@Krump 7 Because when it’s up high on the roof, you have no obstructions around it so it can send out a strong 360 degree signal where as when it’s on the bullbar, the signal will transmit out in the same 360 degree circle however the signal going forward will be stronger / clearer then the signal going backwards towards the cabin of the vehicle it’s mounted on. The vehicle behind you won’t get a clear signal because the body of car ( the one with it on the bullbar ) acts like a big signal blocker, it gets in the way, all that glass and metal to bounce around on / off. The same reason you mount your TV antenna high up on the ridge capping of your house as opposed to mounting it down low on the side of your house, less obstructions means a clearer stronger cleaner signal. 👍 because when it’s up high on the roof, you have no obstructions around it so it can send out a string signal 360 degrees where as when it’s on bullbar, the signal will transmit out in the same 360 degree circle however the signal going forward will be stronger / clearer then the signal going backwards towards the cabin of the vehicle it’s mounted on. The vehicle behind you won’t get a clear signal because the body of car ( the one with it on the bullbar ) acts like a big signal blocker, it gets in the way... The same as how you mount your TV antenna high up on the ridge capping of your house as opposed to mounting it down low on the side of your house, less obstructions means a clearer stronger cleaner signal. 👍
@Krump 7 sorry mate, it was the way you worded it that threw me - I thought you were saying ‘how does it affect it when mounted on the bullbar ?’ as opposed to asking ‘by how much does it affect it mounted on the bullbar when compared to mounted on the roof ?’ Going off the end of that clip, I think he’s going to test the bull bar one too which would be good. 👍👍 cheers buddy
Krump 7 I think most would of understood perfectly what you meant . I also run a low mount aerial , we have lots of overhanging stuff a high roof mount is not very practical so would also be interested in how much difference there is
A huge shout out to the both of you for taking the time to make this video Ronny! Your videos are a boatload of information for those of us who don't have the money to experiment with multiple, expensive items. I as well as many others who are involved with overlanding, look to you for help and guidance, regarding products, driving techniques and so much more. The bottom line is, your videos are extremely fun, informative and most of all, you emphasize the importance of safety. Good Job Mate!!
Hi guys, i have used the 2.1 d b for a long time at least 10 years overall i find it better even in the city it rules when near high buildings it is also a clear winner in hills, mine is only on the bullbar, good test guys
Thanks Ronny for taking the time to make videos like these. This kind of stuff helps so many people like myself who are not sure how certain products work and perform. Your channel is helping to educate a lot of people in how to have fun and stay safe and be prepared when off road. Thank you :)
I hundred percent agree with what you’re saying is people who don’t go for driving very often or don’t use two way radios and install them very often it is very handy information for those sorts of people especially when they have a learning difficulty or some kind of disability
This test confirms the test's I have done over the years. I have all 3 in the GME range, the 2.1, 6.6 and 9dBi antenna's. The beam pattern really plays a huge part in it as you said. So my everyday antenna is the 2.1dBi and I use it when the terrain gets undulation and can sometimes get better reception than the 6.6dBi, especially as you have found at that few km apart range. I use the 6.6dBi for my trips just for the extra distance when separated in convoy. My 9dBi is absolutely hopeless in convoy. it just fires the beam right across the top of the other vehicle antennas, its not until you are a good 6 or more km apart that you can start talking clearly with the other vehicles. So the 9dBi is fantastic for talking long distance over flat ground but that is absolutely it. Great vid guys, keep it up!
I used to fly over rural NSW quite a bit. At altitude you can hear your mates almost out to the horizon. Downside is that you can hear anyone else on the same frequency at that range. Lots of people seem to use CB channels as if they were phones, meaning long, personal, sometimes painfully personal conversations, all playing in your ear, hours on end. There were many times when I'd have been happier with less antenna performance.
I chose the 2.1dbi, and went with medium duty because it was cheaper, absolutely love it, has never let me down once, great range on the highway, and can hear a mate loud and clear when we’re both at home, 5.6km as the crow flies, through hills, trees, buildings etc, best all rounder antenna I believe
I use a 4.5 dbi ground plane dependant antenna mounted in the middle of the roof. It provides a good balance of range vs different terrains and it fits under carparks and other obstacles.
Please do the roof vs bar test. I’m yet to install my uhf in my new rig and have been debating which way to go. Roof would mean I might have to take it off for day to day use. But great vid at this stage I would go the shorter one in the roof. Love your work.
When I was playing with drones (when you had to make them yourself rather than buy at JBHIFI) we had these little magic boxes that had a high gain antenna (usually a yagi) and a low gain whip connected, and it would seamlessly switch to the antenna with the highest signal quality. Someone smart should design a little magic box that does that for UHF stuff.
The diversity receivers for the 'drone' is usually only for receiving the video from the drone .. where you have one omni and one directional .. handy for when you fly behind the backplane of the directional. The CB antenna's also need to transmit. UHF .. 2.1db / 3db good for hills as higher radiation angle .. big open flat areas get a 6, 9 or 12db antenna with lower radiation angle still in the omni directional pattern for greater distance. Mounting the antenna on roof at center is best for UHF, mounting on bull bar or rear will change the radiation pattern.
@@DarrenFJ : umm.. Diversity on 2.4GHz Control has been a thing for a long time - mainly from factory for selection between 1/4 wave monopoles at vertical vs horizontal polarisation.. Naturally Video (at legal transmit power) goes to pot long before the control comms -much more sensitive to interference - most important to maintain video link if flying BVLOS FPV (illegal in most cases -don't want to loose AC or get busted.).
I drive mostly in hilly terrain and was considering switching from the 6db i have on my bullbar to a 2.1db mounted on my rollbar, my only concern was losing range, but this video shows that unless I'm on the Nullarbor, it's really a non-issue.
ive got the big one on my bullbar simply because its the exact height of my roof top tent so it lets me know if I'm going to clear low hanging things or not
Mate, that was very interesting..... I’ve got two aerials on my vehicle, one a short little stubby for hill work and a 6.6 dbi on a mast and it works antrrat. We were up on top of a hill in the middle of nowhere and when asking for a radio check, picked up a 4x4 driving course convoy 26 k’s away. Obviously it worked because we were up quite high but yeah, I was super surprised to get a response from that far away. Great video mate, thanks for sharing 👍👍
I have a centrally drilled roof-mounted (iMax) no dbi short UHF whip. Ideal position, but obviously not suited to all install situations owing gear you carry. Your 2.1db is fine. Great test.
100% right. The manufacturers figures are theoretical and based on an isotropic radiator in free space. As soon as you mount an antenna to a vehicle the radiation pattern changes - and usually changes a lot.
@@adelarsen9776 yes agree and the higher the db with a poor install the worse the performance is. I reckon 95% of people dont even check their install with a swr meter.
@@jimpap13 A reflectometer and nomograph are essential. People just copy and paste. People believe the marketing and that bigger is always better. All of my antennae are 2.1dBi or less. The lower the gain the better.
I find it laughable that GME and Uniden advertise their tiny magnetic antennas as 2.1dbi or similar. That would be the same as the one on Ronny’s roof.
