Dave thank you for this instructive video, I have the old version that no longer makes 65 feet 10-160 and with my tuner, I can also transmit in 6 and 60 meters, I think I was the first to buy it in Italy, I am greatly envied by many radio amateurs. 73 Peter IW3RUA
With all due respect, the "RL" value is not cable loss. It stands for "Return Loss", a term well-known to RF engineers. Think of it as the inverse of SWR, and just an alternative expression to what the SWR is. It has very little to do with cable loss. For example, 9 dB RL is about a 2:1 SWR. They are equivalent. You want a higher Return Loss number for a better SWR, not lower. A 40 dB return loss is a near perfect 1:1 SWR. This high Return Loss number means that the antenna is absorbing and using all of the power you send to it. A low value of Return Loss means that very little of your power is being used by the antenna, and is being reflected (Returned) back to your transmitter. I hope this helps. I've enjoyed your videos, BTW, and just bought a ZeroFive 33' vertical from Tom. I have no connection with him other than just being a new customer. ALL of the 43' verticals, not just the one from ZeroFive, are meant to be used with some type of antenna tuner and/or Un-Un combination, either at the base, or in your shack, using low-loss coax, like the RG-213 you are using. It is important that the coax is rated for higher power than you would normally transmit with, because of the higher SWR the coax will need to handle. With a large mismatch (high SWR), the voltages inside the coax can get to be really big. Putting 500 watts into a 43' antenna on 160 meters will give you something like 5200 volts peak out there at the base of the antenna, unless you have added a series inductor at the base to make up for the shorter antenna length. The well-known 43' length is naturally resonant around 5.4 MHz (without the Un-Un at the base), and was chosen to give the best compromise between avoiding super-high SWR on any ham band from 60-10 meters, and practical un-guyed height. It's a compromise on each band, designed that way on purpose. There are lots of ham-related articles floating around the Interwebs regarding the 43' antenna. The ARRL Antenna Book also has a page on it. It's not magic. 73 - Dave, K7DAA (and now a subscriber--keep up the great videos!)
Dave, thank you for sharing that information! I don't take it personal and enjoy the feedback. I won't be the only person benefiting from it. Congrats on the Zero Five 43'. I too have no affiliations with Zero Five and like his antennas. That's why I have two now. One antenna at each of my QTHs. Thank you for your subscription to my channel. 73's de N4VFR Capt Darren
Little by little you get everything in fully working order. Zero Five is an excellent company building high quality antennas. Happy mid of the Weekday & 73 de Your Friend from the German Frontier
@@DarrenN4VFR Real Flight Simulator Training...that sounds like being more fun than just pressing some stupid buttons on a X-Box 360 or PS5 of Sony. I know you guys have to do this every year and if you are over 40 and 50 years of ages you even need to go for these Checks more often. Good luck Capt Darren, you will make it. 👍🙋♂
Captain, if you use a coupler at the base of the antenna the losses of the coax will be none or minimal, if you use an nun the losses in the cable are high due to the high sir, good luck and stay safe. N1MXB.
Carlos, thank you brother! I will need to save up for the MFJ 998RT or like and mount it at the base of both antennas. Man, this is an expensive hobby.
In the past I have used icom ah-4 for 100 watts, yaesu fc-40 for 100 watts, mfj 600 watts they also have full power model and sgc 100 and 500 watts, they are excellent.
Read the definition of resonate. It's only resonate, if there's no reactive component to your impedance. The point in the band where the SWR is the lowest is not the resonant point . A 43 ft vertical is not designed to be resonant but it's nature. As I think somebody else mentioned if you can use a remote tuner at the base of the antenna it would be much better. You will have loss in your coax.
Thank you for clarification. I agree with a remote at the tuner, it will be most efficient for the antenna to radiate with very minimum reflected power.
