How did the 9032 do compared to your 91XG?

As mentioned elsewhere, since the single-boom MXU-59 was too big to fit, I obtained the HD-9032. The thread where I compared the 9032 head-to-head with the 91XG is here:

http://www.digitalhome.ca/forum/showthread.php?t=137678

Out of the box, the 91XG bested the 9032. As you know, the D/FW market is interesting since we have UHF facilities ranging from channel 14 to the current top end, channel 51. Those in between those extremes are evenly dispersed in the 20s, 30s and 40s.

Subsequently, at the advice of 300ohm, I added four aluminum foil panels to enhance the 9032's corner reflectors and did see gain increases across the spectrum.

Thanks for the reply.... That was a great thread. :) It's right up my alley, as I have some mesh screen ready to add to my 9032, but wasn't sure it would be worth it. If I correctly read the figures you posted, it looks like the 9032 with the wider reflector does pretty much match the 91XG.

Then again, in the real world I don't know how much better it would be than my CM4248 yagi. It's too bad CM no longer makes the 4248... Its very wide reflector really helps it on the lower channels (as Ken Nist notes).

I find this thread interesting & was wondering if Peano has put up his MXU59 Antenna?? I did buy the MXU59 antenna to use at this location. http://www.tvfool.com/?option=com_wrapper&Itemid=29&q=id%3d8d17974b055988

I wish I could say yes. But April where I live has been either very rainy with high winds or fast moving snow squalls with high winds - at least on the days I can spare the time.

As soon as I can test the MXU59 I will post the results.

Peano, sell my your MXU59, and I'll put it up my tower this weekend. ;-)

I have two if you want to borrow one. ;)

I do understand about the bad weather Peano. I did get my MXU59 antenna up with out a Pr-amp on a 10 foot piece of pipe just to try & to my surprise I get every channel that my HD Stacker antenna gets at 35 Feet . I am going to try
what 300 ohm advice about adding more reflectors on the conner screen!! I wish I could load the picture of the Antenna My son & I put together from three
other antennas the boom is 126".5" long the spread on the conner screen is almost 6 foot this antenna is for our camp it works pretty good :)

Forum member Peano was kind enough to loan me one of his MXU59's for testing on my tower. It's too windy today, but I hope to have it in the air this coming weekend.

Any recommendations on which balun to use? I have a Magnovox, Eagle, and Radio Shack. All are ferrite ones. Due to the logistical complexity of installing the antenna 69' in the air, I only intend to test one balun with the antenna.

Given that the MXU59 is an LPDA antenna, is an enhanced reflector really necessary?!

Well, if anything, a LPDA driven element would require a bigger bounce back area than a simple dipole IMO.

If that's the case, then why don't why see reflectors on LPDA VHF antennas? I understand that different frequencies have different characteristics...but is there that much of a difference between VHF and UHF?

If that's the case, then why don't why see reflectors on LPDA VHF antennas?
Actually, my CM1221 does have a pair of reflectors. A corner reflector for VHF would be incredibly huge.

No doubt there are reflectors for some VHF LPDA antennae--but it's not common.

So this is just an issue of size then? Obviously a corner reflector for something like the 16'1" VIP307SR LPDA antenna would be monstrous.

So this is just an issue of size then?
Mostly, yes. Plus vhf antennas dont have to have as much gain for the intended viewing area. IIRC, the FCC recommends/assumes 4 dB for vhf-low, 6 dB for vhf-hi and 10 dB for uhf for the intended viewing area.

Forum member Peano was kind enough to loan me one of his MXU59's for testing on my tower. It's too windy today, but I hope to have it in the air this coming weekend.

Since this will be a comparison against your existing 91XG, that raises a point of curiosity. What does the 91 mean in the model name? If I do some very creative counting, I can kind of, sort of, nearly get 91 elements. But I doubt that's it.

Any ideas if the number 91 (or for that manner the 43 in its little brother) have any significance?

Yeah, I think its the total number of elements, but it depends on what pieces theyre considering as individual elements, heh. :p

Yeah, I think its the total number of elements, but it depends on what pieces they're considering as individual elements, heh.

Here's how the math works out considering my rather creative counting.

There are 22 directors attached to the 3 booms of the 91XG. If I count each one of those as 4, that yields 88. I next count the driven element as 1 and the corner reflector as 2.

88 + 1 + 2 == 91

Here's hoping ADTech comes across this thread and reveals the secret in the sauce! :)

You could double check that with the 43XG by taking off the additional directors. :p

You could double check that with the 43XG by taking off the additional directors.

I actually had a 43XG for a brief period of time before returning it for credit to get its big brother. If my notes are correct, my counting shows that the element count is 43. According to what I have archived, there are 10 directors (5 on each of the two booms) in all.

Thus 4 * 10 + 2 + 1 == 43

After reviewing those notes, this is contrary to the conventional wisdom that a 43XG is just a 91XG with one boom subtracted.

Here's what I have:

91XG: 6 directors each on booms #2 and #3, 10 on boom #1 == 22
43XG: 5 directors each on booms #1 and #2 == 10

My measurements show that the boom lengths also differ:

91XG: Each is 31 inches
43XG: Each is 26.5 inches.

I don't believe this has been specifically mentioned: One important design difference between the two antennae is the MXU59's directors are not electrically isolated from the boom. Only the active LPDA elements are isolated.