It’s interesting to see basically the same result I think I’ll stick to my 5watt handheld and if in convoy use same channel and try and stick to line of sight
What a neat practical test, though I can't say I'm surprised at the result. The math says ~16km is the max you would be able to get between two antennae at 4 meters high for pure radio horizon. With simplex transmission on VHF/UHF low gain is where it's at. With a high gain antenna, your major advantage is hitting high mountain repeaters. As others have said, a good ground plane and pattern are going to be your best bets for distance. I don't know how it it is there, but in the US most of our comms is duplex off the repeaters so a high gain pays dividends.
So interesting test as a senior communications network engineer for a large regional, rural, & remote communications, telecommunications & telemetry company who travels the entire east coast both coastal and inland for work I would love to not only see this same test done on the bull bar but would love to see it done against the other great antenna that being RFI Like pencil beam headlights v’s wide. Pencil cast light longer, but not as wide. The same goes for dBi. Lower dBi means wider but less travel (3 to 5). Higher (6-9+) means longer travel less width. Higher dBI: awesome performance on flat terrain Lower dBI: awresome performance on hill terrain Middle dBI: great all rounder On our fleet of XLT Rangers & we run 2 x different types of antennas 1 for our Telstra Cel-Fi Go Mobile Boosters and one for our CB's So In the metro & outer metro areas of Melb, Syd, Newcastle, Brisd, Ipswitch because of under ground car parts etc. we run the RFI CDQ7194 3dBI for the Cel-Fi Booster & the RFI CDQ3000 3dBI for the CB's & yeah they are ok generally speaking for the immediate general area say maybe up to 10K's depending on a lot of things on the CB if we are lucky and can be a bit hit and miss on the Telstra Cel-Fi Go Mobile Boosters. If we want range & performance we swap out to the RFI CDQ7195 6.5dBI for the Telstra Cel-Fi Go Mobile Boosters & the RFI CDQ5000 6.5dBI for the CB, the range difference & signal quality are not comparable it has to be seen to be believed the difference is massive the RFI CDQ7195 6.5dBI & RFI CDQ5000 6.5dBI eat the RFI CDQ7194 3dBI & the RFI CDQ3000 3dBI for breakfast in challenging areas & spit them out the other end in every facet of communications. As for hilly & high country communications both simplex on the CB ( vehicle to vehicle ) as well as duplex via a distant repeater & wanting stable reliable mobile coverage for the Telstra Cel-Fi Go Mobile Boosters there is only 1 options the RFI CDQ7195 6.5dBI & RFI CDQ5000 6.5dBI for the CB everything else you are wasting your time with. We only use the RFI CDQ7195 6.5dBI & RFI CDQ5000 6.5dBI on our major highways including but not limited to the Hume, ( Melb to Syd ) The Pacific ( Syd yo Bris ) including up the back way Melb to Bris via Dubbo. We also have our vehicles fitted with the RFI CDQ7195 6.5dBI & RFI CDQ5000 6.5dBI running around Roma for a range of 700 + km's and other places in western QLD without any reception problems. Lets also not forget about ground plane quality and the radiation pattern as well as they also play a major part in range of transmission and reception. Regards Wayne
Better still I'd like to see manufacturers use actual dB gain figures for their antennas. Not the bullshit dBi figure based on a non existant isotopic antenna with no actual real world testing. The dBi figures quoted are based on an antenna that is designed in the perfect realm of pc design & not actually possible to produce to many varying factors of the real world conditions. Anybody who actually wants to learn this stuff should spend the time & at least go get their amateur foundation radio ticket. It's not hard to achieve & will open your eyes to many things some manufacturers claim as sheer bullshit.
@@jlphtc dBi IS the real figure. 30 years of RF engineering and I've never see test results from an anechoic chamber in "actual dB". Your misunderstanding of how to interpret it that is the issue. I often hear this excuse from hams without any context. "My 14dBi antenna has shit gain, it must be the dBi, not that I'm measuring it from the side therefore this value is not true because the report should have compensated for my lack of technical understanding by using dBd. (The exact same measurement with a different reference.)
Great work mounting on the roof, probably the first 4WD channel I’ve seen properly explain signal coverage and dead spots when mounting to a Bull bar. Unless you’re transmitting in HF, antenna gain isn’t as important as elevation and terrain analysis, especially without an amplifier. They’re line-of-sight radios.
The higher the dB a antenna has the flatter the signal that gets transmitted , higher dB antennas for flat ground, lower dB for hilly areas , also roof mount is best , height is might with UHF
One of the best comments here, pity most don't realise a 2.15dbi gain antenna, is actually only a 0 dbd antenna when compared to real world metrics. But marketing be marketing & hell a bigger number even though BS is better than the real facts. Bit like that other one out there watts in pmpo vs watts rms.
@@jlphtc It's because selling something with ZERO in the name sounds less useful and less saleable. It's amazing reading the comments how few people know the reality of advertising nor RF.
I'm definitely going to swap my 6.6 on the bullbar to a 2.1 on the roof with a fold down mount 😀 I think with the same test done in the hills, the 2.1 will be an even clearer winner... so to speak.
Thanks for the Video guys, I have a 3.1 Dbi on my rack as well, far clearer than the 6 on the bar. Around town just leave it down and still get good reasonable distance around me. It is hooked up to a Oricom DTX 4700x.
I tested this myself last year. Using a combination of Google earth and an earth curvature calculator website I selected hill (870m elevation) that allowed a line of sight back to the base (22m elevation). I was able to transmit 67km between a 5 watt GME TX4500s with the antenna at roof height like Ronny's and a 2 watt Uniden UH820S. At this range, the 2.1dbi antenna was barely legible and the 6.6 was legible but not totally clear. This just proved to me that the antenna and wattage of a radio come in a distant second behind the obstacles in the way of the transmission.
For anyone wondering if mounting up on the roof is any better than on a bullbar where you so commonly see, this is my take on it. Only an opinion but sharing to maybe help others. When it’s up high on the roof, you have no obstructions around it so it can send out a strong 360 degree signal where as when it’s on the bullbar, the signal will transmit out in the same 360 degree circle however the signal going forward will be stronger / clearer then the signal going backwards towards the cabin of the vehicle it’s mounted on. The vehicle behind you won’t get a clear signal because the body of car ( the one with it on the bullbar ) acts like a big signal blocker, it gets in the way, all that glass and metal to bounce around on / off. The same reason you mount your TV antenna high up on the ridge capping of your house as opposed to mounting it down low on the side of your house, less obstructions means a clearer stronger cleaner signal. 👍
Hey fellas, awesome informative video. Back in the day we would have the 2.1dbi on when we were in club convoys in hilly terrain. The omni directional antennas go over hills better. When I've been touring ive use to always have bigger antennas. However saying that, the best I have ever found was a 2.1dbi on my Kombi roof rack driving across Australia. Better usable sound, and mounted on the roof rack, it got a fair distance, even on the Nullarbor.
If you were doing inland desert travel or open highway the 6.6 would be a better option, but for most applications like beach travel, mountains, tree cover the 2.1 may be the better fit. Having the two detachable aerials however gives you the best of both worlds if doing long trips across varied terrain/conditions for sure. Great real world test guys.
