I can echo the EFHW experiences as above but, they for me, are slightly more noisy then a quarter wave vertical. Other than that, that is my only objection that I have to the EFHW. Every one that I have used has been excellent.
If you talk to Balun designs they make a 52 to 1 match box that I know for sure will easily take 800 watts CW on 40. I ran one that way and had no problems. With power I did use a line isolator inside the shack to protect against common mode on the shield of the coax. I had no problems with that set up. It worked and worked well. I have built 2 tuner boxes for them, I bought 2 old tuners that used an L network and rewired them to a parallel tank circuit and we, my son NS0R have used them with 1kw and had great success. No shack problems and they radiate like a beast because the current is high in the wire and not at the feed point on the ground. We have used them at Field Day, WPX, Sweepstakes as our 20 and 40 meter antennas. We both work from a city lot and have no beams. For us, using these antennas we were able to do 1400 QSO in WPXCW with a half hearted effort. We use the same boxes to tune half square antennas as they also have high impedance feed points. I personally have used a 20 meter half square...1/4 up then 1/2 wave over to 1/4 wire elements on 20 and this will make a quarter wave on 80 that we used with a few radials. So we got 2 bands out of one antenna. In the half square config on 20 meters, using it as an 80 meter made it NVIS. It did work. I am going to have to the me a KX3 or Kx2 some day soon. I wish I had one now because I am heading to Maine and would like to operate there into Europe from the coast. And, you can bet I will be taking an EFHW for ease and portability. Vy 73, Morgan NJ8M On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 1:34 PM, Robert Vargas-KP4Y via Elecraft < elecraft@mailman.qth.net> wrote: > Agree...I'm a big fan of EFHW. I have made comparisons between an HFHW > with a short radial and 1/4 WL with a few radials and the EFHW beats the > 1/4 WL 100% hands down. This is a great example of empirical results > speaking louder than theoretical predictions. > > 73, > Robert-KP4Y/W4 > > Sent from my iPhone > > > On Feb 14, 2017, at 1:19 PM, Gil G. via Elecraft < > elecraft@mailman.qth.net> wrote: > > > > > > I will second Guy here. > > The best antenna I have ever used is the vertical EFHW. I never used a > counterpoise wire, never felt that tingling in your fingers you might feel > with a random wire and a metal key. > > I have used 100mW to 500mW regularly with end feds with great results, > single hop up to 1300 miles, 5K miles on 1W. > > I say that having built all kinds of antennas and used them in all sorts > of configurations, random wires, with and without counterpoises, slopers, > inverted Vs, dipole, Windom, magnetic loops, quad, short whips, yagi, and > except for the beams nothing beats the EFHW! > > A horizontal dipole might perform as well but they are rarely high > enough to perform as well, except of course for NVIS on the lower bands, > and then, a horizontal EFHW will work as well. > > The only antenna that came close in performance was a large magnetic > loop. > > Whatever the theory says, I am talking about real in-the-field > performance where nothing comes close. > > Gil > > AK4YH & F4WBY > > > > ______________________________________________________________ > Elecraft mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html > Message delivered to mbaileyc...@gmail.com > ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
