Best HT Antenna?

[TNFrank]

I have a few different antennas from small stubbies(Diamond SRH805s) to a 3.14" longer stubby(Abbree AR-806+,my go to for my work radio) to the mid-length(8")whips and the longer 15.3" Arbbree AR-771. I'd guess that the 771's would give me the best range on par with other 771's like the Nagoya, et al. Question is are there any other antennas that might give me a bit more gain and still be portable enough or is something like a 771 type antenna about as good as it gets?

I'll not only be using it on GMRS and MURS but also on 2M, 1.25M and 70cm now that I have my Technician License. Thanks.

[WRYS709]

21 hours ago, TNFrank said:

I tried a 5/8 Smiley Rubber Duck and it wasn't as good as the 771 I had. I think I'm going to stick with what I've got for now(see my Power Test video in the Amateur Radio section)and maybe try a 320A later.

Based on your comment, I took a look at this “5/8 rubber duck” on the Smiley website. 

It seems a contradiction in terms: an antenna is either cut to 5/8ths length or is electronically made into a “rubber duck” with coils; but it seems to me it can’t be both!

A true 5/8 should out perform a 1/2 wave or rubber dick. 

[Lscott]

8 minutes ago, WRYS709 said:

Based on your comment, I took a look at this “5/8 rubber duck” on the Smiley website. 

It seems a contradiction in terms: an antenna is either cut to 5/8ths length or is electronically made into a “rubber duck” with coils; but it seems to me it can’t be both!

A true 5/8 should out perform a 1/2 wave or rubber dick. 

A 5/8 wave requires a good ground plane. The reason it has a slightly better gain is the reflection off of the ground. Without that reflection it's basically no better than a 1/2 wave.

And for an HT antenna you have crap for a ground plane.

https://www.w8ji.com/VHF mobile vertical.htm

 

[WRYS709]

1 hour ago, Lscott said:

A definitive test, or comparison, should be done with a field strength meter and a uniform standardized test stand…

I always appreciate your detailed reporting and if you come across one such report on testing, please post it. 

In the meantime, if my 1/2 wave 2 meter HT antenna does not get me satisfactory results, but switching to my more bulky 5/8 telescoping antenna does, I will accept the positive results as proof enough for me!

[Lscott]

1 minute ago, WRYS709 said:

In the meantime, if my 1/2 wave 2 meter HT antenna does not get me satisfactory results, but switching to my more bulky 5/8 telescoping antenna does, I will accept the positive results as proof enough for me!

That's good. The engineer in me would like to know a bit more about the "how and why" that is the case.

[TNFrank]

I ordered a Nagoya 320a to try out. I'll put it on my best radio(AR-5RM #3, see my power test video in Armature Radio section.) to see how it works. 

P.S.

This antenna is rated for 10W, my radio is putting out 11W. Is there enough "wiggle room" for it to handle the extra watt?

[SteveShannon]

33 minutes ago, TNFrank said:

I ordered a Nagoya 320a to try out. I'll put it on my best radio(AR-5RM #3, see my power test video in Armature Radio section.) to see how it works. 

P.S.

This antenna is rated for 10W, my radio is putting out 11W. Is there enough "wiggle room" for it to handle the extra watt?

Almost certainly.  Ratings are usually conservative.  Plus, you probably don’t transmit continuously for long periods of time.

[TNFrank]

Just watched a review on the 320a, the SWR was horrible especially on the 70cm band.  I'll be sending it back without even opening it. Really disappointed that Nagoya would put out a product like this. 

 

 

[LeoG]

I'd open it and test it.  Results may vary.

[SteveShannon]

4 minutes ago, LeoG said:

I'd open it and test it.  Results may vary.

This!

Testing the SWR of a handheld radio antenna is either very tricky or useless, depending upon whom you listen to. Performance is what matters. 

[OffRoaderX]

3 minutes ago, SteveShannon said:

This!

Testing the SWR of a handheld radio antenna is either very tricky or useless, depending upon whom you listen to. Performance is what matters. 