Thank you very much for making this video and sharing it with all of us! I really enjoy your channel and I appreciate that you video and document things that you do! This video made my day! I have been wondering about this particular antenna for a while and I could never get any real-world statistics. Thank you very very much for doing actual measurements! I am of course subscribed to your channel with notifications turned on and thumbs up Captain Darren! 73 W3GUY Ernie in Pennsylvania
@@DarrenN4VFR I absolutely will! I also just sent you an email and just really want to say thank you very much again sir. Thank you! Additionally, I really like that analyzer, excellent tool! 73 W3GUY Ernie
@@DarrenN4VFR we're still adding the controls that will allow the voice to be disabled and enabled as desired and the ability to add a bunch of other customizations. Right now it's just a basic map. Although you can zoom in and out with the control on the left hand side and inside the map on the upper top right there is a layers option where you can toggle some things.
Great video, thanks! I'm a bit confused. The ZeroFive 43' antenna is supposed to work well on 160m and 80m, yet your SWR values (w/o a tuner, of course) were not great at all. I guess the bottom line is whether you have decent QSOs on those bands. Do you? Cheers!
Hi Darren love your videos. I was really surprised by how high the SWR was across the board. What was the SWR right at the antenna? Not hating ... in fact I was going to buy 05 - 43'. I'm a new ham only about a year. I have an IC7600 with an AT 140 remote turner. KN6TUX. 73
I took down the 43' Zero Five for a new Antenna, the DX Commander Signature 12.4. If I were you, I'd look at the DX Commander Classic. It's portable too. I have my DX Commander Classic as a permanent mounted fan dipole and it's my primary antenna to the Zero Five.
I had a look at your other video opening the unun. Thanks very much for this informative posting. You have done a service for the ham community. I would agree with the others that the way to go is with an antenna coupler at the feed point of the antenna. The results with the unun and run of coax to the shack are disappointing. I am not an expert in the matter but I would wonder if the supplied unun is really optimal for a 43 foot antenna. It would be interesting to see what results you can get with the antenna "as-is" and the internal rig tuner.
Hello Larry, I'm no expert too. I doubt that if I bypass the Zero Five 4:1 Unun, my IC7610 would be able to tune because it can only find a match below 3:1. Additionally, the unun acts as a shunt to ground off static electricity build up on the antenna. The ideal is to bypass the 4:1 Unun and have an antenna tuner at the base and connected directly to the vertical antenna to prevent line lose and ensuring that you get the most RF going to the antenna. 73's
@@DarrenN4VFRThanks for replying so soon to my comment. I agree with you that bypassing the unun that you have would only make matching more difficult ("impossible"). I could easily be wrong, but my sense is that ZERO FIVE has one unun for its range of antennas. My guess is that a different unun could give better results. Using an unun is cost-saving compromise. I doubt that any unun could compete with an antenna coupler at the feedpoint.
Hey capt Darren, thanx for a great video! Do you perhaps know the exact length of this anrenna? Moddeling a 43 foot antenna I am not getting similar results?
I'm sorry, I'm currently on a 4 day trip flying. You can call Tom the owner of Zero Five Antennas and he can give you specific dimensions. It is recommended to use an antenna tuner also.
Ouch, remote auto tuner at base of antenna is only option. Anything less you are just matching the impedance, and not the antenna. 66ft required for 80M, 43ft for 40M will get you resonance on those bands..
The wideband sweep at 11:47 doesn't look right. A 43' vertical should have deep narrow dips around 5 and 15 MHz. Is there an AM broadcast station nearby? The vertical will pick up the AM broadcast signal and this will corrupt VSWR measurements.
Yes any RF from transmitters nearby will corrupt any low power vector network analyzer measurements. The most accurate antenna measurements are normally made with an antenna bridge and a high power generator as the source to overcome the interference. That’s the way it’s done in the broadcast industry.
In other words the 43ft vertical is NOT resonant on any commonly used amateur band! To be resonant in an amateur band an antenna should show an inductive or capacitive reactance of X= 0 Ohms . 43 ft is an odd length that does not match with any of our common amateur bands . As a vertical 43ft would be the correct length for quarter wave resonance on the 60M band only. If you are a 40M operator you would have been better served by buying a 33ft vertical which is the correct length for 40M. 73 VO1HP
What others say is that I should have Remote Tuner at the base of the antenna so I will have the least loss of RF. I already have Forty 27' ground radials and Six 43' ground radials already installed when I took those readings.
