Winegard Rayzar UHF/VHF HD Antenna

[YC1]

Looks great but as suggested I would love to see the wind loading factor. What a great idea with the design to allow it to receive from both sides. One should receive more channels without turning it.

[az99]

I will give a report as soon as it arrives. I use a Sensar IV on my house. I have a real need for both directions as 1 station I want is in the opposite direction of most others. The Sensar IV does not pick it up even though it is the closest in distance when aimed away from it.

[Winegard1]

Virago-Rider,

Our recommendation when to stow:

Existing boom – 50 mph
Short boom – 70 mph


That is a recommendation and they can probably take more than that, but we wouldn't recommend it.

Thanks for your interest!

La Mar Timmons
Winegard Digital Communications

[az99]

I got mine yesterday and tested it back to back within 10 minutes with my Sensar IV. Same mount on my house roof and no added Sensar Pro. It picked up less stations from the front but did pickup 1 of the 2 stations it should have from the back.
My personal opinion would be to save your money. Appears to be just another "new and improved" product to help keep your wallet thinner and theirs fatter. But I may be to stupid to test it.
Your results may vary.

[Winegard1]

It all depends on your situation. az99 you proved that our antenna works like it is intended. The Sensar most likely will give you more channels in the front because it is a directional antenna. With any directional antenna your going to have a further, more direct beam. The Rayzar gave you two more channels from the back...that is something the Sensar cannot do. Yes, it did not pick up some channels in the front that the Sensar can, but it did get those channels from behind. When someone is deciding on an antenna and wants either a directional antenna, or an antenna that's going to cover more area, then they can decide on the Sensar or Rayzar. Thank you for testing it and confirming that it works as designed!

La Mar Timmons
Winegard Digital Communications

[Triker56]

Originally Posted by Winegard1

The Sensar most likely will give you more channels in the front because it is a directional antenna. With any directional antenna your going to have a further, more direct beam.

Does that mean a Sensar will get stations more miles away from location then the new antenna?

I have found the Sensar can also pick near by(10-20 miles) stations from the side and rear. Without being directional to them.

And by above post test, the Sensar picks up stations farther away then the new one. By owner getting 2 stations less in front.

[Winegard1]

Triker56,

The best way to explain it would be like this:

For a directional antenna with a more focused line of sight and max distance, you will go with the Sensar.

For all-around max coverage area not looking for specific directionality, you will want to go with the Rayzar Air.

Both antennas will do very well, it just depends on what your preference is.

[az99]

Originally Posted by Winegard1

It all depends on your situation. az99 you proved that our antenna works like it is intended. The Sensar most likely will give you more channels in the front because it is a directional antenna. With any directional antenna your going to have a further, more direct beam. The Rayzar gave you two more channels from the back...that is something the Sensar cannot do. Yes, it did not pick up some channels in the front that the Sensar can, but it did get those channels from behind. When someone is deciding on an antenna and wants either a directional antenna, or an antenna that's going to cover more area, then they can decide on the Sensar or Rayzar. Thank you for testing it and confirming that it works as designed!

La Mar Timmons
Winegard Digital Communications

Well that is sure putting the politicians spin job on it.
Nowhere in the advertising of this product does it say channels will be lost. In fact here is a C&P from your ad- This doubles the coverage area and makes it possible to receive more channels than ever before.

As far as distance, here is a C&P from your ad about that-
Element design provides superior UHF gain allowing greater reception from farther distances.

[Winegard1]

It all depends on the situation az99. In your specific situation, you just so happened to be able to pick up an extra 2 channels that are further away that the Sensar can pick up, but are too far for the Rayzar. We've found in most cases when you can receive double coverage from the front and the rear, even if it doesn't have the same distance capability, it gives you more channels than the normal directional antenna. The possibility of picking up more stations than ever before is in fact there, but it all depends on your location, and surroundings. The Sensar is a great product don't get me wrong! That's why it is has been our number one seller. The Rayzar Air is just giving people another choice if they don't want to bother with aiming in specific directions, or if they know there are going to be towers from the north and south, or east and west. Almost all of our antennas, especially the newer ones, provide you with superior UHF gain, which will always allow you to get greater reception from farther distances. It's in our elements and design which is what also makes our antennas superior. It's more general than the way you explained it. If anyone is not happy with their product there is always a 30 day return policy with a refund, but the Sensar and the Rayzar Air are two great products to chose from for your RV over-the-air experience.