Foe every 3bd , the antenna doubles the transmit and receive power. Gain is achieved by focusing the power at the horizon. A lower gain antenna works best with hills and valleys while a high gain antenna will get maximum distance over flat land. You need have 6DB difference of gain to make a noticeable difference in signal strength. . Also, there is a difference between DB and DBI of 2,1. A 2.1 DBI gain antenna has zero DB gain.
6dB of gain is 4x increase in Effective Radiated Power (ERP), which theoretically will carry the same power density at double the distance (as power and distance in free space propagation follows an inverse square law).
Ronny most of your noise was electrical interference and not just back ground static, try some tests with you stationary with the engine off and while the engine is running at various set distances I think you will be surprised, the short antennas are better around built up areas as apposed to the longer ones being better out in the open.73's 2E0OOW 🤘
Great test. I'm running the 2.1 on my bullbar. Radio checked a fella on Mt Tamborine about 10 km from me (line of sight) yesturday. Didnt check the strength bar but he was Land C. Pretty impressed with a bullbar mount but I do intend to roof mount it later on. Would love to see the bullbar test.
From the US here, I would prefer the 2.1 on a roof mount, only due to height restrictions. That being said, different types of antennas provide a different radiation pattern so there is that...
Always run a 6dbi, good balance i've found, in all situations, would have been interesting matching the same aerials on both ends, result might have been different
i run a 3db on my bullbar most of the time, fits in my garage without hitting the door and I travel mostly in the vic high county which is all hills. For outback trips i run a 6.6db but after you test I might not bother.
Another great video Ronny! I just installed a value pack GME UHF on my budget super tourer. It has an interchangeable 2.1 and 6.6 whip. Very happy with it so far. I am doing an install guide on my channel next week. I will be experimenting with the different DBI’s. In Cairns we have flat coastal roads until we get into national parks, so I’m still trying to figure out which one to use. I’m open to suggestions.
It would be good to see a test when offroad in hilly terrain, one person on the opposite side of a hill to the other so we can see that "ball" RF pattern in play. I run a 9DB antenna on my car but thats because its never going to be offroad and im usually on flat terrain.
One of the reasons for the antenna performance could have been the tuning of the antennas. I would have put an SWR meter on each to see how they are matched to the radio. That can make a big difference.
Antennas are not tuned to the transceiver they are tuned to be resonant on a specific frequency or range of frequencies. Longer antennas do not always mean better on a specific frequency either. It is about resonance, different resonant lengths produce different patterns say 1/4 or 5/8 the wavelength of the frequency. 1/4 will be a lower gain at same points in space as a 5/8 will.
@@mjhmech4903 : SWR works for all antennas -It is just maths - just that UHF is less affected by an out of tune feed line -and ground plane coupling than HF. Factory Tune of UHF antennas is usually acceptable.
2.1 will be my choice. Small and compact best for offroad training. Just got my brother to bring one back from Australia to South Africa. GME is the best CB communication device on the market for my Jimny JB74
I run the 6.6 just personal choice and I like the bigness of it. Also doubles as my gauge when up bush as it sits fairly level when my swag is on me roof rack. So I know if my swag wasn’t to fit under a low lying branch say. Or Maccas drive through. Best range was travelling north of Auski rd house and was still picking up iron ore rd trains that pull out of there. Was 22km night driving with cloud cover. Cheers
Maybe you should have also turned the squelch OFF on the 2.1dB at the furthest range. Also, what may have been a better comparison would have been to have both the same antennas mounted on both bullbars .. that would be an even more realistic test.
I run the 6.6 all the time and swap out for the 2.1 when tackling glass house mountains. I run the tall one because am constantly going up the beach, Fraser Island, double island etc.
No surprises there. A 2.1 gives a nice round signal combating hills and obstacles. For most applications the 2.1 is best. On the bull bar the 2.1 will be even better than the 6.6 as the cab of the vehicle will further obstruct the 6.6. Loved this video guys!
Maybe it's my boating life but i've never heard anybody on a radio use anything other than 5/5 for signal quality. Anyway sweet video, cheers. Good range for UHF. Grab a HF and talk to people in Sweden :)
Check out the R-S-T System for signal strength, it uses 1-9 where 9 is extremely strong and 1 is barely readable. It's used frequently and gives a more granular reporting of a signals strength. GME is using this.
I would go with the long one on the bull bar. But thats more based on the looks lol. Thanks for the video it is interesting to see how you guys do your radio communications over there compared to here in canada
I have a rugged radio vhf 60 watt radio with a 2.4 db antenna. I'm happy with seeing your results, with my setup. Awesome video display of function. This is why I subscribe to Ronny Dahl's videos. Function over Form. Good Work you guys!
Thank you for the entertaining video! Without looking up on the internet that particular model of transceiver that you were using that you mentioned, you didn’t actually mention anywhere what *frequency* or even band you were testing on. This DOES matter. If you hold an amateur radio operator license you could be operating on either HF, 6m, VHF, or UHF. If you are operating on CB in Australia (citizens band) you could be operating on either HF (about 27MHz) or UHF (about 477MHz). Frequency does matter and does make a difference!! Also, probably a better comparison which would eliminate a lot of the variables in your testing methodology would be to have both antennas connected at the same time and use an A/B switch to switch between them to get simultaneous comparisons of signal strength and readability. But again, thanks for the entertaining video!
I run 2 UHF’s, 1 with a 2.2db (for off-road hilly terrain), the other a 6.6db (for flatter terrain and highway use). Both mounted on the bullbar approx 6 inches apart. I find the 2.2 less effective for long range highway, the 6.6 around the same off-road as the 2.2.
Great video. Thanks very much. I have the 2.1db on my roof as well. Would be great to know if there is much of a difference if it was mounted on the bullbar.
I have both antenna's but run the 2.1 most of the time, because it does not scrap in carparks. I would love to see the signal difference between roof and bull bar mounting positions. I'm sure the roof position would win, but the difference would be interesting.
I'm curious as to whether the dBi of the receiving antenna has an impact on the strength and clarity of the signal received. Did you try the test with Torbs using the two different antennas?
I would imagine it has a bigger difference receiving than transmitting. However, 3db is not that much and with your car on and being noisy it's probably reversing any little good it did. You would need a yagi and tune it in to improve the range, which would be quite impractical for a car. Because when you move it it's no longer tuned.
Great video but maybe there are a couple more tests to be done. Comparing antenna placement would be useful, but it would be equally interesting to compare how antenna size affects the ability to receive signals. It's fair to assume that the bigger 6.6dB1 antenna would receive a cleaner signal from further away than a 2.1dBi antenna, but in practical terms how much difference does it actually make?
A bull bar vs roof rack of the 2.1db would be perfect, may as well compare the 6.6 at the same time then you’ve covered the lot boys!! Great vids by the way, invaluable.
Go to your local amateur radio club and introduce yourself then get a standard license. Then get something like Yaesu FT-891 all band transceiver. Life is all about learning.
Back when this channel started ol mate Ronnie had a HF radio in the Ute if i remember correctly. Just like most people I’ve known with HF and other ham solutions he turfed it for satellite for long range comms.
