eBay Antenna Reviews, Ratings, and Discussion

[wcalifas831]

I wouldn't buy these on ebay, rather at this site

Well I wouldn't pay 60 dollars for these type of antennas mentioned. I've seen them way cheaper here: Here are a few links of those antennas mentioned:

Quantum FX ANT-105 35dB Outdoor Rotary High Gain VHF/UHF/FM/HD Antenna with Remote Control - EV-ANT-105

Quantum FX ANT-108 35dB Outdoor Rotary High Gain VHF/UHF/FM/HD Antenna with Remote Control - EV-ANT-108

Quantum FX ANT-107 35dB Outdoor Rotary High Gain VHF/UHF/FM/HD Antenna with Remote Control - EV-ANT-107

Quantum FX 25dB Gain UHF/VHF/FM High Performance Amplified Indoor Antenna - EV-ANT-101

Quantum FX ANT-100 32dB Gain Amplified Digital TV & HDTV Ready UHF/ VHF/ FM Antenna - EV-ANT-100

If I were to buy those ebay antennas I'd buy them for cheaper at one of these sites.

 

[EscapeVelocity]

That is a great price on the ANT-105. Im not enamored of the rest. The second to last is a good amplified RE&Loop if its loop is 9" in diameter like the one I tested with different branding, nice and thick too, for lowering swr and broadbanding the antenna gain.

That last one is interesting.

 

[Piggie]

It looks like you watch TV on that antenna. The UHF part looks like a screen.

But really why does anyone bother with these things besides being curious?

 

[Aaron62]

It looks like you watch TV on that antenna. The UHF part looks like a screen.

But really why does anyone bother with these things besides being curious?

LOL, I thought it looked like a TV too. It's good that we get some real world test results with these antennas though.

 

[EscapeVelocity]

[/LIST]Quantum FX ANT-105 Review

Here is the box next to the Quantum FX ANT 104 box for comparison.

Box and contents of boxs. Some assembly required. Assembly wasnt terribly difficult and the instructions were decently followable. Notice that this unit ships with the same remote and controller box as the QFX ANT 104. However this one was in a sealed bag, not a zip lock bag. See ANT 104 review a couple of pages back for comments on the remote and box. The quick version is that these are serviceable, pretty good.

Here is the QFX 105 fully assembled. As you can see, it comes with about 45 foot of permanently attached RG 59 coax cable.

Here is a comparison shot of the QFX ANT 104 and 105 next to each other. Notice the 105 has one extra director on the front of the boom. All the elements on the UHF section on the front of the boom were the same size and distance from each other. They differ significantly on the backside of the boom...with the 105 having a single VHF High driven element and and UHF sized reflector screen behind it. Read the ANT 104 article to understand its design problems on the VHF elements.

Dimensions of the Quantum FX ANT 104 and ANT 105

QFX 105

Boom Length = 29"

UHF Dipole Directors = 3.5" long each side, 7" long altogether, with 3" spacing between them.

UHF Driven Dipole = 4.5" long each side, 9" long altogether, with 4.5" spacing between it and the last 7" director

VHF Driven Dipole = 12" long each side 25" long altogether with 8.5" spacing between the UHF Driven Dipole and it.

UHF Curved Reflector Screen = 15.5" horizontal diameter, with 3.5" spacing between its center and the VHF Driven Dipole.

QFX 104

Boom Length = 26"

All the UHF section measurements are the same as the 105 except of one extra UHF Dipole Director.

Reflectors = 12" long on each side, 25" long altogether, with one lower and one upper dipole, 9.5" back from the UHF Driven Dipole.

VHF Driven Dipole = 15" long on each side, 31" long altogether, with a funky shape that fattens at the ends, 1.75" from the upper and lower Reflectors.

Looking down the barrel of the QFX ANT 105.

Close up of back end. The VHF High elements are a bit out of whack because of a twist in the plastic bracket. Not that big a deal really, but could be better on quality.

Slightly out of focus shot of a ding/bend in one of the front UHF directors. More quality control problems.

----------------------

This antenna is a close kin of the Quantum FX ANT 104 reviewed in this thread a few pages before this antenna. Reading it is advised as I will skip some of the details and focus on the performance of this antenna, the ANT 105, especially in relation to the ANT 104.

Performance

Work in Progress...

 

[Piggie]

LOL, I thought it looked like a TV too. It's good that we get some real world test results with these antennas though.

