"Jack" digital antenna

What are the chances that users that replaced their Batwing with the Jack antenna increased the conductivity of the circuit when doing the replacement? It may be that after mounting the Jack antenna, a user tried to better aim the unit. It may be that a user is positioned differently on the ground, also. There are a lot of unknowns with this and I trust more to the guy that took the time with his $60K analyzer doing comparisons.

I use a Jack replacement head on a mast, fastened to my ladder. I have it about 4-5' higher than my roof.

I bungee it on after parking. I was in a remote CG, and don't have the direction meter that comes with the regular Jack. I noticed a couple of neighbors had their Batwings up, so went over to ask them about reception.

They said only 1 channel due to remote area. I pointed my Jack the same direction as theirs, and I got 11 channels, most very clear. They came over later to see how mine worked. They could see my tv through the tinted picture window, and could not believe it, as I went through the remote.

For whatever reason, late in the day, I could only get 6, but very clearly.

They both said they were going to look into the J-head replacement, for only around $50, since in our case at least, it was easy to see the diff.

Jerry

wmoses wrote:

SCVJeff wrote:
I sound like an Winegard employee (I'm not), but I'll say it again.
With that kind of a difference between the two, the batwing clearly had a problem. All things being equal you should have had the same or slightly less on the Jack.

SCVJeff - I take it you are basing that stance on the "batwing" vs the non-elevated Jack antenna, correct? If that is the case then I can agree.

However I am interested in the Jack head replacement that sits just as high as the "batwing" since it is installed in place of the "batwing" on top of the mast and is also rotatable as is the "batwing".

In that scenario, assuming the "batwing" had no problem and all other things being equal, what would be the basis for your assertion that the "batwing" would still be superior to the Jack, espeically in the face of these testimonials that, after replacement, they got better reception and more channels?

I did an Apples to Apples comparison Jack to Batwing, with and without the Wingman. I'm on an iphone otherwise I'd post the link, but someone posted it around the beginning of this thread. Check it out and you'll see why I keep saying that.

I've had both the Jack and Sensor 4 batwing. When having some roof work done had the Jack installed. One thing I didn't really like was how far up it sticks up above the roof (installed on a 5er). That concern became reality when it was knocked off from a small branch going into a State Park last fall, so installed the Sensor 4. Having used both, I've felt their performance is about the same. What I found out when the Jack was knocked off is it's built kind of flimsy inside which you don't see. If I someday would use a Jack, I would install the head replacement only.

SCVJeff wrote:
I sound like an Winegard employee (I'm not), but I'll say it again.
With that kind of a difference between the two, the batwing clearly had a problem. All things being equal you should have had the same or slightly less on the Jack.

SCVJeff - I take it you are basing that stance on the "batwing" vs the non-elevated Jack antenna, correct? If that is the case then I can agree.

However I am interested in the Jack head replacement that sits just as high as the "batwing" since it is installed in place of the "batwing" on top of the mast and is also rotatable as is the "batwing".

In that scenario, assuming the "batwing" had no problem and all other things being equal, what would be the basis for your assertion that the "batwing" would still be superior to the Jack, espeically in the face of these testimonials that, after replacement, they got better reception and more channels?

I've been very happy with my Jack Antenna, I also have the interior part:



WoodGlue

These are the answers i was looking for. I asked the same question a couple of months ago and only got answers from people that haven't used them. They said it was not worth it and wouldn't make a difference!

Pine Barren wrote:
I was only getting 4-5 channels with batwing. Switched to Jack and I now get 22-23 channels. Get about 15 with it lowered down. Well worth it.

I sound like an Winegard employee (I'm not), but I'll say it again.
With that kind of a difference between the two, the batwing clearly had a problem. All things being equal you should have had the same or slightly less on the Jack.

I was only getting 4-5 channels with batwing. Switched to Jack and I now get 22-23 channels. Get about 15 with it lowered down. Well worth it.

That is what I was hoping to hear. :)