@@Alan.livingston HF is high frequency, short wave. UHF, VHF is ultra and very high-frequency microwave. Higher you go, more it becomes a line of sight. Low-frequency long wave is for underwater use. Short waves use the stratosphere to bounce back signals, global coverage but will not go through obstructions. Medium Frequency or medium waves used by local radio stations are better where there are obstructions. Like the original poster, Nikad19 said, local amateur club. Then there will be licencing requirements.
@@nikad19 don’t get me wrong, I’ve got a spot-x for comms when I’m remote, but I really want to get my ham license. It’s fascinating, and I bet it’s one of those hobbies where you can just disappear down the rabbit hole.
Yes a bull bar to roof comparison would be good. However I really want to see the figures on a digital screen showing the incoming signal strength comparing a central mount point to the side gutter mount point. Why : “ ground plane “ Thanks Ronny.
Good stuff boys. if you are looking for another exercise, try a winding road through hilly/mountainous roads in a forested landscape. I, for one would be very interested to see the outcome. I'm not really familiar with the landscape in Western Australia, but maybe in the south-west of the state. I have have had some less than satisfactory experiences with the equipment I currently use, here in the mountains of the south-east of the Aussie continent.
I will run the 2dB antenna because sound quality was better over the same distance AND you get better coverage over changing terrain PLUS you don’t have to worry about height on the vehicle. I was surprised. Guess that’s why I watched because I’m not convinced a higher dB antenna is always the best for Simplex communication.
if you do the bonnet vs roof test make sure you test the bonnet car facing towards and away from the other car. Ive heard the windscreen can boost the forward signal
At 2 meters high for both aerials plus a small amount of refraction around 15 km seems about right. You would get a different result if one of you was parked on a 100 meter high hill. But as most long distance travel is on almost flat terrain this is a realistic test and suggests a short 2.1 gain aerial is sufficient for highway travel. Plus you won’t damage it going through MacDonalds.
Ok 2.1 sounded better nearly all the way before fading out. The 6.6 ok up to about 12km then gets harder to read because of more background static. So I'm thinking is there not something that would come somewhere between like 4.0 and give better all round? I'm no expert but who knows! I use a 2.15 on the truck roof magmounted around 13'9" above ground level. Seems a good choice for what I want. Nice vid guys, try some more for range tests, good on ya 😄👊👍
Part one of many tests to be taken?. The same test with the same antennas in mountainous country perhaps provide different results. Of course, there's a large variety of UHF antennas out there with differing results. Happy testing!
After your previous video about roof mounting, I moved my UHF from bullbar to roof and also bought the exact same pair of GME antennas. I've been using the 6.6db, but will now swap out for the 2.1db after watching this video. Thanks for your efforts. PS: my vehicle is a Chev Silverado 6.6 litre (that's why I preferred the 6.6db....hahaha).
@E Bandit I've mounted mine with the inclusion of a pneumatic ram....so I can lower the antenna to horizontal simply by turning the UHF OFF. Otherwise, given that the Chevy has a 5" lift and a tall canopy, I think I would often be hitting stuff with the antenna. Here's a link to my video of the air ram in action....not very professional compared to the quality of most youtube videos. ruclips.net/video/Pog9id5JPzk/видео.html
When i drive my wank tractor around, i do like to show off my longest, thickest antenna. P.s does anyone have the brand of hand moisturiser that fits in the cup holder? Asking for a mate.
i have a 6.6 on my patrol bullbar and i find it not very clear most of the time, but i know guys who have a 2.1 and find it much better for most areas. as you said with the bubble of radio ive known people to be on Mt Coree in canberra which is highest point in canberra and radio to the calwell which is 60km line of sight with a little whip. But i think im going to get a 2.1 oneday.
Do a test with the antenna comparison on the roof and bull bar.
With it on bull bar you vehicle blocks it to radio behind
@Krump 7 Because when it’s up high on the roof, you have no obstructions around it so it can send out a strong 360 degree signal where as when it’s on the bullbar, the signal will transmit out in the same 360 degree circle however the signal going forward will be stronger / clearer then the signal going backwards towards the cabin of the vehicle it’s mounted on.
The vehicle behind you won’t get a clear signal because the body of car ( the one with it on the bullbar ) acts like a big signal blocker, it gets in the way, all that glass and metal to bounce around on / off.
The same reason you mount your TV antenna high up on the ridge capping of your house as opposed to mounting it down low on the side of your house, less obstructions means a clearer stronger cleaner signal. 👍
because when it’s up high on the roof, you have no obstructions around it so it can send out a string signal 360 degrees where as when it’s on bullbar, the signal will transmit out in the same 360 degree circle however the signal going forward will be stronger / clearer then the signal going backwards towards the cabin of the vehicle it’s mounted on.
The vehicle behind you won’t get a clear signal because the body of car ( the one with it on the bullbar ) acts like a big signal blocker, it gets in the way...
The same as how you mount your TV antenna high up on the ridge capping of your house as opposed to mounting it down low on the side of your house, less obstructions means a clearer stronger cleaner signal. 👍
@Krump 7 sorry mate, it was the way you worded it that threw me - I thought you were saying ‘how does it affect it when mounted on the bullbar ?’ as opposed to asking ‘by how much does it affect it mounted on the bullbar when compared to mounted on the roof ?’
Going off the end of that clip, I think he’s going to test the bull bar one too which would be good. 👍👍 cheers buddy
Krump 7 I think most would of understood perfectly what you meant . I also run a low mount aerial , we have lots of overhanging stuff a high roof mount is not very practical so would also be interested in how much difference there is
@Krump 7 oh mate - agree 100% ... that’s how we all learn from one another, no good knowing something and not sharing it around 😉 cheers mate 👍
A huge shout out to the both of you for taking the time to make this video Ronny! Your videos are a boatload of information for those of us who don't have the money to experiment with multiple, expensive items. I as well as many others who are involved with overlanding, look to you for help and guidance, regarding products, driving techniques and so much more. The bottom line is, your videos are extremely fun, informative and most of all, you emphasize the importance of safety. Good Job Mate!!
Hi guys, i have used the 2.1 d b for a long time at least 10 years overall i find it better even in the city it rules when near high buildings it is also a clear winner in hills, mine is only on the bullbar, good test guys
Thanks Ronny for taking the time to make videos like these. This kind of stuff helps so many people like myself who are not sure how certain products work and perform. Your channel is helping to educate a lot of people in how to have fun and stay safe and be prepared when off road. Thank you :)
I hundred percent agree with what you’re saying is people who don’t go for driving very often or don’t use two way radios and install them very often it is very handy information for those sorts of people especially when they have a learning difficulty or some kind of disability
This test confirms the test's I have done over the years. I have all 3 in the GME range, the 2.1, 6.6 and 9dBi antenna's. The beam pattern really plays a huge part in it as you said. So my everyday antenna is the 2.1dBi and I use it when the terrain gets undulation and can sometimes get better reception than the 6.6dBi, especially as you have found at that few km apart range. I use the 6.6dBi for my trips just for the extra distance when separated in convoy. My 9dBi is absolutely hopeless in convoy. it just fires the beam right across the top of the other vehicle antennas, its not until you are a good 6 or more km apart that you can start talking clearly with the other vehicles. So the 9dBi is fantastic for talking long distance over flat ground but that is absolutely it. Great vid guys, keep it up!
