Telescopic GP Whip vs EFHW.

[F5MOG]

Hello, I compared 2 antennas in Sota conditions. Both antennas are light, and extremly quick to install. The antennas are an EFHW (a clone home made PAR end Fed Trial 10/20/40 m) and a GP telescopic whip. I consider my clone home made PAR end Fed as a clear winner. More infos below.

Antenna EFHW description: A clone home made PAR end Fed Trial 10/20/40 m. Basically a home made 81:1 transformer, #10 m wire, followed by a #25 microH coil, followed by # 2 m wire. The 10 m wire is a half wave on 20 m, a full wave on 10 m, a 1/4 wave on 40m. The coil acts as a choke on 10/20m. On 40 m, the coil + the #2m wire acts as the 2nd 1/4 wave on 40m , therefore, the whole is a shortened 40m EFHW. Total length about 12.5 m. I used a #6m carbon fishing rod as a mast. The antenna is installed as a sloping wire. The top of the antenna is #6m high, the bottom, with the 81:1 transformer is 1m high. The antenna has been adjusted for resonnance on 10/20/40 and can be used without ATU. Very little sensitivity to the environment.

Antenna GP : Telecopic antenna # 5.7 m long. See the thread “Cheap 1/4 wave Antenna whip from Aliexpress”. I used 2 X 5 m radials on the ground, and a home made choke at the feedpoint. I used the full length of the telescopic # 5.6m, and the ATU from my KX2. I did not adust the length of the telecopic part for resonnance, just used the KX2 ATU

How I did the comparison.I installed both antennas on a nearby hill. I called CQ de F5MOG for a few minutes, with antenna EFHW, and with the GP. I get the SNR data from the RBN network and I compared the obtained data.

Date of test for 20 m Feb 24, 13:26-13:27 for EFHW and 13:28-13:29 for GP
Date of test for 40 m Feb 24, 13:32-13:33 for GP and 13:35-13:36 for GP
For all tests I used my KX2, same power, about 10 W, same coaxial cable.
Well, same location, same power, same time, same conditions, or close enough to consider the comparison as valuable and meaningful.

The tables below shows the SNR dB received from the RBN network, for the EFHW and for the GP.
On 20 m, almost ALL the reports are higher for the EFHW.

Indicatif	EFHW	GP
2E0INH	12	4
DF2CK	29	23
DK3WW	31	23
DL0PF	25	8
DL1HWS	23	15
DL1HWS-3	26	15
DL8LAS	16	9
DL8TG	25	18
DL9GTB	33	28
DM5GG	17	17
DM6EE	25	18
DO4ZT	21	13
DXSDR		10
EA5WU	15	12
ES2RR	8	5
ES5PC	21	17
F4GOU	21	19
G0KTN	19	11
G3XBI		14
G3YPP	12
G4IRN	17	12
G4ZFE	12	15
GE0FRE	13
GI4DOH-2	17
GX0FRE	13	5
HA1VHF	17	13
HA6PX	9	9
HA8TKS	10	11
HG0Y	26	17
HG8A	10	11
IK7YTT	18	19
LZ4AE		7
LZ5DI		5
LZ7AA		5
MM0ZBH		18
OE6TZE	10
OK1FCJ	30	21
OK1HRA	25	16
OL9A	16	9
OZ1AAB	4
PA8MM	11	4
PE5TT	8	3
PI4CC	20	10
R1LB	16
RK3TD-2	8
S50ARX	7
S50U	12	3
S53M-11	25	19
S53WW	27	20
SE5E	21	15
SM1HEV	4
SM7IUN	24	13
SQ5J	14	9
SQ5OUO	7	6
YO2CK	9	7
YO2MAX		15

On 40 m, ALL the reports are higher for the EFHW. A lot more reports received on the EFHW.

