New Antenna?

FWIW I still have the factory coax and amplifier.

Now tell me how 4 antennas that I know personally did not work are better than my Jack that pulls in way more stations than the other 4 antennas combined!

Sorry, maybe the "scientific" tests may look good, but in the real world is where I draw my conclusions.

I've seen other scientific tests that can also be factored out in real world use!

I like one thing about the Jack antenna -- no worries about having to crank it up or down... or drive off with it still up and having it shear off.

dodge guy wrote:
FWIW I still have the factory coax and amplifier.

Now tell me how 4 antennas that I know personally did not work are better than my Jack that pulls in way more stations than the other 4 antennas combined!

Sorry, maybe the "scientific" tests may look good, but in the real world is where I draw my conclusions.

I've seen other scientific tests that can also be factored out in real world use!

I am not choosing sides, but no matter the scientific test results, Dodge guy has to go with the results that work best for him, comparing, with his camping group.

Everyone can have different results, I know some tvs bring in more channels, using the same antenna.

Jerry

mlts22 wrote:
I like one thing about the Jack antenna -- no worries about having to crank it up or down... or drive off with it still up and having it shear off.

The trouble is, the Jack catches tree branches, and is all plastic, so it is easily sheared off, leaving a gaping hole in the roof, whereas the crankup type simply breaks the elevating gear- no worries about leaks.
There have been a couple of folks here who have had that happen.

dodge guy wrote:
FWIW I still have the factory coax and amplifier.

Now tell me how 4 antennas that I know personally did not work are better than my Jack that pulls in way more stations than the other 4 antennas combined!

Sorry, maybe the "scientific" tests may look good, but in the real world is where I draw my conclusions.

I've seen other scientific tests that can also be factored out in real world use!

Its simply not even worth responding that question because you will NEVER get it. Tell me how much more "real world" an antenna test can be than doing it on a factory installed antenna on an RV. Am I missing something??

Your responses are simply argumentative from someone that cannot substantiate or back up ANY of your claims other than yours works better and you have no idea why? Can there be 4 broken Batwings? Of course! But you clearly aren't qualified to make that determination. Here's an idea: Stick with what you know, and I'll do the same. And this clearly isn't yours.

Not all batwing's are Winegard. I had a Signal Commander batwing on the Big Horn that the Sensar wouldn't adapt to. Installed the Jack head on the mast without any noticable improvement.

:S :R

I'm done!

30BR wrote:
My TT is an '05, and it has the typical (for that time) the crank up Weingard rotatable antenna. It has the antenna outlet inside with the booster on/off button. Is there a better, more gain, over the air antenna available now?

My 5th is an 06. It has the "standard" Winegard crank-up antenna.
When they first came out, I bought the "add-on" attachment - but it's
still in the box. (I usually use Satellite).

I was in an RV park this last week in Central CA, noticed the number of crank-up antennas in use (with no special attachments or "trick stuff").

So, cranked 'R up to give it a try - no problem with xln't pictures from the network TV channels (ABC, CBS, NBC, FOX) plus a few more.

Still haven't replaced my old CRT TV - so using a cheap-O digital converter for those.

IMO - maybe you should save your bucks in lieu of the add-ons?..:@

*********************

BTW - on edit -
At my sticks & bricks, I have satellite.
A few years ago, I kept seeing the Clear Stream Digital Antennas at Costco for about $70. (Model C 2-V-CJM).

Looks like a wire BBQ grill with a plastic figure '8' in the middle.

OK - why not. If it doesn't do what it's supposed to, I'll return it.

Mounted to the eve of the house about 15' off the ground.
(Neighbors ask what it is, LOL.)
Pretty amazing! I'm about 100 miles from the Los Angeles area.
Pulls in all the networks (in HD) and lots of others.
(Allows watching one channel -over the air- and record another off sat, or vice-versa).

Trivia: At a CG, I noticed a DP MH with the same antenna attached to the top of his ladder...;)


.

Drank: We own at least two TV transmitters on all the major sites (6 sites, at least 12 transmitters) in the Central Valley from Bakersfield all the way to Sacramento along the Eastern mtn. ranges and I know the coverage in the valley very well. With the exception of the Modesto area, that 300 miles is rock solid coverage from at least one site. The Wingman isn't a "gadget" or toy. It is a passive adapter that produces UHF gain on the Batwing. The older ones you buy the Wingman as an add-on, and the newer ones are incorporated. In either case, anywhere on the valley floor from the base of the Grapevine, to well North of Sacramento has sufficient coverage that it is not needed.

BTW- there are lots of antennas better than a Batwing, but none are built for RV service.