King Jack or Wingman antenna

mike-s wrote:

The way TVs scan really doesn't fit the RV use case - the process should allow a choice between clearing or adding to already found channels, or work like a lot of car radios and simply scan to the next available station. All I've seen start from scratch and do a full scan each time.

It is amazing that TV manufacturers have totally ignored the needs of those that want to receive over the air stations. I have to believe that they are catering to the cable companies as there is no other good reason for not being able to add channels. When you talk to many people today, they have no clue that antennas now can receive more channels than ever before.

BFL13 wrote:
"Way better" means more channels.

FAIL. That's not any sort of objective measure without much more detail.

A more omnidirectional antenna might pick up more channels on a TV channel scan in an urban area surrounded by stations. A more directional one would pick up more distant stations but need to be aimed, and wouldn't pick up stations which were off-axis. Is "more" simply more in a channel scan without moving the antenna, or is it more when counting different channels while scanning every 10 degrees around you?

Do you camp in an urban area surrounded by stations, or in rural areas where stations are distant? On what basis are you getting more channels?

The way TVs scan really doesn't fit the RV use case - the process should allow a choice between clearing or adding to already found channels, or work like a lot of car radios and simply scan to the next available station. All I've seen start from scratch and do a full scan each time.

"Way better" means more channels. I have no doubt the Wingman on a Batwing does better than the Jack. All I said was that a Jack does better than a Batwing with no Wingman for UHF. If your roof can take a Wingman, go for it. Mine can't.

I was not aware that VHF is coming back. Interesting. There was supposed to be a government auction to use the old VHF spectrum which is why they kicked the TV stations up to UHF. I missed the latest on that it seems.

BFL13 wrote:
I can say that a Jack does way better than a Batwing on UHF OTA. I have no experience with the Wingman on a Batwing.

What does that even mean? Better, exactly how - quantify it instead of only offering a subjective "way better." And if you're not comparing against a Sensar Wingman, you just hit "tilt" on the pinball table. I don't think you can even buy a Sensar which doesn't have the Wingman these days.

And what about VHF? You're silent. Room? That's begging the question. If you don't have room for one or the other, you have no choice so any comparison is meaningless. Your choice between them is already made.

Objective measurements by a Rohde and Schwartz spectrum analyzer are much more trustworthy than any subjective "way better."

Bill.Satellite wrote:

I can say that a Jack does way better than a Batwing on UHF OTA. I have no experience with the Wingman on a Batwing.

Without a Wingman you are comparing Apples to Oranges. The Wingman is the add-on that puts the Jack to shame. Keep it real! You can replace your Winegard with a Jack for $40-$50 or add the Wingman to your Winegard for $20 and be miles ahead of the Jack.
The choice is, of course, yours.

Correct, unless the Wingman sticks out too far. I was just mentioning there is also a difference among TV sets. I have no info on which TV gets get more channels. An older 19" Sanyo got fewer digital channels than a somewhat newer 32" RCA.

I can say that a Jack does way better than a Batwing on UHF OTA. I have no experience with the Wingman on a Batwing.

Without a Wingman you are comparing Apples to Oranges. The Wingman is the add-on that puts the Jack to shame. Keep it real! You can replace your Winegard with a Jack for $40-$50 or add the Wingman to your Winegard for $20 and be miles ahead of the Jack.
The choice is, of course, yours.

I can say that a Jack does way better than a Batwing on UHF OTA. I have no experience with the Wingman on a Batwing.

The thing to add to this discussion is the TV itself. I have tried different TV sets on the Jack and found they get different results for how many channels they "find" with the same antenna pointing the same way.

I don't know what the deal is with that, so you could maybe pick another TV instead of another antenna. But it certainly is in there if only you knew more before you fork over your money for either.

I think un-aimed, not peaked Winegards have been compared to better aimed Happijacs.

Bill.Satellite wrote:
The 2 units have been tested head to head and the Winegard beat the King. That's the simple reality. As more and more broadcasters move away from UHF and back to VHF the difference will become more and more obvious.
Everyone is welcome to disagree but there is a certain reality to someone doing actual real world testing and posting the results.

And here are those posted results.

The 2 units have been tested head to head and the Winegard beat the King. That's the simple reality. As more and more broadcasters move away from UHF and back to VHF the difference will become more and more obvious.
Everyone is welcome to disagree but there is a certain reality to someone doing actual real world testing and posting the results.