“High End” antennas worse than stock?

[WSHC247]

I promise this is not clickbait, but more a question as to what am I doing wrong. 

I’ve heard a lot of guys on my local repeaters proclaiming that the Nagoya and Diamond antennas are the best HT antennas that money can buy. I’ve also seen similar things on the YouTubes. So I grabbed one of each. 

However when I test my antennas on my SWR meter they are showing higher sometimes dangerously higher SWR than the stock “rubber duck” or gooseneck antennas that shipped with the radios. 

I am almost certain I am doing something wrong, or not understanding something. 

Radio Equipment: BF UV25, BF UV5R, Moto APX7000

Testing Equipment: Surecom SW33

Procedure: Radio>Meter>adapter>antenna touching the body of the SWR meter as directed for ground plane, testing on low, medium, high power 

 

Diamond SRH805S VHF: Unacceptable borderline dangerous with a VSWR of 10.56 across all radios and power settings, high of 12.1 and low of 6.2. 

Diamond SRH805S UHF: SWR is almost perfect. Averaging VSWR of 1.15 across all radios and power settings, high of  1.49 and a low of 1.1. 

Nagoya NA-701G VHF: Did not conduct this test as it would not be fair for an advertised GMRS antenna to be tested on VHF. 

Nagoya NA-701G UHF: Marginal performance averaging VSWR of 2.036 across all radios and power settings, high of 2.6 and low of 1.04.

Rubber Duck VHF: Acceptable performance averaging VSWR of 1.86 across all radios and power settings, high of 2.78 and low of 1.01.

Rubber Duck UHF: Excellent performance averaging VSWR of 1.47 across all radios and power settings, high of 2.1 and low of 1.01.

Gooseneck VHF: Acceptable Performance averaging VSWR of 1.584 across all radios and power settings, high of 2.29 and low of 1.01. 

Gooseneck UHF: Excellent performance averaging VSWR of 1.01 across all radios and power settings, high of 1.01 and low of 1.01. 
 

TLDR: why am I getting higher SWR on the “better” antennas than I am on the “rubber duckies”?

[SteveShannon]

13 minutes ago, WSHC247 said:

 

I promise this is not clickbait, but more a question as to what am I doing wrong. 

I’ve heard a lot of guys on my local repeaters proclaiming that the Nagoya and Diamond antennas are the best HT antennas that money can buy. I’ve also seen similar things on the YouTubes. So I grabbed one of each. 

However when I test my antennas on my SWR meter they are showing higher sometimes dangerously higher SWR than the stock “rubber duck” or gooseneck antennas that shipped with the radios. 

I am almost certain I am doing something wrong, or not understanding something. 

Radio Equipment: BF UV25, BF UV5R, Moto APX7000

Testing Equipment: Surecom SW33

Procedure: Radio>Meter>adapter>antenna touching the body of the SWR meter as directed for ground plane, testing on low, medium, high power 

 

Diamond SRH805S VHF: Unacceptable borderline dangerous with a VSWR of 10.56 across all radios and power settings, high of 12.1 and low of 6.2. 

Diamond SRH805S UHF: SWR is almost perfect. Averaging VSWR of 1.15 across all radios and power settings, high of  1.49 and a low of 1.1. 

Nagoya NA-701G VHF: Did not conduct this test as it would not be fair for an advertised GMRS antenna to be tested on VHF. 

Nagoya NA-701G UHF: Marginal performance averaging VSWR of 2.036 across all radios and power settings, high of 2.6 and low of 1.04.

Rubber Duck VHF: Acceptable performance averaging VSWR of 1.86 across all radios and power settings, high of 2.78 and low of 1.01.

Rubber Duck UHF: Excellent performance averaging VSWR of 1.47 across all radios and power settings, high of 2.1 and low of 1.01.

Gooseneck VHF: Acceptable Performance averaging VSWR of 1.584 across all radios and power settings, high of 2.29 and low of 1.01. 

Gooseneck UHF: Excellent performance averaging VSWR of 1.01 across all radios and power settings, high of 1.01 and low of 1.01. 
 

TLDR: why am I getting higher SWR on the “better” antennas than I am on the “rubber duckies”?

First, don’t mistake SWR for antenna quality. If it were that simple we’d all use dummy loads. They typically provide a very low SWR but have no ability to radiate RF. 
Second, the SWR meter is not a sufficient ground plane for a VHF antenna. Typically you’d need either a planar surface of metal or an array of radials of at least a quarter wave radius or length to provide a decent ground plane. For VHF that’s much larger than the body of the SWR meter you’re using. 
The fact is that measuring SWR for handheld antennas is frequently futile and unnecessary. Instead hook up the antennas and see what kind of performance you get. 

[Socalgmrs]

You can not practically measure swr on an HT.  Just do some radio checks with a buddy and see how you sound and how they sound.   Thats the best you can do.    I’ve found the 771 does best for me.  All my hts have them.   I hear a guy just about every week on our local repeater trying out all kinds of different ht antennas and from my perspective they all sound exactly the same.  But don’t tell him that he gets all kinds of upset.  He must spend $100 a week on ht antennas.  