Sounds like if you had to pick just one it’s the 2.1dB ..?
@@bradl2636 yeah essentially. Depends upon where you live etc. On my new vehicle I have a RFI cdq5000. It's 5dbi so the perfect sweet spot IMO.
@@fatmanaj1990 Thank you sir..!
You need to do a test in the hills next, metres of altitude 2db vs 6db
6db would be out of its potential
I used to fly over rural NSW quite a bit. At altitude you can hear your mates almost out to the horizon. Downside is that you can hear anyone else on the same frequency at that range. Lots of people seem to use CB channels as if they were phones, meaning long, personal, sometimes painfully personal conversations, all playing in your ear, hours on end. There were many times when I'd have been happier with less antenna performance.
I chose the 2.1dbi, and went with medium duty because it was cheaper, absolutely love it, has never let me down once, great range on the highway, and can hear a mate loud and clear when we’re both at home, 5.6km as the crow flies, through hills, trees, buildings etc, best all rounder antenna I believe
I use my 6.6dBi on the bull bar as a height indicator for car parks. Dual use!
I would like to see a 2.1-2.1 test. Would definitely be interested in a bullbar vs rack mount test too
Should test out the GME location services with the XRS units at range aswell. Good informative vids as usual Ronny & Torbs. 👍
the most useless feature considering you need an internet connection in both cars to use it
@@TimSargent77 incorrect if sends the GPS local through the radio so regardless it knows where you are as long as you have the map downloaded
@@TimSargent77 No you don't. It's sent via UHF signal. You only need internet to initially set it up.
I use a 4.5 dbi ground plane dependant antenna mounted in the middle of the roof. It provides a good balance of range vs different terrains and it fits under carparks and other obstacles.
Please do the roof vs bar test. I’m yet to install my uhf in my new rig and have been debating which way to go. Roof would mean I might have to take it off for day to day use.
But great vid at this stage I would go the shorter one in the roof. Love your work.
Go roof with folding mounts if you can. I have mine on Rhino rack folding mounts so can easily drop them for drive through / car parks.
No need to do a bar test, height is might
@@TVR161 that’s what I was thinking too. Thanks.
@@Jay-hr9ci thanks mate. I think It’s a done deal now.
Yeah last year when Ronny did a roof mount antenna I swapped my 6.6 to 2.1 and put it on the roof == game changer
maybe do a test between a 2.1 to 2.1 and a 6.6 to 6.6, to see if there is any difference which 2 short antennas vs 2 long antennas
Yep. This.
Research "link budget".
I'm pretty sure base had a 6.6, so they already did the 6.6 to 6.6, just need to try 2.2 to 2.2
When I was playing with drones (when you had to make them yourself rather than buy at JBHIFI) we had these little magic boxes that had a high gain antenna (usually a yagi) and a low gain whip connected, and it would seamlessly switch to the antenna with the highest signal quality. Someone smart should design a little magic box that does that for UHF stuff.
The diversity receivers for the 'drone' is usually only for receiving the video from the drone .. where you have one omni and one directional .. handy for when you fly behind the backplane of the directional. The CB antenna's also need to transmit. UHF .. 2.1db / 3db good for hills as higher radiation angle .. big open flat areas get a 6, 9 or 12db antenna with lower radiation angle still in the omni directional pattern for greater distance. Mounting the antenna on roof at center is best for UHF, mounting on bull bar or rear will change the radiation pattern.
@@DarrenFJ : umm.. Diversity on 2.4GHz Control has been a thing for a long time - mainly from factory for selection between 1/4 wave monopoles at vertical vs horizontal polarisation.. Naturally Video (at legal transmit power) goes to pot long before the control comms -much more sensitive to interference - most important to maintain video link if flying BVLOS FPV (illegal in most cases -don't want to loose AC or get busted.).
Yes, I think it's called diversity. And I've often thought the same thing. That system would be good for a UHF set up.
I’m watching this for comparison, I’m definitely getting 2.1dbi! Thanks for the vlog! 💯
I drive mostly in hilly terrain and was considering switching from the 6db i have on my bullbar to a 2.1db mounted on my rollbar, my only concern was losing range, but this video shows that unless I'm on the Nullarbor, it's really a non-issue.
ive got the big one on my bullbar simply because its the exact height of my roof top tent so it lets me know if I'm going to clear low hanging things or not
Good idea
Having the antenna on your bullbar makes your radio directional most of the dignal will go forwards & backwards relative to yourvehicle
Mate, that was very interesting.....
I’ve got two aerials on my vehicle, one a short little stubby for hill work and a 6.6 dbi on a mast and it works antrrat.
We were up on top of a hill in the middle of nowhere and when asking for a radio check, picked up a 4x4 driving course convoy 26 k’s away. Obviously it worked because we were up quite high but yeah, I was super surprised to get a response from that far away.
Great video mate, thanks for sharing 👍👍
I have a centrally drilled roof-mounted (iMax) no dbi short UHF whip. Ideal position, but obviously not suited to all install situations owing gear you carry.
Your 2.1db is fine. Great test.
This is really well done. I'm getting the same UHF installed shortly and was looking for a decent comparison
Most db/dbi figures for mobile antennas are way over estimated. It has to do more with ground plane quality and the radiation pattern.
100% right. The manufacturers figures are theoretical and based on an isotropic radiator in free space. As soon as you mount an antenna to a vehicle the radiation pattern changes - and usually changes a lot.
@@adelarsen9776 yes agree and the higher the db with a poor install the worse the performance is. I reckon 95% of people dont even check their install with a swr meter.
@@jimpap13 A reflectometer and nomograph are essential.
People just copy and paste. People believe the marketing and that bigger is always better.
All of my antennae are 2.1dBi or less. The lower the gain the better.
I find it laughable that GME and Uniden advertise their tiny magnetic antennas as 2.1dbi or similar. That would be the same as the one on Ronny’s roof.
It’s interesting to see basically the same result I think I’ll stick to my 5watt handheld and if in convoy use same channel and try and stick to line of sight
I will go for Short one, because its more clearer than the long one, only long one has a few kilometres extra range...
So 2.1dbi is my choice.
What a neat practical test, though I can't say I'm surprised at the result. The math says ~16km is the max you would be able to get between two antennae at 4 meters high for pure radio horizon. With simplex transmission on VHF/UHF low gain is where it's at. With a high gain antenna, your major advantage is hitting high mountain repeaters. As others have said, a good ground plane and pattern are going to be your best bets for distance. I don't know how it it is there, but in the US most of our comms is duplex off the repeaters so a high gain pays dividends.
Low gain is the go mate
So interesting test as a senior communications network engineer for a large regional, rural, & remote communications, telecommunications & telemetry company who travels the entire east coast both coastal and inland for work I would love to not only see this same test done on the bull bar but would love to see it done against the other great antenna that being RFI
Like pencil beam headlights v’s wide. Pencil cast light longer, but not as wide. The same goes for dBi. Lower dBi means wider but less travel (3 to 5). Higher (6-9+) means longer travel less width.