@@DarrenN4VFR Yup that's correct. This is how I would prefer to go with. For example buying y MFJ-998RT because this can handle over 1KW RF Power. placing this thing right somewhere close tothe Feedpoint of your antenna. If done so you don't have to be concerned about the Coax Lenght from the inside of your shack all the Way to the Antenna. In general I suggest everyone who works multi band antennas with coax lenghts more than 70 ft. to not use a internal tuners of the Radios or external tuning unit inside the Shack. At this point remote antenna tuner are the better Choice. I am thinking about to get me the CG3000 for random wire lenghts to use for my portable experiments. Happy thursday Capt., keep up the Good Work.
That antenna is a dummy load Not resonant on any band Yes a tuner will tune it but there is a lot of loss Also a tuner is only a lie to make your radio happy There is no substitute for a resonant antenna
Dave thank you for this instructive video, I have the old version that no longer makes 65 feet 10-160 and with my tuner, I can also transmit in 6 and 60 meters, I think I was the first to buy it in Italy, I am greatly envied by many radio amateurs.
73 Peter IW3RUA
With all due respect, the "RL" value is not cable loss. It stands for "Return Loss", a term well-known to RF engineers. Think of it as the inverse of SWR, and just an alternative expression to what the SWR is. It has very little to do with cable loss. For example, 9 dB RL is about a 2:1 SWR. They are equivalent. You want a higher Return Loss number for a better SWR, not lower. A 40 dB return loss is a near perfect 1:1 SWR. This high Return Loss number means that the antenna is absorbing and using all of the power you send to it. A low value of Return Loss means that very little of your power is being used by the antenna, and is being reflected (Returned) back to your transmitter. I hope this helps. I've enjoyed your videos, BTW, and just bought a ZeroFive 33' vertical from Tom. I have no connection with him other than just being a new customer.
ALL of the 43' verticals, not just the one from ZeroFive, are meant to be used with some type of antenna tuner and/or Un-Un combination, either at the base, or in your shack, using low-loss coax, like the RG-213 you are using. It is important that the coax is rated for higher power than you would normally transmit with, because of the higher SWR the coax will need to handle. With a large mismatch (high SWR), the voltages inside the coax can get to be really big. Putting 500 watts into a 43' antenna on 160 meters will give you something like 5200 volts peak out there at the base of the antenna, unless you have added a series inductor at the base to make up for the shorter antenna length.
The well-known 43' length is naturally resonant around 5.4 MHz (without the Un-Un at the base), and was chosen to give the best compromise between avoiding super-high SWR on any ham band from 60-10 meters, and practical un-guyed height. It's a compromise on each band, designed that way on purpose. There are lots of ham-related articles floating around the Interwebs regarding the 43' antenna. The ARRL Antenna Book also has a page on it. It's not magic. 73 - Dave, K7DAA (and now a subscriber--keep up the great videos!)
Dave, thank you for sharing that information! I don't take it personal and enjoy the feedback. I won't be the only person benefiting from it. Congrats on the Zero Five 43'. I too have no affiliations with Zero Five and like his antennas. That's why I have two now. One antenna at each of my QTHs. Thank you for your subscription to my channel. 73's de N4VFR Capt Darren
Little by little you get everything in fully working order. Zero Five is an excellent company building high quality antennas. Happy mid of the Weekday & 73 de Your Friend from the German Frontier
Thanks Uncle Guenter and you too! I'm in Phoenix, Arizona right now for my re-current ground and flight simulator training.
@@DarrenN4VFR Real Flight Simulator Training...that sounds like being more fun than just pressing some stupid buttons on a X-Box 360 or PS5 of Sony. I know you guys have to do this every year and if you are over 40 and 50 years of ages you even need to go for these Checks more often. Good luck Capt Darren, you will make it. 👍🙋♂
@@DK5ONV thank you! I'll be studying while listening on remote HF on 40m.