This!!

Testing the SWR of an HT antenna is impossible without very sofistikated equipment, OTHER than confirming that the antenna is not just a dead-short.

[Lscott]

12 minutes ago, TNFrank said:

Just watched a review on the 320a, the SWR was horrible especially on the 70cm band.  I'll be sending it back without even opening it. Really disappointed that Nagoya would put out a product like this. 

 

 

I would do a bit more research before sending it back. Checking the match on an HT antenna is a difficult exorcise. Lot's of ways to do it wrong and get crappy results. I've tried it myself and had trouble getting results that looked reasonable.

Read the comments about antenna testing and what the guy observed.

I did some simple tests using an older MFJ antenna analyzer. Check out the results for the  Diamond SRH320A. The results for 2M are particularly weird. 

WGP - With Ground Plane

WOGP - Without Ground plane.

Then I ran some SWR sweeps of the SRH320A using my RigExpert AA-1000 antenna analyzer with a special MFJ magnet mount using an SMA connector for HT antennas. The mount was placed on a large 36 inch by 40 inch flat sheet metal sheet for a ground plane.

https://mfjenterprises.com/products/mfj-332s?srsltid=AfmBOoq7AleI5bQc6eePGbJ4paGCA-ZK7sBSZWARn6VL0pTjEjIYgUTy

https://old.rigexpert.com/products/antenna-analyzers/aa-1000/

Apparently, I assume, something else must be going on to get a good match on 2M when the antenna is on an HT, held in the hand and close to the body, that the testing I did does not duplicate.

https://www.diamondantenna.net/srh320a.html

 

HT-Antenna-Testing.pdf HT Antenna Tests Results.pdf Antenna Scan Results (SRH320A 1.25M GP).pdf Antenna Scan Results (SRH320A 2M GP).pdf Antenna Scan Results (SRH320A UHF GP).pdf

[Northcutt114]

I'm certainly and self-admittedly new to all of this, but I wasn't even aware that one could test the SWR of a handheld antenna.

I'm running a Nagoya NA-771 on my 5 watt HT. I don't have any scientific data, but from a bit of practical testing, I have found that range is much improved over the OEM rubber ducky. I am roughly 40 miles - as the crow flies - from a local repeater and I hear it clear as a bell and have, on two occasions, hit it and gotten a response on that HT with the Nagoya NA-771. I suppose the stars were aligned just right because I have tried several times since and not had success. I was never able to hit it with the rubber ducky on.

 

[TNFrank]

Just for grins I got my power/swr meter out(same one I used to test power output in my videos)and checked the swr(unscientifically)and got anywhere from really good on some frequencies with some antennas to absolutely awful on some frequencies.  Some antennas did great on MURS and 2M but totally sucked at 70cm. Many didn't do well at all on 1.25M but were passable on 2M and 70cm.

Surprisingly the factory 8" and Abbree 771 were both accaptably on ALL tested frequencies. 2M, MURS, 1.25M, 70cm and GMRS. I guess the factory provided antennas aren't as bad as the old rubber duck antennas they use to provide. 

I'll probably give the 320a a test to see how it looks before I make up my mind one way or the other. 

[SteveShannon]

4 hours ago, TNFrank said:

Surprisingly the factory 8" and Abbree 771 were both accaptably on ALL tested frequencies. 2M, MURS, 1.25M, 70cm and GMRS. I guess the factory provided antennas aren't as bad as the old rubber duck antennas they use to provide. 

SWR is somewhat important, but tells you nothing about gain or pattern. A dummy load will test nearly perfectly for SWR. 

[TNFrank]

That's because as I've learned the radio is looking for a perfect 50 ohm load from the antenna and since the dummy load gives the radio the 50 ohms it's looking for the SWR is perfect. The load the radio "sees" from a given antenna can vary depending on frequency, hence the need to tune the antenna for a given frequency.

I really want to pick up a NanoVNA to run SWR scans on my antenna so I can see what each is tuned for.