Higher dBI: awesome performance on flat terrain
Lower dBI: awresome performance on hill terrain
Middle dBI: great all rounder
On our fleet of XLT Rangers & we run 2 x different types of antennas 1 for our Telstra Cel-Fi Go Mobile Boosters and one for our CB's
So In the metro & outer metro areas of Melb, Syd, Newcastle, Brisd, Ipswitch because of under ground car parts etc. we run the RFI CDQ7194 3dBI for the Cel-Fi Booster & the RFI CDQ3000 3dBI for the CB's & yeah they are ok generally speaking for the immediate general area say maybe up to 10K's depending on a lot of things on the CB if we are lucky and can be a bit hit and miss on the Telstra Cel-Fi Go Mobile Boosters.
If we want range & performance we swap out to the RFI CDQ7195 6.5dBI for the Telstra Cel-Fi Go Mobile Boosters & the RFI CDQ5000 6.5dBI for the CB, the range difference & signal quality are not comparable it has to be seen to be believed the difference is massive the RFI CDQ7195 6.5dBI & RFI CDQ5000 6.5dBI eat the RFI CDQ7194 3dBI & the RFI CDQ3000 3dBI for breakfast in challenging areas & spit them out the other end in every facet of communications.
As for hilly & high country communications both simplex on the CB ( vehicle to vehicle ) as well as duplex via a distant repeater & wanting stable reliable mobile coverage for the Telstra Cel-Fi Go Mobile Boosters there is only 1 options the RFI CDQ7195 6.5dBI & RFI CDQ5000 6.5dBI for the CB everything else you are wasting your time with.
We only use the RFI CDQ7195 6.5dBI & RFI CDQ5000 6.5dBI on our major highways including but not limited to the Hume, ( Melb to Syd ) The Pacific ( Syd yo Bris ) including up the back way Melb to Bris via Dubbo.
We also have our vehicles fitted with the RFI CDQ7195 6.5dBI & RFI CDQ5000 6.5dBI running around Roma for a range of 700 + km's and other places in western QLD without any reception problems.
Lets also not forget about ground plane quality and the radiation pattern as well as they also play a major part in range of transmission and reception.
Regards
Wayne
Yep, would like to see this test done with RFI and ZCG Scalar antennas.
Better still I'd like to see manufacturers use actual dB gain figures for their antennas. Not the bullshit dBi figure based on a non existant isotopic antenna with no actual real world testing. The dBi figures quoted are based on an antenna that is designed in the perfect realm of pc design & not actually possible to produce to many varying factors of the real world conditions. Anybody who actually wants to learn this stuff should spend the time & at least go get their amateur foundation radio ticket. It's not hard to achieve & will open your eyes to many things some manufacturers claim as sheer bullshit.
@@jlphtc dBi IS the real figure. 30 years of RF engineering and I've never see test results from an anechoic chamber in "actual dB".
Your misunderstanding of how to interpret it that is the issue. I often hear this excuse from hams without any context.
"My 14dBi antenna has shit gain, it must be the dBi, not that I'm measuring it from the side therefore this value is not true because the report should have compensated for my lack of technical understanding by using dBd. (The exact same measurement with a different reference.)
@@trash0 Totally agree Vk2tgr
Great summary Wayne. Im impressed with the RFI cel-fi antenna also when working remote in Outback areas
Great work mounting on the roof, probably the first 4WD channel I’ve seen properly explain signal coverage and dead spots when mounting to a Bull bar. Unless you’re transmitting in HF, antenna gain isn’t as important as elevation and terrain analysis, especially without an amplifier. They’re line-of-sight radios.
Amplifiers will do squat without line of sight.
The higher the dB a antenna has the flatter the signal that gets transmitted , higher dB antennas for flat ground, lower dB for hilly areas , also roof mount is best , height is might with UHF
One of the best comments here, pity most don't realise a 2.15dbi gain antenna, is actually only a 0 dbd antenna when compared to real world metrics. But marketing be marketing & hell a bigger number even though BS is better than the real facts. Bit like that other one out there watts in pmpo vs watts rms.
@@jlphtc It's because selling something with ZERO in the name sounds less useful and less saleable.
It's amazing reading the comments how few people know the reality of advertising nor RF.
I'm definitely going to swap my 6.6 on the bullbar to a 2.1 on the roof with a fold down mount 😀 I think with the same test done in the hills, the 2.1 will be an even clearer winner... so to speak.
The roof give a better ground plane ,or counter poise, for the antenna to work off of . If there is no ground plane the antenna looses its gain.
@@frankpeletz1818I’m pretty sure there’s are ground independent antennas though?
@@frankpeletz1818these*
@@maxxx229 No ground plane antennas have no gain.
Thanks for the Video guys, I have a 3.1 Dbi on my rack as well, far clearer than the 6 on the bar. Around town just leave it down and still get good reasonable distance around me. It is hooked up to a Oricom DTX 4700x.
I use 2.1 always, mostly cause I live in the west coast of Tasmania and it’s mountains and rainforests.
I would like to see testing in some bush and hills.
No hills in WA
HAHAHA.
I've got a 2dbi GME stubby and been great for nearly 10yrs. I never communicate with ppl over 1km away anyway but may be over hills.
Thanks Ronny! This was one of the most useful video's I've seen and nothing beats a real world test! Keep up the great work.
I tested this myself last year. Using a combination of Google earth and an earth curvature calculator website I selected hill (870m elevation) that allowed a line of sight back to the base (22m elevation). I was able to transmit 67km between a 5 watt GME TX4500s with the antenna at roof height like Ronny's and a 2 watt Uniden UH820S. At this range, the 2.1dbi antenna was barely legible and the 6.6 was legible but not totally clear.
This just proved to me that the antenna and wattage of a radio come in a distant second behind the obstacles in the way of the transmission.
100% Matt, we use 5 watt and 2 watt units on our 1300 acre property. The main difference is definitely what hill is in the way.
Would be interesting to see what a 5w handheld radio might achieve, with the antenna integrated in the unit and in the cabin.
in Australia the max rf output allowed is 5watts.
For anyone wondering if mounting up on the roof is any better than on a bullbar where you so commonly see, this is my take on it. Only an opinion but sharing to maybe help others.
When it’s up high on the roof, you have no obstructions around it so it can send out a strong 360 degree signal where as when it’s on the bullbar, the signal will transmit out in the same 360 degree circle however the signal going forward will be stronger / clearer then the signal going backwards towards the cabin of the vehicle it’s mounted on.
The vehicle behind you won’t get a clear signal because the body of car ( the one with it on the bullbar ) acts like a big signal blocker, it gets in the way, all that glass and metal to bounce around on / off.
The same reason you mount your TV antenna high up on the ridge capping of your house as opposed to mounting it down low on the side of your house, less obstructions means a clearer stronger cleaner signal. 👍
Hey fellas, awesome informative video.
Back in the day we would have the 2.1dbi on when we were in club convoys in hilly terrain. The omni directional antennas go over hills better.
When I've been touring ive use to always have bigger antennas.
However saying that, the best I have ever found was a 2.1dbi on my Kombi roof rack driving across Australia.
Better usable sound, and mounted on the roof rack, it got a fair distance, even on the Nullarbor.
If you were doing inland desert travel or open highway the 6.6 would be a better option, but for most applications like beach travel, mountains, tree cover the 2.1 may be the better fit. Having the two detachable aerials however gives you the best of both worlds if doing long trips across varied terrain/conditions for sure. Great real world test guys.