Yeah, 25,000 mph is addicted to Chinese....

The amps are on, When he gets home
His mind is on it's own.
Construction sweats, instructions a waste
Chinese Antennas, is all it takes....

Apologies to Robert Palmer....

 

[rando01]

hope that 104 works better for you than it did me....

 

[EscapeVelocity]

I just got a Zinwell ZAT 970A with dual meters for signal strength and signal quality. Im goint to use it in a mini roundup of antennas.

Quantum FX ANT104
Quantum FX ANT105
A-Neutronics ANI AV 891 (naked)

plus a basic unamped RE&Loop the RCA ANT108 and another well regarded higher performing antenna the DB2 just for performance markers. Im familiar with both of these antennas performance at my location and can judge atmospheric conditions among other things.

Ill probably throw in the...

RS 1880
and
Quantum FX Indoor that is real similar to the RS 1880...

just to round out the mini comparison and draw some conclusion with my new testing equipment, the Zinwell ZAT 970A.

 

[EscapeVelocity]

Lava A-2805 antenna review from Yes616 on this link.

 

[Tim58hsv]

That is a great price on the ANT-105. Im not enamored of the rest. The second to last is a good amplified RE&Loop if its loop is 9" in diameter like the one I tested with different branding, nice and thick too, for lowering swr and broadbanding the antenna gain.

That last one is interesting.

Reminds me of that cheap $10.00 un amplified antenna I purchased from Walmart a few weeks ago. I bought it hoping the rabbit ears would do a better job of picking up WSYX out of Columbus, Ohio. I already get a low signal from the station but no image or audio and that's with uhf bow tie antennas, which ain't suppose to work very good of high band vhf anyway.

Hooked up the cheapo Walmart antenna to my CM7777 preamp, adjusted the ears this way and that way and couldn't even get a signal from WSYX. Not only that but it wouldn't even pick up a signal from WCPO or WKRC out of Cincinnati, two vhf channels I already get using uhf bowtie antennas.

Bottom line seems to be that the antenna pictured would be too weak for distant channels and the 32db gain preamp in the unit could cause signal overload on the local channels.

 

[EscapeVelocity]

Test of Antennas with Early Production Zinwell ZAT 970A Meters

Test was done in same sweet spot location in the North & West Corner Windows on the Lamp for those who are familiar with my antenna ramblings. Back to back at about 10 PM on date of this post. Antennas were tested in order from top to bottom. TVFool is below.

Notes...

WJWJ Ch. 16 (Real Channel 44) was tested with antennas pointed to the North Towers, so readings are off the backside of the antenna.

Signal Quality 10 is on the digital cliff. Anything above this is a video lock. Signal Quality 10 is unwatchable with severe breakups. Signal Quality 20 is clean video.

The RCA ANT108 basic unamplified Rabbit Ear & Loop was doing well, which indicates good atmospherics at the time of testing.

A Neutronics AV ANI 891 was tested naked with amplifier and other electronics removed and also the VHF Loops were not hooked up...only the UHF loops.

All antennas which have Rabbit Ear VHF Dipoles were adjusted to 15" per side using the fattest part of the dipoles and situated horizontally (or near as possible for the RCA ANT108) and inline with the loops. These are the RS 1880, QFX ANT-102, and RCA ANT108.

4 Bay Bowtie was on the roof with a Channel Master 7777 amplifier and 50 ft of Quad Shield RG6 coax to the Zinwell.

 

[EscapeVelocity]

Conclusions

So, the meters tell the real story.

Both the Quantum FX ANT 105 and 104 are less than spectacular. The ANT-104 outperformed its longer cousin the ANT-105. Why is that? Is the UHF reflector screen on the 105 too far back, being out of phase with the UHF driven element? Still need to remove the Upper and Lower passive longer elements on the 104 and test just using the 30" VHF Driven Element in the rear...for VHF forward gain. Both the Quantum FX ANT 104 and the 105 were very finicky, suggesting a tight beamwidth.

The A-Neutronics is a good UHF antenna surrounded by lousy electronics, though no info yet on the VHF loop section.

The Quanum FX ANT102 performs on par with the highly regarded Radio Shack 15-1880.

Also, I may be detecting that the loops (and double loops) are giving better Bit Error Rates (aka Signal Quality readings) than the bowties. Any takers on why that may be?

