Shakespeare's Galaxy serries have a urthane coating which looks better longer out in the weather.

Some antennas will have a Nylon mount and it work pretty well if you keep it out of the sun when not in use but with time and sun exposure will crack and the antenna fall over. First upgrade is chrome, then chrome covered brass then a must for saltwater Stainless Steal.

I really like the Shakespeare 5225 serries. I started with a 497 and it worked pretty well for a few years but I noticed boats near me would here more stations then I bought the 5225 and could not belive the difference.

Even in the Shakespeare 5225 serries there are big diferences. 5225-flt has a filter built in to help prevent intermod, used in areas like San Francisco Bay where there many many transmitters that can cause intermod. 5225-XP has a silver plated brass radiator for better performance.

Another factor is better antennas will have RG-8X low loss coax where cheaper antennas will use RG-58. On many boats the Coax may not run more than 5 feet so not that big a factor but if you use most of the 25 feet the extra loss can add up.

Some antennas have a 5 year warranty

http://www.shakespeare-marine.com/specs.asp?menupick=galaxy

http://www.shakespeare-marine.com/search.asp

 

[jurgenscraft]

Re: Another Antenna Question

Hello all, I think that old saying " you only get what you pay for" applies when it comes to antennas,The 5225 flt, is in my opinion, one of the best antennas available not just as very functional antenna, but also its engineering qualities.the machanical strenght as well as the repoprts I get are the reasons why this is the standard antenna used by many ocean going boats here in the RSA. We have a saying in afrikaans that reads " GOED KOOP IS DEUR KOOP"
loosly translated this meand cheap is expensive.REGARDS William Wright.

 

[jurgenscraft]

Re: Another Antenna Question

A second posting regarding antennas. Today I Tested a Banten 1/2 wave marine antenna (3db gain) against the shakespeare 5225 flt(6db gain) and guese what? not that big a big difference at 10 nautical miles, in fact no difference at all. The S meter on my Icom IC-M422 gave identical readings both tx and rx.But at 20 nautical miles,the shakespeare 5225 flt was 3 S points stronger on the S meter both tx and rx which after doing the calculations is about right,during transmissions (tx) the Shakespeare was constantly stronger from 3 nautical miles out to sea.The testing station also used a Icom IC-M422 AND A 21 FOOT PHASED 1/2 WAVE ELEMENTS COLLINEAR ARRAY approximitately 25 meters above seal evel at our club house radio station, which has a clear view of the Indian ocean.
Price wise the Banten 1/2 wave (3db gain) is not half the price but only 30% cheaper than the Shakespeare so in fact the Shakespeare is a better buy when you compare price against performance and how much value you place on good radio comunications which might save your life or vessel in times of distress. Kind Regards William Wright.

 

[761]

Re: Another Antenna Question

Thanks everyone! All great info. I went with the Shakespeare 5225-xt. I was going to go cheap until I got all of your valuable feedback. Thanks again!
This forum and all the people here are fantastic!