Antenna

[doc]

We are in the process of going over specifications on a new coach and need to know how this "Rayzar digital antenna" works compared to the current crank up and adjust antenna we have now.

[Lt Dan]

Originally Posted by doc

We are in the process of going over specifications on a new coach and need to know how this "Rayzar digital antenna" works compared to the current crank up and adjust antenna we have now.

Which Rayzar antenna does it have? There are two types, the Rayzar Automatic and the Rayzar Z1 RV manual antenna which is similar to the King Jack antenna. I had a Rayzar automatic one time and it worked quite well.

[doc]

Originally Posted by Lt Dan

Which Rayzar antenna does it have? There are two types, the Rayzar Automatic and the Rayzar Z1 RV manual antenna which is similar to the King Jack antenna. I had a Rayzar automatic one time and it worked quite well.

Good question - I don't have an answer for. The sheet just said Rayzar. I will have to find out.
Did you find it better, worse or equal to the regular RV crank-up manual adjust antenna?

[cwk]

I am curious as to how well they perform also.

One thing that I have read is that the Rayzar antennas are low profile and do NOT need to be cranked up. Makes forgetting to lower the antenna before moving your RV a moot issue. One less item on the departure checklist.

[Lt Dan]

Originally Posted by doc

Good question - I don't have an answer for. The sheet just said Rayzar. I will have to find out.
Did you find it better, worse or equal to the regular RV crank-up manual adjust antenna?

I found the automatic worked almost as well as the crank up Bat Wing antenna. I don't have experience with the manual Rayzar so I don't know about it.

[docj]

I have a natural skepticism about any antenna that advertises that it is "digital" since any antenna of the proper design can receive TV signals regardless of whether or not they are digital signals or the "old" analog ones. Unscrupulous salesmen have been selling digital antennas to technically unsophisticated RV owners ever since digital TV was introduced.

Time and time again test show that the old Winegard batwing is pretty much the best antenna being sold, but people like antennas that don't have to be pointed at the TV station, so the Jack and similar others have become popular. But a higher gain, pointable antenna is usually going to outperform a lower gain omnidirectional antenna. That's simply physics.

[Carlos Marti]

Doc, FYI, the Jack is pointable. It rotates, but doesn't raise or lower.

[docj]

Originally Posted by Carlos Marti

Doc, FYI, the Jack is pointable. It rotates, but doesn't raise or lower.

But it's my understanding that it is significantly less sensitive to pointing direction than is the Batwing. And the result of that lack of sensitivity is less gain (amplification) of the signal. You can't have it both ways. You can have a highly directional antenna with a lot of gain or a lower gain antenna that is less sensitive to pointing accuracy.

[Carlos Marti]

Doc, It could be less sensitive as you say. I have no way to compare them. But one thing I have discovered with the Jack is if I point the arrow head away (180°) from the target tower, I get a stronger signal. I think it may be similar to the old yagi (i think that's what it was called) uhf antennas where there was a funnel reflector and concentrating the signal on the receiving element. It has been a very long time since I studied antenna design and my terminology is probably all wrong. Anyway, I found that I get a stronger signal off the back end of the Jack.

[YC1]

The batwing does have a bit more gain for those long distance stations but the Jack is easier to aim and you can receive a few more station from the back side because the batwing has a high forward to reverse gain. That is it rejects signals from the back side.

I like the Jack antennas but they seem to be a bit sensitive to life. I have replaced a couple of them.

[Tom_M]

Originally Posted by Carlos Marti

But one thing I have discovered with the Jack is if I point the arrow head away (180°) from the target tower, I get a stronger signal.

The flat part of the Jack is actually the front.

I have both a Jack and a Winegard Sensar IV. Both perform about the same for the UHF channels, but the Sensar IV is much better for the VHF channels. RF channels 2 - 13 are VHF, 14 and above are UHF. I say RF channel because the TV channel displayed on your TV is not necessarily the RF channel being broadcast. For instance, in Minneapolis channel 2 is actually broadcast on RF channel 34. About 25% of the TV stations are now broadcasting on VHF. That percentage will increase soon because the government auctioned off a chunk of the UHF band forcing some stations to drop to a lower frequency. Some of these stations will change to VHF.

[Bob_C]

On a batwing, what is the reception ......the ends or the width?

[KanzKran]

Originally Posted by Tom_M

That percentage will increase soon because the government auctioned off a chunk of the UHF band forcing some stations to drop to a lower frequency. Some of these stations will change to VHF.

Some will also move to a subchannel of a frequency already in use by other stations. Looks like UHF will now be limited to 14-36 (37 has been radio astronomy for a long time), down from 14-51 now, before that 14-69, and before that 14-83. But at least anyone with high-VHF plus UHF won't have to do anything but rescan, which has to be done with every move anyway.

[docj]

Originally Posted by bob caldwell

On a batwing, what is the reception ......the ends or the width?

The reception is from the "wide side". In fact, if your batwing has been fitted with the Wingman accessory to improve UHF performance, the signal is received from the wide side with the Wingman.