โAug-30-2014 06:40 AM
โAug-30-2014 05:15 PM
โAug-30-2014 03:51 PM
rgatijnet1 wrote:
As I sit in my coach, watching a crystal clear picture on my TV with my Jack antenna up in the air, I care little about anyone's tests, no matter how knowledgeable the tester is. If I am receiving a crystal clear picture because of a repeater, so what? WE typically put 15,000 miles a year on our coach in the West and the East, stay in small towns and large, and I cannot remember the last time I was unable to pick up the network channels with my Jack antenna at any location. My own personal experience in my coach trumps any test by anyone. :B
โAug-30-2014 03:26 PM
rgatijnet1 wrote:BTW- it's again clear you are misinformed.. There are no HD "repeaters" anywhere. Just because you sit there claiming that you get all the channels you want doesn't mean that there are aren't plenty more available, or your system is broken and you don't even know it. As the author of that antenna report I'll be happy to debate the results all you want, but you better come up with more evidence than how much you drive. We don't care, we're looking for antenna performance, and the numbers simply don't lie.
As I sit in my coach, watching a crystal clear picture on my TV with my Jack antenna up in the air, I care little about anyone's tests, no matter how knowledgeable the tester is. If I am receiving a crystal clear picture because of a repeater, so what? WE typically put 15,000 miles a year on our coach in the West and the East, stay in small towns and large, and I cannot remember the last time I was unable to pick up the network channels with my Jack antenna at any location. My own personal experience in my coach trumps any test by anyone. :B
โAug-30-2014 03:17 PM
rgatijnet1 wrote:Speaking of untrue blanket statements. You are incorrect that stations are still on the move, especially to UHF, even the Winegard rep that shows up here (NOT Bill) says that , and he too in incorrect. I suggest you look at the upcoming repacking auction rules too. You will find that there is actually incentive for stations that don't sell out to move BACK to VHF.Dutch_12078 wrote:rgatijnet1 wrote:Bill.Satellite wrote:
If your existing Winegard antenna is working, the Jack is going to be a downgrade. Many stories of people replacing non-working or very old Winegard antennas with Jack's a getting great results. Well, of course they are!
If you stay in close to town then the Jack will perform very well, it is a good antenna. However, it will not bring in NBC in Las Vegas as they are still broadcasting NBC 3 on VHF channel 2. The Rayzar Air will also not receive these channels. The Sensar's long arms are required to receive channels 2-6 and there are still multiple markets that use channels 2-6.
If you do a search Batwing vs. Jack (or similar) you should be able to find the comparison done by JVCJeff (JCV?). It is an excellent report.
Way too many variables for you to make such a blanket statement. Our last time in Moab, Utah, we were able to use our Jack antenna and pick up 26 channels with some being as far away as Salt Lake City, Utah. This was with a range, in the mountains, of over 120 miles. Over flat land out west, our range has been greater.
There have been very very few instances where we could not pick up all three of the network channels, no matter where we are parked.
How many low-VHF channels (broadcast, not virtual) have you picked up at that distance? There are still 300 plus stations broadcasting on the low-VHF (2-6) channels in the US.
Who cares? That number of 2-6 channels is getting smaller every day as the stations upgrade. I'm more interested in the future than the past.
โAug-30-2014 01:32 PM
โAug-30-2014 12:32 PM
IAMICHABOD wrote:
If you are talking about the JACK antenna, I changed out mine to it and got very good results.
I put one on my RV for 2 reasons, the bat wing was only marginal and the addition of the Wing Man was not an option because of it's size, it would not clear my A/C on the roof. Where the Jack would.
I have had great luck with it and compared it with others in our camping group that had the BatMan, when out together and got as good or better reception as they did.
I found a new one that is not much bigger and fits in the same space.
It is The Rayzar
][IMG]http://i.imgur.com/TgLwTbbl.jpg" height=220>
In a non scientific test I was able to get 20 more channels from it when doing a scan on my TV. One nice thing about it is, its Bi-Directional and gets larger field of coverage than the Jack.
On a recent outing I found that it outperformed the Jack at the same place that I had camped at before.
After I bought it and used it a while, I found a discussion Here on the NET about it.
โAug-30-2014 12:05 PM
โAug-30-2014 12:00 PM
rgatijnet1 wrote:Dutch_12078 wrote:rgatijnet1 wrote:Bill.Satellite wrote:
If your existing Winegard antenna is working, the Jack is going to be a downgrade. Many stories of people replacing non-working or very old Winegard antennas with Jack's a getting great results. Well, of course they are!