Foe every 3bd , the antenna doubles the transmit and receive power. Gain is achieved by focusing the power at the horizon. A lower gain antenna works best with hills and valleys while a high gain antenna will get maximum distance over flat land. You need have 6DB difference of gain to make a noticeable difference in signal strength. . Also, there is a difference between DB and DBI of 2,1. A 2.1 DBI gain antenna has zero DB gain.
6dB of gain is 4x increase in Effective Radiated Power (ERP), which theoretically will carry the same power density at double the distance (as power and distance in free space propagation follows an inverse square law).
Ronny most of your noise was electrical interference and not just back ground static, try some tests with you stationary with the engine off and while the engine is running at various set distances I think you will be surprised, the short antennas are better around built up areas as apposed to the longer ones being better out in the open.73's 2E0OOW 🤘
Well, I’m surprised too !
Just about to get a roo bar fitted and an XRS to boot, I think I know what I’m going to do now. 👍
yes ... definitely do the bullbar location comparo ... 90% are usually mounted on the bullbar
Great test. I'm running the 2.1 on my bullbar. Radio checked a fella on Mt Tamborine about 10 km from me (line of sight) yesturday. Didnt check the strength bar but he was Land C. Pretty impressed with a bullbar mount but I do intend to roof mount it later on.
Would love to see the bullbar test.
From the US here, I would prefer the 2.1 on a roof mount, only due to height restrictions. That being said, different types of antennas provide a different radiation pattern so there is that...
I’d be interested to see the range of 2x 2.1’s in this test...I think it only had the range because of the other vehicles 6.6.
Always run a 6dbi, good balance i've found, in all situations, would have been interesting matching the same aerials on both ends, result might have been different
i run a 3db on my bullbar most of the time, fits in my garage without hitting the door and I travel mostly in the vic high county which is all hills. For outback trips i run a 6.6db but after you test I might not bother.
Where do you get a 3db UHF antenna?
@@BrekMartin eBay i think.
Another great video Ronny! I just installed a value pack GME UHF on my budget super tourer. It has an interchangeable 2.1 and 6.6 whip. Very happy with it so far. I am doing an install guide on my channel next week. I will be experimenting with the different DBI’s. In Cairns we have flat coastal roads until we get into national parks, so I’m still trying to figure out which one to use. I’m open to suggestions.
It would be good to see a test when offroad in hilly terrain, one person on the opposite side of a hill to the other so we can see that "ball" RF pattern in play. I run a 9DB antenna on my car but thats because its never going to be offroad and im usually on flat terrain.
Definitely would like to see a comparison between the roof and the bullbar
antho3024 roof is best especially in the center of the roof it acts as a counterpoise to the active element. Bull bar has a directional component.
Why do you install antenna on bullbar in australia?
One of the reasons for the antenna performance could have been the tuning of the antennas. I would have put an SWR meter on each to see how they are matched to the radio. That can make a big difference.
Isn't that more for the old AM sets than UHF?
@@mjhmech4903 The general rule of antennas is the longer the better. AM is harder but a tuned antenna will usually offer the best performance.
Antennas are not tuned to the transceiver they are tuned to be resonant on a specific frequency or range of frequencies. Longer antennas do not always mean better on a specific frequency either. It is about resonance, different resonant lengths produce different patterns say 1/4 or 5/8 the wavelength of the frequency. 1/4 will be a lower gain at same points in space as a 5/8 will.
@@mjhmech4903 : SWR works for all antennas -It is just maths - just that UHF is less affected by an out of tune feed line -and ground plane coupling than HF. Factory Tune of UHF antennas is usually acceptable.
2.1 will be my choice. Small and compact best for offroad training. Just got my brother to bring one back from Australia to South Africa. GME is the best CB communication device on the market for my Jimny JB74
I've got a 4.5db ground dependant on a rotating gutter mount. going to swap it out for a 3.3dbi.
I run the 6.6 just personal choice and I like the bigness of it.
Also doubles as my gauge when up bush as it sits fairly level when my swag is on me roof rack. So I know if my swag wasn’t to fit under a low lying branch say. Or Maccas drive through.
Best range was travelling north of Auski rd house and was still picking up iron ore rd trains that pull out of there. Was 22km night driving with cloud cover.
Cheers
Good job. Thanks for your time in doing the comparison.
UHF is great for that open terrain. It gets attenuated quickly in built up areas or in the mountains.
Maybe you should have also turned the squelch OFF on the 2.1dB at the furthest range.
Also, what may have been a better comparison would have been to have both the same antennas mounted on both bullbars .. that would be an even more realistic test.
I run the 6.6 all the time and swap out for the 2.1 when tackling glass house mountains. I run the tall one because am constantly going up the beach, Fraser Island, double island etc.
No surprises there. A 2.1 gives a nice round signal combating hills and obstacles. For most applications the 2.1 is best. On the bull bar the 2.1 will be even better than the 6.6 as the cab of the vehicle will further obstruct the 6.6. Loved this video guys!
Maybe it's my boating life but i've never heard anybody on a radio use anything other than 5/5 for signal quality.
Anyway sweet video, cheers. Good range for UHF. Grab a HF and talk to people in Sweden :)
Check out the R-S-T System for signal strength, it uses 1-9 where 9 is extremely strong and 1 is barely readable. It's used frequently and gives a more granular reporting of a signals strength. GME is using this.
I run the 6.6 when out and about then the 2.1 when working in hilly areas they both perform very well
Great video guys! hope to see the next test.
I would go with the long one on the bull bar. But thats more based on the looks lol. Thanks for the video it is interesting to see how you guys do your radio communications over there compared to here in canada
Did you both change antenna?
I have a rugged radio vhf 60 watt radio with a 2.4 db antenna. I'm happy with seeing your results, with my setup. Awesome video display of function. This is why I subscribe to Ronny Dahl's videos. Function over Form. Good Work you guys!
ZCG Scalar are the worlds finest antennas.
Made in the home of Radio Comms in Australia, Victoria.
Thank you for the entertaining video! Without looking up on the internet that particular model of transceiver that you were using that you mentioned, you didn’t actually mention anywhere what *frequency* or even band you were testing on. This DOES matter. If you hold an amateur radio operator license you could be operating on either HF, 6m, VHF, or UHF. If you are operating on CB in Australia (citizens band) you could be operating on either HF (about 27MHz) or UHF (about 477MHz). Frequency does matter and does make a difference!!
Also, probably a better comparison which would eliminate a lot of the variables in your testing methodology would be to have both antennas connected at the same time and use an A/B switch to switch between them to get simultaneous comparisons of signal strength and readability. But again, thanks for the entertaining video!
They were on uhfs so roughly 477.______
I run 2 UHF’s, 1 with a 2.2db (for off-road hilly terrain), the other a 6.6db (for flatter terrain and highway use). Both mounted on the bullbar approx 6 inches apart. I find the 2.2 less effective for long range highway, the 6.6 around the same off-road as the 2.2.
Great video. Thanks very much. I have the 2.1db on my roof as well. Would be great to know if there is much of a difference if it was mounted on the bullbar.