[WRUE951]

a long time ago i shelled out some good money ($45) for a Comet (i don't remember the model) HT dual band antenna.  I never was able to ascertain the difference between that and the standard stock antenna.  I gave up spending money on HT antennas and just use what came with the radio..   And honestly, considering they are HT's   never been dissatisfied .  

[Davichko5650]

46 minutes ago, WRUE951 said:

   And honestly, considering they are HT's   never been dissatisfied .  

This!  Especially given what I use my GMRS HT's for, very short distance comms on the trail or around the spread or up at the cabin. Money spent on extra spendy fancy antennae is money better spent on boat cooler beer & ice!

On the Amateur side of things, I so very rarely use an HT so it's pretty much a moot point, the rubber ducky that came with the radio is more than sufficient to get the farz I needs.

[WRHS218]

Like many have already started I have been through many different antennas when I was more active on the HAM side. I spent a lot of money on comet antennas and others. some were good, some maybe not so good. I learned my lesson, some antennas are better than OEM but it depends on the radio and how you are using them. When I started my GMRS journey I forgot the lesson I had learned with all of my HAM HTs. I now have a collection of GMRS antennas. I have determined that it depends on the radio and how you are using them. Amazing, I know.

Actually the reason I was looking for different antennas with my GMRS radios was specifically to find a good flexible antenna that was at least as good on TX/RX as the OEM. I have 701s, 771s, Melowave Bandit Gs, a Smiley Slim Line, and even a Signal Stick cut for GMRS. All of them were tested on my KG-935G at specific distances in my mountain area. My big takeaway is nothing new; the longer antennas normally RX better when I'm on the ragged edge RX/TX. Anywhere else they all are about the same. With flexibility being my main desire I have a Smiley Slim line on my HT most of the time. If I am out in the mountains I carry a Melowave Bandit G in my pack in case I need the longer antenna. I haven't really had that need but it is easy to carry. I have found that the OEM antenna that came on my 925G is a very good antenna, but it is very stiff. The stiffer the antenna the more I am likely to catch it on something or poke my eye out again. Your experiences WILL vary.

[LeoG]

20 minutes ago, Davichko5650 said:

This!  Especially given what I use my GMRS HT's for, very short distance comms on the trail or around the spread or up at the cabin. Money spent on extra spendy fancy antennae is money better spent on boat cooler beer & ice!

On the Amateur side of things, I so very rarely use an HT so it's pretty much a moot point, the rubber ducky that came with the radio is more than sufficient to get the farz I needs.

I talk through repeaters that are 17 and 21 miles away so any little advantage I can get I'll take.  The 3dBi gain of the Nagoya 771G helps a bit and keeps the conversation a bit more clear than the OEM antenna that comes with my H3.  The length no longer bothers me since I've been using it for over a year now.  Actually seem funny when I put the short Smiley antenna on it.

But if you are only using it for HT to HT short range communications the OEM antennas are probably just fine.

And that beer you buy with the money you could have put into antenna is gone in a half hour whereas the antenna should last you years.  Buying rocks vs ice.

[Lscott]

10 minutes ago, LeoG said:

And that beer you buy with the money you could have put into antenna is gone in a half hour

The belly fat one gets from the beer sticks around a lot longer. 

[WRYS709]

12 minutes ago, Lscott said:

A 5/8 wave requires a good ground plane. The reason it has a slightly better gain is the reflection off of the ground. Without that reflection it's basically no better than a 1/2 wave.

And for an HT antenna you have crap for a ground plane.

https://www.w8ji.com/VHF mobile vertical.htm

 

We are talking HT antennas here and the human body holding the HT acts as the ground plane. 

In my anecdotal experience, I have always had better performance using my 5/8 2 meter telescoping antenna on my HTs, including my DSB Quansheng UV-K5(8), than either a 1/2 wave or rubber duck. 

Especially for those times a little extra “umph” gets me into a repeater or successfully complete a simplex QSO