Maco v58 frustration

[321 treeclimber]

10-4
321

[321 treeclimber]

You make a solid point sixshooter. Got to admit, I've heard so many sides to so many versions of swr theory that i simply lean toward the one that works for me! Hahaha easier that way. So i agree with you now! 😏

[ytradio]

Ok Six-Shooter the story. When I was a new general, I belonged to a local ham club that had a 80 meter group of rag chewers that talked me into putting up an inverted V that I really did not have the room for. After getting it up and setting the SWR to 1.3 on my 1970's vintage radio shack meter, I noticed I was not getting full power out. Asking the group on the air if I should see a full 100 watts out on 80 meters I was told yes. So I said to them it must just be my meter. One of the guys stopped by on his way to work one evening with his Bird meter and checked it for me. The power out was close to what I was seeing, but the SWR was over 3 to 1. We determined the antenna was too long and he left for work with his Bird meter. He did not offer to let me use it and I did not ask. Getting on the air latter with my power reduced for safety sake, I asked the rest of the guys for advice on a reasonably priced, reasonably accurate meter. One older fellow who had been a ham since sometime in the 50's asked how I had set the SWR in the first place. I told him, and he said "crank her up son, bet that's yer problem". I didn't know what he meant by this and he said "that cheep meter ya got there will be more accurate on higher power, put it in CW mode, hook up your key and see what its doing". I did all this and I got a reading pretty close to what the other fellows Bird gave us. So I personally have been checking my SWR this way since. I will first use just carrier power, then go to 100 watts and also check. Sometimes I will need to adjust a little more sometimes not, the meters that I have been using since that time are better, but they are not a Bird. A few months back I was having this same kind of conversation on the air with a fellow, and showed him in the ARRL antenna book what I believe is a reference to this. It is in the chapter on antenna and feed line measurements, and it says that typical SWR meters available to the average ham are not very accurate at low power levels, then goes on to talk about building one that is.  321 said that he was using a galaxy 959, I assumed it was stock with a 4 watt carrier. He also said he was using a meter that had always seemed reliable.   From this I believed increasing his power to the full 12 watts may give a more accurate reading on the meter he was using, and that he may in fact have that 3 to 1 SWR. Since he did not say it was a Bird, I assumed it was not, and may have been of the quality that I had been using. Also, antenna analyzers use a better circuit than any of the ham or CB radio meters that I have used, I am sorry for my thriftiness.  If what I have been doing all this time is wrong, then when I recheck the SWR with just a carrier it should be off. But this is not the case, it is always low at dead carrier and 100 watts with a CW tone. And I was wrong for saying to 321 that SWR should be checked at full power. I should have suggested that he give it a try if he wanted to, and see how it worked for him. 73 Whitey

[cbrown]

SWR is a ratio, its not dependent upon power applied. The only thing that changes with higher transmit power is the amount of reflected power your rig will see.

[321 treeclimber]

Thanks for everyones input. I truly believe we have solved most of earth's problems here and achieved world peace! Happy to say that i am using my rig daily and have not gotten a bad radio check or report. No smoke or flames,so far and the use of a low pass filter has lowered swr readings by about .1 so 1.4 is now 1.3+ and it has been entered into history that all parties involved have completely confused the crap out of me! I still dont know an SWR from a UFO so i hope your happy. 321

[Sandbagger]

Feb 12, 2019 22:30:03 GMT -5 ytradio said:

Ok Six-Shooter the story. When I was a new general, I belonged to a local ham club that had a 80 meter group of rag chewers that talked me into putting up an inverted V that I really did not have the room for. After getting it up and setting the SWR to 1.3 on my 1970's vintage radio shack meter, I noticed I was not getting full power out. Asking the group on the air if I should see a full 100 watts out on 80 meters I was told yes. So I said to them it must just be my meter. One of the guys stopped by on his way to work one evening with his Bird meter and checked it for me. The power out was close to what I was seeing, but the SWR was over 3 to 1. We determined the antenna was too long and he left for work with his Bird meter. He did not offer to let me use it and I did not ask. Getting on the air latter with my power reduced for safety sake, I asked the rest of the guys for advice on a reasonably priced, reasonably accurate meter. One older fellow who had been a ham since sometime in the 50's asked how I had set the SWR in the first place. I told him, and he said "crank her up son, bet that's yer problem". I didn't know what he meant by this and he said "that cheep meter ya got there will be more accurate on higher power, put it in CW mode, hook up your key and see what its doing". I did all this and I got a reading pretty close to what the other fellows Bird gave us. So I personally have been checking my SWR this way since. I will first use just carrier power, then go to 100 watts and also check. Sometimes I will need to adjust a little more sometimes not, the meters that I have been using since that time are better, but they are not a Bird. A few months back I was having this same kind of conversation on the air with a fellow, and showed him in the ARRL antenna book what I believe is a reference to this. It is in the chapter on antenna and feed line measurements, and it says that typical SWR meters available to the average ham are not very accurate at low power levels, then goes on to talk about building one that is.  321 said that he was using a galaxy 959, I assumed it was stock with a 4 watt carrier. He also said he was using a meter that had always seemed reliable.   From this I believed increasing his power to the full 12 watts may give a more accurate reading on the meter he was using, and that he may in fact have that 3 to 1 SWR. Since he did not say it was a Bird, I assumed it was not, and may have been of the quality that I had been using. Also, antenna analyzers use a better circuit than any of the ham or CB radio meters that I have used, I am sorry for my thriftiness.  If what I have been doing all this time is wrong, then when I recheck the SWR with just a carrier it should be off. But this is not the case, it is always low at dead carrier and 100 watts with a CW tone. And I was wrong for saying to 321 that SWR should be checked at full power. I should have suggested that he give it a try if he wanted to, and see how it worked for him. 73 Whitey

