Another new OTA antenna

[Chris_Bryant]

Winegard has announced another Razar antenna- pretty much a Winegard clone of the Jack- replacement head or complete non crank up.

The Razar z1:

[SCVJeff]

Bill.Satellite wrote:
Yep! You are absolutely correct. It will likely require that everyone move back to a Sensar "style" antenna as the frequencies change moving forward. The problem stems from our ignorant Government representatives who have no idea how any of their decisions effect us common folk.

when everyone went to UHF the big grandiose plan was to sell off the spectrum to 2way, trunking, etc. At the same time the wireless industry was exploding and THEY knew that VHF sucked for what they wanted to do. Apparently that email never got out

[Bill_Satellite]

Yep! You are absolutely correct. It will likely require that everyone move back to a Sensar "style" antenna as the frequencies change moving forward. The problem stems from our ignorant Government representatives who have no idea how any of their decisions effect us common folk.

[Dutch_12078]

Bill.Satellite wrote:
The OEM will usually go for cheap if it can do essentially the same job. Even if the units retailed for the same price the OEM pricing will likely be set somewhat lower than the Jack to regain market and the installation would be substantially quicker (cheaper) making it a very good choice for the OEM. Very few RVers are savvy enough about the OTA antenna mounted on their coach to question it prior to purchase.

And it'll be even more profitable for Winegard as more stations move back to high/low VHF and they can sell folks yet another new antenna when the current crop of UHF centric units fail to deliver... :W

[Bill_Satellite]

The OEM will usually go for cheap if it can do essentially the same job. Even if the units retailed for the same price the OEM pricing will likely be set somewhat lower than the Jack to regain market and the installation would be substantially quicker (cheaper) making it a very good choice for the OEM. Very few RVers are savvy enough about the OTA antenna mounted on their coach to question it prior to purchase.

[SCVJeff]

Bill.Satellite wrote:
You must build what the market demands even when it does not perform as well as another. "If you build it they will come". Just watch the OEM's flock to this as it will be cheap and easy to install. The OEM's do not care about performance. If they did they would never have started installing the Jack.

And sometimes you have to tell them what they need.

[Tom_M1]

Bill.Satellite wrote:
You must build what the market demands even when it does not perform as well as another. "If you build it they will come". Just watch the OEM's flock to this as it will be cheap and easy to install. The OEM's do not care about performance. If they did they would never have started installing the Jack.

If you do a search on Amazon you will find that the Jack antenna and mount is about the same price as the Winegard Sensar IV and mount.

I suspect that people prefer not having to deal with cranking the antenna up and down.

[Bill_Satellite]

You must build what the market demands even when it does not perform as well as another. "If you build it they will come". Just watch the OEM's flock to this as it will be cheap and easy to install. The OEM's do not care about performance. If they did they would never have started installing the Jack.

[SCVJeff]

Bottom line is is its VHF performance is as lousy as the Jack then it belongs in the trash can. It still amazes me Winegard is dumb enough to release an already obsolete antenna that likely cannot perform where a significant number of stations are about to relocate to.

[Bill_Satellite]

My guess is that this is an attempt to gain back the OEM market share lost to the Jack antenna. The OEM's want cheap and simple as it is much more important than performance when you are trying to save every possible penny during production. I would speculate that the electronics are better with the Winegard antenna but the limitations of this kind of antenna compared to the Sensar cannot be understated.

[az99]

Just another of their attempts to keep your wallet empty with a new latest and greatest release. How many revolutionary OTA RV antennas have they released in the last 2 years? Have any beat the old crank up?
We still have several low VHF stations 2 places we go.

[SCVJeff]

Dutch_12078 wrote:
I wonder how good its VHF-Lo performance is...

On edit: Maybe they answered the question for me. "Optimal UHF reception with strong High-Band VHF..."

Wonder what THAT means?

Chris: Do you know if it's flat on the bottom so Imcan just set it on the roof if I wanted to test it?, or is there a mast-top version too?

[Chris_Bryant]

I'm thinking they came out with it simply because people wanted the no-crank option that the full Jack gives- and are willing to sacrifice performance for convenience. I emailed about the price and they changed the web page to show no price, but msrp will be $109.99 for the full setup, $49.99 for replacement head to go on the Sensar mount.

[wa8yxm]

I still suspect teh Sensar IV will outperform it

Remember look at the gain and range estimates for the antenna...

I notice the following.. It says "Optimal UHF and Good VHF High band"

There are still some stations hanging in VHF low band (2-6) and the Sensar IV has better VHF hi performance from the way that reads.

Of course till I see the lab tests I can not be sure.

Another thing HEIGHT is MIGHT and this antenna is not as Tall as the Sensar IV

plus when you are driving down the road Hight is not a good thing.. For a low limb or _____ can get under the antenna and...

Actually happened to the person parked beside me once.

[Dutch_12078]

I wonder how good its VHF-Lo performance is...

On edit: Maybe they answered the question for me. "Optimal UHF reception with strong High-Band VHF..."