I have both antenna's but run the 2.1 most of the time, because it does not scrap in carparks. I would love to see the signal difference between roof and bull bar mounting positions. I'm sure the roof position would win, but the difference would be interesting.
Well done Ronny and Torbs good antenna test, not one mention of poor old Scratchy in those signal reports.
I'm curious as to whether the dBi of the receiving antenna has an impact on the strength and clarity of the signal received. Did you try the test with Torbs using the two different antennas?
I would imagine it has a bigger difference receiving than transmitting. However, 3db is not that much and with your car on and being noisy it's probably reversing any little good it did.
You would need a yagi and tune it in to improve the range, which would be quite impractical for a car. Because when you move it it's no longer tuned.
@@veneratedmortal4369 An antenna's gain is exactly the same for receive as for transmit.
@@veneratedmortal4369 a yagi is not practical for mobile use. Every 3dbi in gain is equiv to double the power.
Very helpful video👍. I'd choose the 2.1 after watching this.
An amazing comparison, both antennas have their applications, my choice 2.1 dbi
Great video but maybe there are a couple more tests to be done. Comparing antenna placement would be useful, but it would be equally interesting to compare how antenna size affects the ability to receive signals. It's fair to assume that the bigger 6.6dB1 antenna would receive a cleaner signal from further away than a 2.1dBi antenna, but in practical terms how much difference does it actually make?
Really good comparison fellas, the shorty on the roof wins in my book. Would like to see longy on bullbar vs shprty on roof!! Love ya work..
A bull bar vs roof rack of the 2.1db would be perfect, may as well compare the 6.6 at the same time then you’ve covered the lot boys!!
Great vids by the way, invaluable.
Cool comparison guys. I actually need a new antenna on my uhf. So I might look into a 2.1 mounted on the roof.
Go to your local amateur radio club and introduce yourself then get a standard license. Then get something like Yaesu FT-891 all band transceiver. Life is all about learning.
@chris beerad LOL.
Back when this channel started ol mate Ronnie had a HF radio in the Ute if i remember correctly. Just like most people I’ve known with HF and other ham solutions he turfed it for satellite for long range comms.
Alan Livingston. Didn’t realize that he’d been down that road. And you’re right sat phones are so much easier.
@@Alan.livingston HF is high frequency, short wave. UHF, VHF is ultra and very high-frequency microwave. Higher you go, more it becomes a line of sight. Low-frequency long wave is for underwater use. Short waves use the stratosphere to bounce back signals, global coverage but will not go through obstructions. Medium Frequency or medium waves used by local radio stations are better where there are obstructions. Like the original poster, Nikad19 said, local amateur club. Then there will be licencing requirements.
@@nikad19 don’t get me wrong, I’ve got a spot-x for comms when I’m remote, but I really want to get my ham license. It’s fascinating, and I bet it’s one of those hobbies where you can just disappear down the rabbit hole.
Yes a bull bar to roof comparison would be good.
However I really want to see the figures on a digital screen showing the incoming signal strength comparing a central mount point to the side gutter mount point.
Why :
“ ground plane “
Thanks Ronny.
Gme 409l antennas are my pick best I’ve had.
Good stuff boys.
if you are looking for another exercise, try a winding road through hilly/mountainous roads in a forested landscape. I, for one would be very interested to see the outcome.
I'm not really familiar with the landscape in Western Australia, but maybe in the south-west of the state.
I have have had some less than satisfactory experiences with the equipment I currently use, here in the mountains of the south-east of the Aussie continent.
Sick vid mate, please do a bullbar to bullbar test 👍
I have a 6.6 was mounted up front now on my wagon door. Roof mounted light bar was reflecting back
I will run the 2dB antenna because sound quality was better over the same distance AND you get better coverage over changing terrain PLUS you don’t have to worry about height on the vehicle.
I was surprised. Guess that’s why I watched because I’m not convinced a higher dB antenna is always the best for Simplex communication.
if you do the bonnet vs roof test make sure you test the bonnet car facing towards and away from the other car. Ive heard the windscreen can boost the forward signal
It's not so much that the forward signal is boosted as the bulk of the car in the way of a rearward signal.
At 2 meters high for both aerials plus a small amount of refraction around 15 km seems about right. You would get a different result if one of you was parked on a 100 meter high hill. But as most long distance travel is on almost flat terrain this is a realistic test and suggests a short 2.1 gain aerial is sufficient for highway travel. Plus you won’t damage it going through MacDonalds.
Ok 2.1 sounded better nearly all the way before fading out.
The 6.6 ok up to about 12km then gets harder to read because of more background static.
So I'm thinking is there not something that would come somewhere between like 4.0 and give better all round?
I'm no expert but who knows!
I use a 2.15 on the truck roof magmounted around 13'9" above ground level.
Seems a good choice for what I want.
Nice vid guys, try some more for range tests, good on ya 😄👊👍
Part one of many tests to be taken?. The same test with the same antennas in mountainous country perhaps provide different results. Of course, there's a large variety of UHF antennas out there with differing results. Happy testing!
After your previous video about roof mounting, I moved my UHF from bullbar to roof and also bought the exact same pair of GME antennas. I've been using the 6.6db, but will now swap out for the 2.1db after watching this video.
Thanks for your efforts.
PS: my vehicle is a Chev Silverado 6.6 litre (that's why I preferred the 6.6db....hahaha).
@E Bandit I've mounted mine with the inclusion of a pneumatic ram....so I can lower the antenna to horizontal simply by turning the UHF OFF.
Otherwise, given that the Chevy has a 5" lift and a tall canopy, I think I would often be hitting stuff with the antenna.
Here's a link to my video of the air ram in action....not very professional compared to the quality of most youtube videos. ruclips.net/video/Pog9id5JPzk/видео.html
When i drive my wank tractor around, i do like to show off my longest, thickest antenna.
P.s does anyone have the brand of hand moisturiser that fits in the cup holder?
Asking for a mate.
Holy fuck, wank tractor 😂 my sides are in orbit
Freudian slip spelling mistake or is it actually crap
Offer your mate the one you use
i have a 6.6 on my patrol bullbar and i find it not very clear most of the time, but i know guys who have a 2.1 and find it much better for most areas. as you said with the bubble of radio ive known people to be on Mt Coree in canberra which is highest point in canberra and radio to the calwell which is 60km line of sight with a little whip. But i think im going to get a 2.1 oneday.
I’ve got a 6.6dbi on the bull bar and my mrs hates it there 😂.I I was pretty impressed with the range of the 2.1dbi
I run the RFI CD34 MBC 2.1dBI aerial on my roof. Awesome.
Great episode Ronny! thanks
I'm removing my 2.1 on the roof and relocating a 6.6 back to the bar so I can have a roof topper tinny :)
A good point to the disadvantage to mounting on the roof!
I am usung a 3dBI around the city, great signal compared to the 6.6Dbi
I generally pick something with a gain of around 3 or lower for mobile applications.
Nice vid guys...wish me luck for today is my Radio Amateur exam here....cheers mate! 😉🤙🏻
Good luck mate! Going 4x4 with Amateur radio is so much better! Much higher power, better radios etc
If you live in hilly country, you need a 2 dB.
When I go out west to flat country the 6bB