cushcraft a3s or mosley ta-33?
Marshall Johnson, Sr.
---You are correct, the two antennas you mention are nearly identical.
The Mosely antenna is just slightly better built than the Cushcraft.
However, before you consider either of these antennas, take look at the
three element antenna from Force 12. No loading coils or traps...and can
be expanded to include 40 meters if the need arises. Force 12 makes an
entire line of "butt-kickin'" antennas.
TTFN 73 Marsh KK7CW
Ian Procyk wrote:
> Hello
>
> I'm looking around at some smaller sized tribanders. I was wondering
> if anyone out there has any thoughts on the cushcraft a3s beam or the
> mosley ta-33. They are both about the same price and I was just
> wondering if one is better than the other. I plan to use a cd-45-ii
> rotor on which ever antenna I get. Will that rotor work?
>
> -THNX!
> -VE7HHS Vancouver BC
Ian Procyk
John Cramond
In article <35435f67...@mail.direct.ca>, Ian Procyk
<jpr...@direct.ca> writes
I have used both of these beams and found little difference in
performance between them worth mentioning. Perhaps the mechanical
construction of the Cushcraft just had the edge but price might be the
deciding factor.
The CD-45 will work, probably for a year or two, but you would be better
to go for the CD-650 or even the CD-850. The extra money would give you
a rotor more suited to the tribander and probably provide a number of
years extra service.
--
John Cramond - GM4NHI
<jo...@gm4nhi.demon.co.uk>
Richard E Stealey
Marshall Johnson, Sr. <kk...@skipnet.com> wrote:
: ---You are correct, the two antennas you mention are nearly identical.
: The Mosely antenna is just slightly better built than the Cushcraft.
: However, before you consider either of these antennas, take look at the
They are far from "nearly identical" The Mosely has only one "trap"
per side, where the CC has 2. The theory behind that difference is
beyond the scope of this reply.
There is no comparison regarding the construction of a Mosely vs a
Cushcraft. I just moved one after being up for 16 years. The only
deterioration was in the plastic caps over the end of the elements,
"traps" and boom. One call to Mosely and they had them in stock and
shipped right out. All hardware is Stainless steel. 1/4 turn with a
wrench and all the nuts spin right off into your hand. Heavy aluminum
used throughout, made to last a lifetime. Just ask any owner of one.
Force 12? Getting high marks for performance, but do a search (use DejaNews)
and see remarks from guys who own them and try to get support from the
mfr - it is nonexistant. So if they don't even answer the phone now, what
do you expect the parts situation will be like in the future !!!!!
GL and 73
Rick K2XT
Jerry Flanders
On 1 May 1998 16:45:22 GMT, Richard E Stealey <r...@wndev.att.com>
wrote:
>Marshall Johnson, Sr. <kk...@skipnet.com> wrote:
>: ---You are correct, the two antennas you mention are nearly identical.
>: The Mosely antenna is just slightly better built than the Cushcraft.
>: However, before you consider either of these antennas, take look at the
>
>They are far from "nearly identical" The Mosely has only one "trap"
>per side, where the CC has 2. The theory behind that difference is
>beyond the scope of this reply.
><SNIP>
>
>GL and 73
>
>Rick K2XT
More accurately: Mosely has only one "can" per side. If I remember
this all correctly, the Mosely TA-33 has two traps in each can. The
can housing provides the extra length of metal you usually see between
the traps for 15 Meters in a conventional tribander.
Pretty clever, but not mysterious, and there is certainly no difficult
"theory" to this. It is probably less effective electrically than a
conventional two can arrangement due to physical size, but certainly a
neater package and mechanically strong.
Jerry W4UK
Bob Lewis
I've owned both. The Mosley is much better built than the Cushcraft. In addition,
I find the Mosley has a broader bandwidth - especially the 40 meter add-on kit. I
suspect this is due to the heavier guage wire in the traps. I'd put my money on
the Mosley any day.
Richard E Stealey wrote:
> Marshall Johnson, Sr. <kk...@skipnet.com> wrote:
> : ---You are correct, the two antennas you mention are nearly identical.
> : The Mosely antenna is just slightly better built than the Cushcraft.
> : However, before you consider either of these antennas, take look at the
>
> They are far from "nearly identical" The Mosely has only one "trap"
> per side, where the CC has 2. The theory behind that difference is
> beyond the scope of this reply.
> There is no comparison regarding the construction of a Mosely vs a
> Cushcraft. I just moved one after being up for 16 years. The only
> deterioration was in the plastic caps over the end of the elements,
> "traps" and boom. One call to Mosely and they had them in stock and
> shipped right out. All hardware is Stainless steel. 1/4 turn with a
> wrench and all the nuts spin right off into your hand. Heavy aluminum
> used throughout, made to last a lifetime. Just ask any owner of one.
> Force 12? Getting high marks for performance, but do a search (use DejaNews)
> and see remarks from guys who own them and try to get support from the
> mfr - it is nonexistant. So if they don't even answer the phone now, what
> do you expect the parts situation will be like in the future !!!!!
>
roof.cleani...@gmail.com
> ---You are correct, the two antennas you mention are nearly identical.
> The Mosely antenna is just slightly better built than the Cushcraft.
> However, before you consider either of these antennas, take look at the
> be expanded to include 40 meters if the need arises. Force 12 makes an
> entire line of "butt-kickin'" antennas.
> TTFN 73 Marsh KK7CW
>
> Ian Procyk wrote:
>
> >
> > I'm looking around at some smaller sized tribanders. I was wondering
> > if anyone out there has any thoughts on the cushcraft a3s beam or the
> > mosley ta-33. They are both about the same price and I was just
> > wondering if one is better than the other. I plan to use a cd-45-ii
> > rotor on which ever antenna I get. Will that rotor work?
> >
> > -THNX!
> > -VE7HHS Vancouver BC
Some forget that Mosley INVENTED the triband Yagi, and they are still there, under the same family ownership, making their antennas.
The Cush Craft a 4 is an excellent antenna, electrically.
But Cush Craft Traps I have found to be fragile devices, and I question their power handling ratings, since I have burnt up the ones on both my old Cushcraft A3, as well as the ones on my Cushcraft D 4 rotatable dipole.
The Mosley traps I have never burnt up, and the Mosley TA 33 worked great for me, and every one else I have known who has ever run one.
Allodoxaphobia
> On Sunday, April 26, 1998 3:00:00 AM UTC-4, Marshall Johnson, Sr. wrote:
>> ---You are correct, the two antennas you mention are nearly identical.
>> The Mosely antenna is just slightly better built than the Cushcraft.
>> However, before you consider either of these antennas, take look at the
>> three element antenna from Force 12. No loading coils or traps...and can
>> be expanded to include 40 meters if the need arises. Force 12 makes an
>> entire line of "butt-kickin'" antennas.
>> >
>> > if anyone out there has any thoughts on the cushcraft a3s beam or the
>> > mosley ta-33. They are both about the same price and I was just
>> > wondering if one is better than the other. I plan to use a cd-45-ii
>> > rotor on which ever antenna I get. Will that rotor work?
>
YAGG replying to a now 6+ year-old posting.
Jerry Stuckle
--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry, AI0K
jstu...@attglobal.net
==================
David
post was 16 years ago.
unp...@gmail.com
unp...@gmail.com
ji...@specsol.spam.sux.com
--
Jim Pennino