Where I am, there are tall Western Hemlocks, Douglas Firs ~ 135' and Western Red Cedars ~ 100' in a park about 1/2 a block from me and my signal from Mt. Seymour comes right through them; so I'm wondering if a more directional antenna, like the 91XG, might be better than a something like a four or eight bay antenna.
Thats like trying to get a signal thru a wall of water. Sometimes lower to the ground may be better in those cases.

My personal experience is that broadside type antennas, like the GH and bowties, do better thru the trees than yagi/lpda types, unless you can find a hole somewhere thru the trees.

They are not round but actually U shaped.
Yep, thats what AntennaCraft does. The take 3/8" round split tubing, open it up, and notch the middle to fit the square boom. Clever and very cost effective.:)

Another feature that's in the 91XG's corner is the easy custom tilting feature right out of the box.
Because of the mounting brackets, there will be enough give for the MXU59 to tilt up or down a bit too.

Both the MXU59 and the 91XG could benefit structurally from a pvc pipe cross brace from the front of the antennas to the mast, basically on a 45 degree angle.

Peano, is that corner reflector on it mounted sideways to its factory position or am I seeing an optical illusion ?
Pics here show how it ships:

http://www.digitalhome.ca/forum/album.php?albumid=211&pictureid=3626

http://www.digitalhome.ca/forum/album.php?albumid=211&pictureid=3625

http://www.digitalhome.ca/forum/album.php?albumid=211&pictureid=3628

Yep, thats what AntennaCraft does. The take 3/8" round split tubing, open it up, and notch the middle to fit the square boom. Clever and very cost effective.
Most likely they just stamp it out from flat sheets or rolls of aluminum sheeting. That's quick and cheap, way cheaper than using tubing.

Thats like trying to get a signal thru a wall of water. Sometimes lower to the ground may be better in those cases

That is good to know and could explain my odd situation. The Bellingham channels are LOS and according to TV fools stronger than many of the Mt Seymour stations, but they come in much stronger lower down at this location. Even 7-8' AGL with a folded dipole antenna in my living room is stronger (95-100% signal strength) than the high gain antennas 20'AGL outside. Every foot increase in antenna height above this 20' and they get weaker and weaker, at 30' AGL, 2 of the 3 Bellingham channels will barely lock.:confused:

Conversely, the 1-2 Edge Seattle channels respond favorably to height increase, getting noticeably stronger at 30' versus 20'.

Thanks 300ohm

Good to know about experience with trees and signals. I can find a good signal, for say VHF 8 (Global) in more than one compass direction with strong ghosting in between. That's with my 20 year old combo VHF/UHF/FM Antennacraft VU-160XR.

I have a similar situation here. One station at about 20 miles is supposed to be LOS but has tons of multipath. Lowering the antenna reduces multipath. OTOH, extra height to turn 2 edge stations into 1 edge makes a dramatic improvement.

The 91XG, until about a year or 18 months ago, shipped with a ferrite core balun. We changed over to the PCB balun as it is more efficient on UHF, the design intent of the 91XG. The best ferrite transformers typically exhibited 2-3 dB IL on UHF while the PCB's IL was less than 1 dB for the UHF band.

As noted, the PCB balun is particularly harsh on VHF frequencies with increasing loss as the frequency decreases.

The 91XG, until about a year or 18 months ago, shipped with a ferrite core balun. We changed over to the PCB balun as it is more efficient on UHF, the design intent of the 91XG.


I first was going to submit this as a private message, but considering there are a lot of 91XG owners here, I thought it to be of general interest.

My 91XG was ordered via Solid Signal in November 2009. What would be the way to discern if the balun attached to the UHF bowtie is of the older design? And, if so, what can a 91XG owner do to get the newer, more efficient balun part?

Thanks for a good product that works 10/10 and now I'd just like to get it to 11! :)

The older design has the coax connection facing the back of the antenna. The newer design has it on the bottom. I have both & performance seems the same.

Peano, where did you purchase the MXU59? How much was it? And what about shipping? - since it's about 8' long. It looks good. Look forward to hearing about how it performs.

Antenacraft MXU59 is probably Log-periodic antenna. What I see on pictures. They dont have much gain, so 10-12 dB. Sounds right. Log-periodic antenna has relatively "flat" gain over frequency designed for.That is good, some Yagi start much lover and get better gain at the end. I have Iskra 91x and has 14-16 dBi gain. With 18 dB preamplifier, I get some chanels from Seattle
165 km. I still have to move antenna away from chimney. Metal pipe is to close.:rolleyes: So I will se.

Antenacraft MXU59 is probably Log-periodic antenna. What I see on pictures. They dont have much gain, so 10-12 dB. Sounds right.
Correct, thats typical of LPDAs. But once you start adding in the corner reflector and massive amounts of directors, that will change. :p

Peano, where did you purchase the MXU59? How much was it? And what about shipping?

Summit Source. Was about $85 landed after UPS and brokerage.

Hey Peano

Did you get the MXU59 up and working? If you did, how's it doing and comparing to other antennae? - You could be in a snowy place so, if that's the case, I look forward to hearing later on when it's safe to put it up.

Winter has returned with a vengance where I live. Perhaps mid to end of April I can try it.

Peano, will you be stacking the MXU59 with the 91XG for comparative testing?
With all your cold and probably snow, ice, wind, etc., how are the elements standing up on the 91XG? It looks a bit light duty. I was looking at at Televes DAT75, but I'm not sure how significant a performance benefit would be vs. the additional cost.

I was looking at at Televes DAT75, but I'm not sure how significant a performance benefit would be vs. the additional cost.You've hit the nail right on the head. If you want a highly noticeable conversation piece up high on a tower then nothing beats a bright orange, triple-boom Televes DAT75, but the comparitively high cost of a DAT75 is not paid back in better performance than the 91XG, so I would not spend the money on one. The quality and craftsmanship of Televes products is well known, but outside of Europe the bang for the buck is just not there.

See the Antenna Chart and you'll be fine with the models on it. If the MXU59 turns out to be a strong alternative to the 91XG I'll add it there.

I remember you saying if it didn't bring you a beer then you wouldn't pay that much for it. I don't drink so I don't need the beverage. The tri-boom, especially in bright orange, makes for an interesting conversation piece.

I was interested in this thread, because you read scattered very favorable reviews of the MXU59, and I've never seen it modeled. Besides the one re_nelson posted, I remember a Seattle installer telling me years ago how good the MXU59 was. I would think it would become more popular since it's now available at RadioShack here in the States for 55 or so dollars with free shipping to the store.

Anyway... I hope re_nelson sees this because I recognize him from the AVS Dallas forum. :D How did the 9032 do compared to your 91XG? I finally got a 9032 after years of wanting one due to those tempting published gain figures and previous good experiences with the 4400, 8800, and 6065 FM Winegards. Very nice build quality, but alas, I was disappointed in the performance of the 9032. Just eyeballing it, it looks like it fits the model on the HDTV Primer graph, with a narrow reflector and smallish directors. On the other hand, the AntennaHacks site has them functioning pretty close on the lower UHF channels. (Which I find confusing, but then the 91XG is one of the few high-gain UHFs I haven't yet tried). I've considered putting a wider screen reflector on my 9032 since I have it anyway and I probably won't sell it... The box is too big to ship anywhere!