Indicatif	EFHW	GP
DC8YZ	25	18
DF2CK	12	7
DK0TE	12
DK3WW		11
DK9IP	4
DK9IP-1	6
DL0PF	22	18
DL8TG		11
DL9GTB	8	5
DP5G-15	12
DR4W		10
F4GOU	17	10
F4VVG	3
F6KGL	16	8
HA1VHF		1
IK4VET	5	6
OE6TZE		6
OK1FCJ		14
OK1HRA	10	9
PA8MM	9
PE5TT	5
PI4CC	13
S50ARX	14

[HB9EAJ]

Hi Pierre,

Interesting observations, thanks for sharing!

Some preliminary observations:

• Using only 2x5m radials with the GP is not optimal. I prefer many but shorter ones, e.g. at least 8 that are 2.5m long.
• On 40m the GP is shorter and therefore probably less efficient than the EFHW.
• Especially on 20m, the EFHW has some preferred directions.
• Since the GP is vertically polarised, (near) NVIS won’t work. Therefore your EFHW in sloper configuration should be much better with closed-by stations. It would be interesting to configure the EFHW as inverted-L or inverted-7 (this could probably improve your results even more).
• There was at least one tree in the vicinity which may have a greater effect on your vertical polarised GP, compared to the EFHW.
• Having a 2-4 minute measurement time difference can also have a propagation effect.

But it’s true, when I did some experiments myself, testing both antennas (the same EFHW as inverted-7 and the same GP) on 10m, sometimes the EFHW was the winner and sometimes the GP (mostly testing with stable groundwave RX and TX).

I know some summits that work better with the GP and some that “prefer” the EFHW. When I’m surrounded by trees, I usually choose the EFHW. Another advantage of the EFHW is that you don’t have to change the antenna when you change bands (I don’t use an ATU).

There are so many variables involved, which is part of the fun!

73 Stephan

[F4LEK]

I also think 2 x 5 m radials is far from ideal. I use mine with at least 5 radials of 2.5 m.

@HB9EAJ

Another advantage of the EFHW is that you don’t have to change the antenna when you change bands

Well, with a 20 m long efhw, you can theoretically use 40 20 15 and 10 but the reality is that so many nulls in the patterns for the higher bands make the antenna barely usable at those frequencies, imho. So you can use 2 (or 3) bands without modifying the antenna… Not that great.

With the telescopic gp, you can use every single band from 20 to 10 m without atu and at its ‘proper’ physical length. You can also easily add 30 and 40 m with a coil. Only a few seconds are required to change the length of the telescopic whip. Concerning antenna directivity, as an activator, the 360° uniform pattern can also be an advantage to get as many chasers, from every directions, as possible.

Since I got the vertical whip, I have to deal with crazy pileups that I never experienced with my efhw. Things like 40 QSO in 25 min never happened to me before. Maybe the bands are better or it’s just a coincidence but now I have 9 activations with the whip and so far, it’s been superior.

Add to this the ease of setup of the telescopic compared to guying a mast and dealing with 20m of wire when on a cold summit… Now my efhw’s stay in the drawer !

[VE3IPS]

I had avoided the EFLW and EFHW antennas in the past because a dipole or vertical would be a better radiator for lower power operators out in the field

The Chameleon antennas with their balun was another antenna I found lacking in performance when I am running QRP

Remember, 5 watts on SSB is a struggle so every db helps

All these baluns and chokes in the above I believe provides less results than what I am finding using a resonant vertical or inverted vee dipole. Maybe the single wire style of deployment in a horizontal or sloper set up is different enough from the 2 wire antennas

There is a lot of convenience to using the those antennas with higher power and when bands are in great shape and you will get 59s and work some DX based on the deployment style. I use these antennas when I can get the far end up high or off a mast

I have been A/Bing a Chelegance MC-750 vertical against their MC-599 dipole and at times one is better than the other depending on the distance at the far end but overall they are pretty much the same

If I compare the vertical to the balun based single wire there are times that again that one is better than the other based on the calling station but overall they are pretty much the same

I can make 50 contacts at POTA and I pretty well work the usual states with their usual signals and at times you notice a pipeline into a state that provides stronger signals