Captain, if you use a coupler at the base of the antenna the losses of the coax will be none or minimal, if you use an nun the losses in the cable are high due to the high sir, good luck and stay safe. N1MXB.
Agreed, only option
Carlos, thank you brother! I will need to save up for the MFJ 998RT or like and mount it at the base of both antennas. Man, this is an expensive hobby.
In the past I have used icom ah-4 for 100 watts, yaesu fc-40 for 100 watts, mfj 600 watts they also have full power model and sgc 100 and 500 watts, they are excellent.
@@radioactive8245 I will need one that can handle 1500 watts legal power. DX Engineering has their MFJ 998RT waiting list till June 2022.
@@DarrenN4VFR Correct.
Read the definition of resonate. It's only resonate, if there's no reactive component to your impedance. The point in the band where the SWR is the lowest is not the resonant point . A 43 ft vertical is not designed to be resonant but it's nature. As I think somebody else mentioned if you can use a remote tuner at the base of the antenna it would be much better. You will have loss in your coax.
Thank you for clarification. I agree with a remote at the tuner, it will be most efficient for the antenna to radiate with very minimum reflected power.
Yes and ones lowest SWR is rarely the resonant frequency ....
Thank you very much for making this video and sharing it with all of us! I really enjoy your channel and I appreciate that you video and document things that you do! This video made my day! I have been wondering about this particular antenna for a while and I could never get any real-world statistics. Thank you very very much for doing actual measurements! I am of course subscribed to your channel with notifications turned on and thumbs up Captain Darren! 73 W3GUY Ernie in Pennsylvania
Your welcome Ernie! I made a video for the Zero Five 27' HOA antenna. It wont be up in maybe a week or two. Keep an eye out for it.
@@DarrenN4VFR I absolutely will! I also just sent you an email and just really want to say thank you very much again sir. Thank you! Additionally, I really like that analyzer, excellent tool!
73 W3GUY Ernie
@@ErnestGWilsonII I had your app/website loaded up and in the background.... Then my computer said, there was 3 POTA active. lol scared me.
@@DarrenN4VFR we're still adding the controls that will allow the voice to be disabled and enabled as desired and the ability to add a bunch of other customizations. Right now it's just a basic map. Although you can zoom in and out with the control on the left hand side and inside the map on the upper top right there is a layers option where you can toggle some things.
Great video, thanks! I'm a bit confused. The ZeroFive 43' antenna is supposed to work well on 160m and 80m, yet your SWR values (w/o a tuner, of course) were not great at all. I guess the bottom line is whether you have decent QSOs on those bands. Do you? Cheers!
Hi Darren love your videos. I was really surprised by how high the SWR was across the board. What was the SWR right at the antenna? Not hating ... in fact I was going to buy 05 - 43'. I'm a new ham only about a year. I have an IC7600 with an AT 140 remote turner. KN6TUX. 73
I took down the 43' Zero Five for a new Antenna, the DX Commander Signature 12.4. If I were you, I'd look at the DX Commander Classic. It's portable too. I have my DX Commander Classic as a permanent mounted fan dipole and it's my primary antenna to the Zero Five.
I had a look at your other video opening the unun. Thanks very much for this informative posting. You have done a service for the ham community. I would agree with the others that the way to go is with an antenna coupler at the feed point of the antenna.
The results with the unun and run of coax to the shack are disappointing. I am not an expert in the matter but I would wonder if the supplied unun is really optimal for a 43 foot antenna. It would be interesting to see what results you can get with the antenna "as-is" and the internal rig tuner.
Hello Larry, I'm no expert too. I doubt that if I bypass the Zero Five 4:1 Unun, my IC7610 would be able to tune because it can only find a match below 3:1. Additionally, the unun acts as a shunt to ground off static electricity build up on the antenna. The ideal is to bypass the 4:1 Unun and have an antenna tuner at the base and connected directly to the vertical antenna to prevent line lose and ensuring that you get the most RF going to the antenna. 73's
@@DarrenN4VFRThanks for replying so soon to my comment. I agree with you that bypassing the unun that you have would only make matching more difficult ("impossible"). I could easily be wrong, but my sense is that ZERO FIVE has one unun for its range of antennas. My guess is that a different unun could give better results. Using an unun is cost-saving compromise. I doubt that any unun could compete with an antenna coupler at the feedpoint.
