No More Crankup Antenna!!!!

Excellent solution for a cheap alteration. One thought on another solution would be to just shorten up the existing arms. Zero cost and it would give you the options of either leaving it up or lowering it if needed.

Obviously height is seriously important for distance, we all know that. Antenna type notwithstanding, the only drawback to low rider antennas these days is that they are just that much closer to the noise generating LED's we are now all adding to our RV's. As you figure out how this ting works in its new form, make sure you know which LED's, if any will kill your TV.

Did the same thing to our Jack antenna 2 years ago.
So far it works great.

I knocked 2 off....one in a state park and the other driving down a major road that I think a high truck struck a limb an a piece was hanging down the Jack got it.....so I am replacing it with a crank up razor antenna.....

down home, you are spot on! After I knocked off the Jack I had I saw foirst hand how flimsy the mast is. The good side to it is there was no damage to the roof or ceiling. Stuck a ziplock bag over it and duct taped it to the roof to keep any rain out. Then installed a Sensor 4.

One reason we haven't changed is we frequently encounter low limbs on roads in parts of the country. The Counties etc claim they don't have the money to keep trimmed to the mandatory 15 ft, all the time.
The though just hit of why not a deflector that could catch and deflect the limbs over the top of the antenna. Jack Antennae should have incorporated a sturdy piece in their design on a sturdy base.
Would just have to check whatever is used doesn't interfere with signal.
Might need to be sort of a deflecting cage to keep from grabbing limbs backing up etc.

FLY 4 FUN wrote:
I would for sure like to hear updates when you are using it to determine how you feel the reception is with the Jack vs the previous Wineguard. I really hoped my new rig would have a more modern antennae but it seems most manufacturers still rely on the good old standby.

And for good reason - the "good old standby" Winegard Sensar IV is still the best available in terms of a compact antenna suitable for use on an RV, as evidenced in these tests by SCVJeff. Certainly my own Sensar IV, coupled with a Winegard SensarPro, is about as good as it gets and I wouldn't change it unless something demonstrably more sensitive comes along. Regardless, any antenna will work better the higher off the roof it is so I to would see reducing that height as a negative not a positive.

I would for sure like to hear updates when you are using it to determine how you feel the reception is with the Jack vs the previous Wineguard. I really hoped my new rig would have a more modern antennae but it seems most manufacturers still rely on the good old standby.

Daryll

Having had a Jack antenna and knocking it off from a low branch I missed going into LaPine State Park, I like what you did. My take after seeing how flimsy the mast part of the Jack antenna is, I replaced it with a Sensor 4. You solved the flimsy problem.

I know that posts on the internet require that folks make negative posts but I just wanted to say that I think you did an awesome job. The roof wasn't leaking so there's no chance it will now leak as you never touched that part. You have a better base and a better arm than the entire kit would provide and you saved a bunch of money. While we know that the Winegard is a better antenna in many cases, if this works for you at that elevation then all's good!