If you stay in close to town then the Jack will perform very well, it is a good antenna. However, it will not bring in NBC in Las Vegas as they are still broadcasting NBC 3 on VHF channel 2. The Rayzar Air will also not receive these channels. The Sensar's long arms are required to receive channels 2-6 and there are still multiple markets that use channels 2-6.
If you do a search Batwing vs. Jack (or similar) you should be able to find the comparison done by JVCJeff (JCV?). It is an excellent report.
Way too many variables for you to make such a blanket statement. Our last time in Moab, Utah, we were able to use our Jack antenna and pick up 26 channels with some being as far away as Salt Lake City, Utah. This was with a range, in the mountains, of over 120 miles. Over flat land out west, our range has been greater.
There have been very very few instances where we could not pick up all three of the network channels, no matter where we are parked.
How many low-VHF channels (broadcast, not virtual) have you picked up at that distance? There are still 300 plus stations broadcasting on the low-VHF (2-6) channels in the US.
Who cares? That number of 2-6 channels is getting smaller every day as the stations upgrade. I'm more interested in the future than the past.
โAug-30-2014 11:34 AM
โAug-30-2014 10:29 AM
Dutch_12078 wrote:rgatijnet1 wrote:Bill.Satellite wrote:
If your existing Winegard antenna is working, the Jack is going to be a downgrade. Many stories of people replacing non-working or very old Winegard antennas with Jack's a getting great results. Well, of course they are!
If you stay in close to town then the Jack will perform very well, it is a good antenna. However, it will not bring in NBC in Las Vegas as they are still broadcasting NBC 3 on VHF channel 2. The Rayzar Air will also not receive these channels. The Sensar's long arms are required to receive channels 2-6 and there are still multiple markets that use channels 2-6.
If you do a search Batwing vs. Jack (or similar) you should be able to find the comparison done by JVCJeff (JCV?). It is an excellent report.
Way too many variables for you to make such a blanket statement. Our last time in Moab, Utah, we were able to use our Jack antenna and pick up 26 channels with some being as far away as Salt Lake City, Utah. This was with a range, in the mountains, of over 120 miles. Over flat land out west, our range has been greater.
There have been very very few instances where we could not pick up all three of the network channels, no matter where we are parked.
How many low-VHF channels (broadcast, not virtual) have you picked up at that distance? There are still 300 plus stations broadcasting on the low-VHF (2-6) channels in the US.
โAug-30-2014 10:01 AM
Dutch_12078 wrote:
How many low-VHF channels (broadcast, not virtual) have you picked up at that distance? There are still 300 plus stations broadcasting on the low-VHF (2-6) channels in the US.
โAug-30-2014 09:23 AM
rgatijnet1 wrote:Bill.Satellite wrote:
If your existing Winegard antenna is working, the Jack is going to be a downgrade. Many stories of people replacing non-working or very old Winegard antennas with Jack's a getting great results. Well, of course they are!
If you stay in close to town then the Jack will perform very well, it is a good antenna. However, it will not bring in NBC in Las Vegas as they are still broadcasting NBC 3 on VHF channel 2. The Rayzar Air will also not receive these channels. The Sensar's long arms are required to receive channels 2-6 and there are still multiple markets that use channels 2-6.
If you do a search Batwing vs. Jack (or similar) you should be able to find the comparison done by JVCJeff (JCV?). It is an excellent report.
Way too many variables for you to make such a blanket statement. Our last time in Moab, Utah, we were able to use our Jack antenna and pick up 26 channels with some being as far away as Salt Lake City, Utah. This was with a range, in the mountains, of over 120 miles. Over flat land out west, our range has been greater.
There have been very very few instances where we could not pick up all three of the network channels, no matter where we are parked.
โAug-30-2014 08:16 AM
Bill.Satellite wrote:
If your existing Winegard antenna is working, the Jack is going to be a downgrade. Many stories of people replacing non-working or very old Winegard antennas with Jack's a getting great results. Well, of course they are!
If you stay in close to town then the Jack will perform very well, it is a good antenna. However, it will not bring in NBC in Las Vegas as they are still broadcasting NBC 3 on VHF channel 2. The Rayzar Air will also not receive these channels. The Sensar's long arms are required to receive channels 2-6 and there are still multiple markets that use channels 2-6.
If you do a search Batwing vs. Jack (or similar) you should be able to find the comparison done by JVCJeff (JCV?). It is an excellent report.
โAug-30-2014 07:30 AM
โAug-30-2014 07:24 AM