La Mar Timmons
Winegard Digital Communications

[Jim A]

When I worked for Hughes Aircraft all those years ago, there was a popular saying:

In God we trust. All others bring data.

Well, here is my data.

I replaced a perfectly good Sensar IV antenna with the new Rayzar Air antenna in my coach. I just finished it today, so my experiences are very limited obviously. Before I removed the Sensar IV antenna, I peaked the signals from the LA broadcast towers, which are about 45 miles from my storage location. I measured the signal strength using my SensarPro on a handful of stations, some VHF and some UHF. I then rotated the antenna off of the peak by 5 notches on the rotation wheel, and took readings on the same stations for comparison.

After I installed the Rayzar Air, I repeated the test as before. In addition, I tested the strength again 180 degrees from the peak to compare front and back readings. (I didn't do that with the Sensar IV because I had not read this thread with Winegard1's posts when I did the first part of the test. But past experience tells me that the drop off between front and back is pretty severe, especially with UHF frequencies.)

As can be seen, the readings with the Rayzar Air are indeed slightly lower than the readings with the Sensar IV. However, just as Winegard1 reported, the readings at 180 degrees are virtually identical. And the readings 5 notches off from peak are closer to the peak than with the Sensar IV. Especially with the UHV frequencies.

Based on my limited test, I tend to believe Winegard1's posts. The Sensar IV is probably better for maximum distance if properly aimed, but the Rayzar is better for being less sensitive to direction. And it will not suffer from that dreaded "dead spot" in the Sensar rotation arc.

Bottom line, I would not replace a perfectly good Sensar IV antenna with a Rayzar. (Although that is exactly what I did!) But if I needed to replace a Sensar head or the whole antenna, I would switch to the Rayzar Air. I do like the Rayzar antenna because it is much smoother to crank up and rotate the antenna than with the Sensar, which is why I wanted to test it. Plus it is less direction sensitive. Time will tell how much it is affected by the wind. But in high wind I tend to put the antenna down anyway.

I would definitely replace a old Sensar III with the Rayzar, as it is much better for UHF.

I still need to rescan for stations, but based on the signal strength, I don't expect much change. I typically get 150+ stations in a scan in the LA area.

[YC1]

Originally Posted by Winegard1

Lincolnboy2,

It just got released yesterday. There were some retrofit replacement heads that were available last week, but as of yesterday it is official. I would be more than happy to answer any questions about the Rayzar Air if you would like!

La Mar Timmons
Winegard Digital Communications

Since I have gone through the sensar, then the add on, and now managed to dispose of two Jack antennas I will try the new Rayzar. I believe my first Jack took a lightening surge and the current one took a hit from a tree limb. It is intermittent now what the heck. I'm a telecommunication tech so have fun experimenting.

I am curious about the add on plate. Hopefully will find some info on that tonight.

[Lincolnboy2]

I just put this new/back on my local/crank up antenna coach:

Winegard Sensar IV Integrated Amp. Replacement Head Only - Winegard RVW-205 - Over-the-Air Antennas - Camping World

It replaced this:

Jack Digital HDTV Antenna Replacement Head - King Controls OA-8000 - Over-the-Air Antennas - Camping World

I can tell you with certainty now the Winegard Sensar is a better product. Before replacement the Jack picked up about 32-38 stations. The Winegard picks up 63. Hands down the winner on my coach for my application.

[SCVJeff]

I'm curious how an essentially unity gain antenna can make a 4db improvement over a directional gain antenna that the Wingman alone claims a 3db gain (that's 100%, not 50). When I get my ETL back in LA, I'm going to run the same tests I did with the Batwing, Wingman upgrade, and Jack. What you say may be correct, but personally I go by data, and I have never seen any real engineering data on antenna performance from Winegard published, even when specifically asked for it.

Also, the re packed band will not end on Ch.32. The band continues on Ch.38 and goes up to 41 (as proposed). And this is not a boiler plate repack. The intention is to take the bandwidth needed, and this is dictated by each individual market, with many areas of the country with no impact at all. This is all completely fluid, which is the reason nothing has happened yet. Even once passed, if anything happens before the next 8-10 years, I'll be shocked (and retired). The equipment manufacturers are in no way ready to supply the broadcasters, as others are completely out of business. Plus, there aren't enough tower crews on the planet to accommodate this kind of a flash cut the FCC thinks can happen, and they're getting an education every day.

So redesigning that antenna to narrowband may not be a real good idea.... Yet