@@larrypicard5969 I've made some changes in my equipment. Look out for my videos in the following week. 73's
Darren you should have that Antenna Analyzer at the Feed Point of your antenna NOT in your shack !!!
Hey capt Darren, thanx for a great video! Do you perhaps know the exact length of this anrenna? Moddeling a 43 foot antenna I am not getting similar results?
I'm sorry, I'm currently on a 4 day trip flying. You can call Tom the owner of Zero Five Antennas and he can give you specific dimensions. It is recommended to use an antenna tuner also.
If you had it to do all over again, would you buy the zero five 43' antenna? Also how do you rate the performance? Thanks! and 73 de K0EAO
Hello Tom, I would start off with the DX Commander Classic and use an Inverted L configuration for 80m.
Thanks,I enjoy your videos, keep the video coming, we all enjoy them!@@DarrenN4VFR
Did you open the little box full of rocks they sent with it ? You can throw a rock further than you cant talk on that vertical.
Ouch, remote auto tuner at base of antenna is only option.
Anything less you are just matching the impedance, and not the antenna.
66ft required for 80M, 43ft for 40M will get you resonance on those bands..
Thank you Robbie! I'll definitely put a remote antenna tuner at the base of my Zero Fives such as the MFJ 998RT.
The wideband sweep at 11:47 doesn't look right. A 43' vertical should have deep narrow dips around 5 and 15 MHz. Is there an AM broadcast station nearby? The vertical will pick up the AM broadcast signal and this will corrupt VSWR measurements.
Yes any RF from transmitters nearby will corrupt any low power vector network analyzer measurements. The most accurate antenna measurements are normally made with an antenna bridge and a high power generator as the source to overcome the interference. That’s the way it’s done in the broadcast industry.
In other words the 43ft vertical is NOT resonant on any commonly used amateur band! To be resonant in an amateur band an antenna should show an inductive or capacitive reactance of X= 0 Ohms . 43 ft is an odd length that does not match with any of our common amateur bands . As a vertical 43ft would be the correct length for quarter wave resonance on the 60M band only. If you are a 40M operator you would have been better served by buying a 33ft vertical which is the correct length for 40M. 73 VO1HP
Hi Darren, Is your 7610 getting the full 100 Watss PEP power output ? I hear many dont ...
I'll check it out next time I'm back in Florida.
Captain, if you had more radials. Would that bring your matching down. 🤔
KQ4CD Paul ⚓️
I was thinking excatly the Same Thing right as I looked on the Readout of the RigExpert. 🙋♂
What others say is that I should have Remote Tuner at the base of the antenna so I will have the least loss of RF. I already have Forty 27' ground radials and Six 43' ground radials already installed when I took those readings.
@@DarrenN4VFR Yup that's correct. This is how I would prefer to go with. For example buying y MFJ-998RT because this can handle over 1KW RF Power. placing this thing right somewhere close tothe Feedpoint of your antenna. If done so you don't have to be concerned about the Coax Lenght from the inside of your shack all the Way to the Antenna.
In general I suggest everyone who works multi band antennas with coax lenghts more than 70 ft. to not use a internal tuners of the Radios or external tuning unit inside the Shack. At this point remote antenna tuner are the better Choice.
I am thinking about to get me the CG3000 for random wire lenghts to use for my portable experiments.
Happy thursday Capt., keep up the Good Work.
@@DK5ONV Uncle Guenter thank you for you feedback. I've placed an order for mfj998rt and have to wait when it get back in stock.
@@DarrenN4VFR You welcome Capt! 🍻👍🙋♂
That antenna is a dummy load Not resonant on any band Yes a tuner will tune it but there is a lot of loss Also a tuner is only a lie to make your radio happy There is no substitute for a resonant antenna
I agree with you.