Good explanation, and it pretty much goes along with my earlier assertion that it's not the SWR that changes with different power levels, but that cheapie SWR meters may display it differently due to the characteristics of the diodes used in the bridge circuit. A Bird 43 is a very good in-line wattmeter and it will give you accurate wattage reading both in the forward direction and the reverse direction. But you have to do the math (or have a handy lookup chart) to convert the forward:reflected power ratio into SWR. Usually people just tune for minimum reflected power and call it a day. If you're putting out 100 watts in the forward direction and show 1 watt reflected, that's a darn good SWR, about 1.2:1.

Here's a site that allows you to calculate SWR from power readings: rfcalculator.mobi/vswr-forward-reverse-power.html


Good explanation and

[SIX-SHOOTER]

Like the fellow said,I am NOT the sharpest knife in the drawer but the rest of them are butter knives. LOL Glad we settled that I think.

SIX-SHOOTER

[321 treeclimber]

The v58 has good ears. Its transmit powers are still in question. I get good reports but no one will say its better than my sirio 1/2 wave. It surely handles more watts and again it has better ears. I guess when some skip comes in i can test it more. The swr has been consistant, 1.3 ,in rain and ice. We've had all that and heavy winds here in the sullivan county catskills recently and the maco held up well. Again, coated with ice and wind gusts of 25 to 35+mph no problem. 321

[ytradio]

Feb 13, 2019 18:55:55 GMT -5 Sandbagger said:

Feb 12, 2019 22:30:03 GMT -5 ytradio said:

Ok Six-Shooter the story. When I was a new general, I belonged to a local ham club that had a 80 meter group of rag chewers that talked me into putting up an inverted V that I really did not have the room for. After getting it up and setting the SWR to 1.3 on my 1970's vintage radio shack meter, I noticed I was not getting full power out. Asking the group on the air if I should see a full 100 watts out on 80 meters I was told yes. So I said to them it must just be my meter. One of the guys stopped by on his way to work one evening with his Bird meter and checked it for me. The power out was close to what I was seeing, but the SWR was over 3 to 1. We determined the antenna was too long and he left for work with his Bird meter. He did not offer to let me use it and I did not ask. Getting on the air latter with my power reduced for safety sake, I asked the rest of the guys for advice on a reasonably priced, reasonably accurate meter. One older fellow who had been a ham since sometime in the 50's asked how I had set the SWR in the first place. I told him, and he said "crank her up son, bet that's yer problem". I didn't know what he meant by this and he said "that cheep meter ya got there will be more accurate on higher power, put it in CW mode, hook up your key and see what its doing". I did all this and I got a reading pretty close to what the other fellows Bird gave us. So I personally have been checking my SWR this way since. I will first use just carrier power, then go to 100 watts and also check. Sometimes I will need to adjust a little more sometimes not, the meters that I have been using since that time are better, but they are not a Bird. A few months back I was having this same kind of conversation on the air with a fellow, and showed him in the ARRL antenna book what I believe is a reference to this. It is in the chapter on antenna and feed line measurements, and it says that typical SWR meters available to the average ham are not very accurate at low power levels, then goes on to talk about building one that is.  321 said that he was using a galaxy 959, I assumed it was stock with a 4 watt carrier. He also said he was using a meter that had always seemed reliable.   From this I believed increasing his power to the full 12 watts may give a more accurate reading on the meter he was using, and that he may in fact have that 3 to 1 SWR. Since he did not say it was a Bird, I assumed it was not, and may have been of the quality that I had been using. Also, antenna analyzers use a better circuit than any of the ham or CB radio meters that I have used, I am sorry for my thriftiness.  If what I have been doing all this time is wrong, then when I recheck the SWR with just a carrier it should be off. But this is not the case, it is always low at dead carrier and 100 watts with a CW tone. And I was wrong for saying to 321 that SWR should be checked at full power. I should have suggested that he give it a try if he wanted to, and see how it worked for him. 73 Whitey

Good explanation, and it pretty much goes along with my earlier assertion that it's not the SWR that changes with different power levels, but that cheapie SWR meters may display it differently due to the characteristics of the diodes used in the bridge circuit. A Bird 43 is a very good in-line wattmeter and it will give you accurate wattage reading both in the forward direction and the reverse direction. But you have to do the math (or have a handy lookup chart) to convert the forward:reflected power ratio into SWR. Usually people just tune for minimum reflected power and call it a day. If you're putting out 100 watts in the forward direction and show 1 watt reflected, that's a darn good SWR, about 1.2:1.

Here's a site that allows you to calculate SWR from power readings: rfcalculator.mobi/vswr-forward-reverse-power.html


Good explanation and

I never was meaning to say that the ratio was changing, but the reading could be inaccurate. Also using the double or twin needle meters, are difficult for me to read without higher power, and that is what I use most of the time. I guess I don't make myself very easy to understand a lot of the time. Good God, my wife has been right.

[321 treeclimber]

My girlfriend agrees!