The other night I got a bonus with a Washington station and South Dakota that I needed for my POTA states and I heard them on the inverted vee but not on the vertical. So that was an important lesson that if I was running a vertical mobile antenna or a 17fter with a coil I would have missed these 2 states

Over 9000 contacts and I still need 6 states so the right antenna at the right time is the one that works best

I think 5 radials in place of 2 would also be better with more wire on the ground in each direction

With all that said I still have OCD and ADHD over the antenna, do I have the best one, is that better than this and does the DX spray really work and then one day after 300 contacts in the park I said “This Inverted Vee works like gangbusters”
John VE3IPS

[VE3IPS]

Planning ahead of an activation or summit operation is important and you can choose what antenna you can deploy easily and safely based on the band conditions

A lightweight antenna like the Gabil GRA-7350TC would be handy as well

I think the vertical may be the easiest to deploy once you figure out if its clamped, ground spike or a tripod is used to hold it up
john VE3IPS

SOTA is tough in my area but I am always trying for a POTA to SOTA contact and I have a handful of them

[G8CPZ]

@VE3IPS

All these baluns and chokes in the above I believe provides less results than what I am finding using a resonant vertical or inverted vee dipole

Well, even the balun for a centre-fed dipole will have losses but can be minimised by good construction. You’re right about the Chameleon vertical’s lossy transformer but I find it’s fine with 10W CW on 10MHz and above and use it instead of my EFHWs or CF linked dipoles in strong wind or rain or where the summit topology demands a small antenna footprint.

[HB9PJT]

These are not DX stations, but only local stations in the receive report. The result would be different for DX stations. Local stations have a steep elevation, which a vertical antenna cannot do so well.

73, Peter - HB9PJT

[DL6GCA]

Ultimately, it’s always the same…

With cars, they say: nothing can replace displacement other than (more) displacement…

And with antennas, it’s wire length or area and height…

I’ve noticed for a long time (not just since the Elecraft KH1) that many SOTA activators are using “small” telescopic antennas. There are plenty of “miracle antennas” on the market.

If you’ve sent a spot, you get your QSOs, there are lots of chasers who can compensate for the weaknesses with their good antennas. Unfortunately, that doesn’t always work with an S2S. Especially with groundwave QSOs, I often find that I can hardly hear activators with these small antennas… and stations with an EFHW give a great signal!

During the 10 m challenge I often used the 6 m Decathon mast and a 5.80 m random wire + 1:9 Unun… it is a light, inexpensive unit… and works well from 10 m to 20 m… at frequencies below it is rather weak.

73 Armin

[GM4EVS]

@G8CPZ

Well, even the balun for a centre-fed dipole will have losses but can be minimised by good construction.

Indeed good construction is important.

But balun-related losses with a centre-fed dipole are typically low because it is dealing with low impedances, without too much reactance; assuming the dipole is being used on the band for which it is a half-wave.

As we know, the EFHW balun must accommodate a wider range of impedances; higher losses are more likely, but perhaps not always?

73 Dave

[VK1AD]

@DL6GCA

5.80 m random wire

How can a 5.8m length of wire be ‘random’. It’s 5.8m. There is nothing random about any length of wire. The wire is either resonant or non resonant and may include some sort of impedance match.

Andrew VK1AD

[DL6GCA]

https://udel.edu/~mm/ham/randomWire/

73 Armin

[G8CPZ]

Déjà vu on Groundhog Day?

Every time someone posts a type-A vs type-B antenna topic we go through the same steps:

• We discuss some technical aspects of each antenna type
• Someone posts a load of radiation lobe model diagrams
• Someone points out that the comparison wasn’t done strictly enough to reach a conclusion (e.g. which type is better)
• Die-hards / long-in-the-tooth bloggers point out there is no best type from the most-popular 3 or 4 types of antenna that activators use, and that they are ALL pretty good and each type has its strengths and weaknesses
• Someone will argue [correctly in my opinion] that it depends what you are trying to achieve, e.g. excellent dx or get enough contacts to qualify the summit before your brain and body freezes
• Someone [like me] will point out there are other factors influencing the choice [if you’re lucky enough to have multiple antenna types for the intended band(s)], like weight, packed volume, speed of deployment & take-down, suitability for a particular summit topology (e.g. small footprint needed), suitability for adverse wx (e.g. strong winds / heavy rain), etc.
• Finally, someone [@MM0FMF ?] will write “the best antenna is the one you own”

Did I miss a step?