[WRUE951]

Well, unless your using this product, your antenna won't be top notch  

[WSHC247]

2 hours ago, SteveShannon said:

First, don’t mistake SWR for antenna quality. If it were that simple we’d all use dummy loads. They typically provide a very low SWR but have no ability to radiate RF. 
Second, the SWR meter is not a sufficient ground plane for a VHF antenna. Typically you’d need either a planar surface of metal or an array of radials of at least a quarter wave radius or length to provide a decent ground plane. For VHF that’s much larger than the body of the SWR meter you’re using. 
The fact is that measuring SWR for handheld antennas is frequently futile and unnecessary. Instead hook up the antennas and see what kind of performance you get. 

I am more concerned with damaging my HT due to reflected power over performance. Perhaps I’m just being over cautious.

2 hours ago, Socalgmrs said:

You can not practically measure swr on an HT.  Just do some radio checks with a buddy and see how you sound and how they sound.   Thats the best you can do.    I’ve found the 771 does best for me.  All my hts have them.   I hear a guy just about every week on our local repeater trying out all kinds of different ht antennas and from my perspective they all sound exactly the same.  But don’t tell him that he gets all kinds of upset.  He must spend $100 a week on ht antennas.  

Yea I’m not that crazy, I’m just trying to get something that doesn’t damage my radio. 

37 minutes ago, WRUE951 said:

Well, unless your using this product, your antenna won't be top notch  

Where can I buy this, Amazon is sold out?

[WRYZ926]

The antenna wax will be right next to the cans of squelch. In other words there is no such thing as antenna wax.

As others have said, there is no easy way to test the SWR of hand held antennas. And your body actually acts as part of the ground plane when you use a hand held.

As far as aftermarket hand held antennas, it really depends on the radio it self if the antenna will make an improvement or not. I have some radios where the longer Nagoya antennas helps and some radios where the stock antenna works better.

[SteveShannon]

1 hour ago, WSHC247 said:

I am more concerned with damaging my HT due to reflected power over performance. Perhaps I’m just being over cautious.

I would be very surprised if the final output transistor in your radio would let its smoke out even if full power were reflected.  
 

[AdmiralCochrane]

There are counterfeits of almost everything that is good.  It is possible that you bought fakes.   There are websites that show how to tell the difference between the legit Nagoyas and Diamonds. 

 

Directly speaking of the fake Diamond antennas, they are obvious if you have had a real one in your hand and know what the real ones look like. 

 

Going back to your testing.  You did not mention testing across the frequencies/bands for each antenna.  Most usually favor one side of the band more than the other.  Ideally they would be tuned for center, but that is less than optimal if you end up using it primarily on one end of the band or the other

[tweiss3]

As mentioned, testing of an HT antenna is nearly impossible to get completely accurate results. It should also be noted that sometimes a "better" antenna will cause the radio to perform worse due to RF saturation. That being said, for the APX, the Motorola antenna will work the best for that radio.

[SteveShannon]

I got a chuckle out of the rating of the Diamond SRH805S. You might have noticed that they rate the antenna gain as -2dB.  That means a loss of RF radiation. Diamond says:

Quote

Diamond rates their antenna gain figures against 'standard' HT antennas usually delivered with a new transceiver. This antenna gain method makes it easy to see how their antennas perform as a replacement for an original manufacturer's antenna.

So, basically, Diamond says the SRH805S will perform 2dB worse than the OEM antenna 

[wayoverthere]

38 minutes ago, SteveShannon said:

I got a chuckle out of the rating of the Diamond SRH805S. You might have noticed that they rate the antenna gain as -2dB.  That means a loss of RF radiation. Diamond says:

So, basically, Diamond says the SRH805S will perform 2dB worse than the OEM antenna 

I mean, not really a surprise at that size, but I appreciate that they rate it honestly.

[marcspaz]

I have done handheld antenna testing and it's not that easy. I wouldn't recommend an SWR meter, either. You can't replicate the ground plane of the chassis and the effects of having the radio in your hand, which makes taking the measurements difficult. 

 

The closest I have come without literally building a sampling circuit onto the radio was by making small metal table into a ground plane, mounting an SMA connector on it with proper length cable between the base of the antenna and the VNA. Depending on the cable type, you will want the cable to be almost 7 feet (6.9) to be sure you are outside of the near field while testing. 

 

 

[FishinGary]

I'm very new to all this, so take this comment with a grain of salt, but as I under stand it you only really need to measure SWR with a base or mobile installation. Don't worry about it with an HT. Sure, you could add a counterpoise like a Tiger Tail that turns your HT vertical into a dipole, but you don't necessarily need to do that either.

[SteveShannon]

44 minutes ago, wayoverthere said:

I mean, not really a surprise at that size, but I appreciate that they rate it honestly.

I absolutely agree.