[G4TGJ]

For a few years we used to visit a holiday home on Anglesey (near GW/NW-069) and I set up my rig in our downstairs bedroom. I ran a wire out of the window, round to the front, up and over the roof and along to a high point in the garden (it sloped up). I added a counterpoise and used an ATU to tune it. I have no idea how long the wire was. That’s a random wire.

Unfortunately it’s no longer available as the owner had to sell it due to covid.

[MM0FMF]

@G8CPZ

Did I miss a step?

Yes, you and some other hams know that antennas like your Chameleon MPAS are a compromise and know that it works well enough. You know you can whip it out and get it up in the cold without problems. Impressive for an older gentleman. I hope to be in your situation one day (you are +10dByears on me) and also need antennas that are quick to deploy that work well enough.

@VK1AD

How can a 5.8m length of wire be ‘random’.

A wire may be random in length or it may be a “random” length. The quotes are important. “Random” wires are anything but random but a carefully chosen length that works by not being a half wave on any of the bands you want to use.

Random? No.
“Random”? Yes.

c.f. Armin’s link: Telescopic GP Whip vs EFHW. - #11 by DL6GCA

[G8CPZ]

@MM0FMF

you are +10dByears on me

Yes but the ratio of my age to your age is getting smaller every day.

[VK1DA]

Perhaps the antenna you actually have on a summit rather than back in the car or at home is even better.

[F5MOG]

@HB9EAJ

Using only 2x5m radials with the GP is not optimal.

I may try more radials, eventually shorter.

@HB9EAJ

Since the GP is vertically polarised, (near) NVIS won’t work. Therefore your EFHW in sloper configuration should be much better with closed-by stations.

For Sota, I first look for my local EU chasers, and S2S, so I consider the NVIS component as an advantage. Of course the more uniform 360 low angle pattern is nicer for dx and I like to have a DX in my log,

@F4LEK

Well, with a 20 m long efhw,

@F4LEK

guying a mast and dealing with 20m of wire

my efhw is 12.5m, 40/20/10. yes, less bands than telescopic gp, but my main bands, easier to install than a 20 m wire. And I do not guy the mast, I put my fishing rod into a PVC piece of pipe. Fast, and good enough even in windy conditions.

@VE3IPS

the right antenna at the right time is the one that works best

I agree, I would choose the gp if the objective on the summit is the VK contacts.

@DL6GCA

I often find that I can hardly hear activators with these small antennas… and stations with an EFHW give a great signal

the telescopic here is full size 1/4 wave on 20 m and above. For 40 m, no doubt that a13m efhw is shortened 7Mhz efhw, but proportionnaly longer than the 5.7 m telescopic whip,

@G8CPZ

Finally, …the best antenna is the one you own”

of course, and my first words of my topic said my efhw is a winner. My post tried then to explain which data I used ro come to my conclusion.

Overall, I apreciate all your comments, Your comments influenced me, for continuing some GP tests, with some more radials, shorter, and with a loading coil for 30/40 m.
THANK YOU all, for your comments.

73 de Pierre F5MOG

[VK5CZ]

My Vertical antenna I use for VKFF is a Hustler mobile loaded vertical with each band coil screw on/off to change bands. I have the antenna base on 40mm pvc pipe 1m long so no interaction with the steal picket I belt in the ground as support. 2 quarter wave radials elevated about 1 metre made like a link dipole for 15/17/20m. To get resonance with the 40m coil I just run the same radial and connect 1 end of the radial wire to my earth side of the antenna. Make sure all links are closed. Works very FB and puts stuff back into use 1 less home for spiders in my shed.
Ian vk5cz …