Furthermore, you can see that the amplified antennas are showing strong signal more often than not, but that isnt the whole story. The unamped RCA ANT108, DB2, and A Neutronics without amplifiers are showing lower Signal Strength but often higher Signal Quality. If I amped them, they would probably show higher Signal Intensity, but not necessarily higher Signal Quality....though they might show some if the amplifier is low noise and thus lowers the noise floor (S/N ratio) being lower than the tuner noise figures of about 6db.


What say you?

 

[Thomas G]

Conclusions

So, the meters tell the real story.

Both the Quantum FX ANT 105 and 104 are less than spectacular. The ANT-104 outperformed its longer cousin the ANT-105. Why is that? Is the UHF reflector screen on the 105 too far back, being out of phase with the UHF driven element? Still need to remove the Upper and Lower passive longer elements on the 104 and test just using the 30" VHF Driven Element in the rear...for VHF forward gain. Both the Quantum FX ANT 104 and the 105 were very finicky, suggesting a tight beamwidth.

The A-Neutronics is a good UHF antenna surrounded by lousy electronics, though no info yet on the VHF loop section.

The Quanum FX ANT102 performs on par with the highly regarded Radio Shack 15-1880.

Also, I may be detecting that the loops (and double loops) are giving better Bit Error Rates (aka Signal Quality readings) than the bowties. Any takers on why that may be?

Furthermore, you can see that the amplified antennas are showing strong signal more often than not, but that isnt the whole story. The unamped RCA ANT108, DB2, and A Neutronics without amplifiers are showing lower Signal Strength but often higher Signal Quality. If I amped them, they would probably show higher Signal Intensity, but not necessarily higher Signal Quality....though they might show some if the amplifier is low noise and thus lowers the noise floor (S/N ratio) being lower than the tuner noise figures of about 6db.

The RCA ANT108 basic unamplified Rabbit Ear & Loop was doing well, which indicates good atmospherics at the time of testing.

What say you?

:bowdown: So if your neighbor asked you which antenna to purchase, which would you go with? Quanum FX ANT102 or Radio Shack 15-1880?

 

[EscapeVelocity]

Either, the Quantum FX 102 can be found Brand New in current distribution much more readily and at lower prices. The RS 1880 is long discontinued from Radio Shack, hard to find, and commands premium prices on the bay.

 

[curt_dawg2000]

Hi

Yes I have reading up on the thread the last few days. I live in an area where tv recption is very diffcult to get. I have a radio shack antenna, it is one of the biggest antenna on the market. I have been looking at these antenna on ebay that says range 100 miles. I know that when amplifier is added it helps the singles somewhat. My question is are these antennas sold on ebay as good as they say? I seen chart posted, in a test of some of these antennas. I in my area get 2 stations that is got a good signle, one is the pbs feed which has a 90 single most of the time, the other is the cbs feed which is bout 60 miles form me I get 30 single rating. They more stations in the area of bout 70 miles or more but dont receive unless the weather is just right. I would like some help on these so called great ebay antennas to see if they may be worth buying in my area. I would like to hear form some of you experts, I would also like to now more about tv singles. Thanks curt_dawg

Here is my email address {Curt I removed your email as it will just get caught by robots. Members can contact you through the forum's private message system}

Would like to hear you thanks

 

[Piggie]

Yes I have reading up on the thread the last few days. I live in an area where tv reception is very difficult to get. I have a radio shack antenna, it is one of the biggest antenna on the market.

Then as far as an antenna goes you are probably in good shape.

I have been looking at these antenna on ebay that says range 100 miles. I know that when amplifier is added it helps the singles somewhat. My question is are these antennas sold on ebay as good as they say? I seen chart posted, in a test of some of these antennas.

I have a bridge I can sell you that is a thousand miles long. No, 100 mile range is not true, unless you live on top of a mountain and the station is on top of a mountain and there are no mountains between you and the station.

Amplifiers don't always help and one of the leading causes of people not getting good reception.

The cheap Chinese stuff on ebay is exactly that. Cheap Chinese stuff. Cheap construct, exaggerated claims on reception and no specifications on the amps.

The antenna you have is probably already better the Chinese junk on Ebay.

I in my area get 2 stations that is got a good signal, one is the PBS feed which has a 90 single most of the time, the other is the cbs feed which is bout 60 miles form me I get 30 single rating. They more stations in the area of bout 70 miles or more but don't receive unless the weather is just right. I would like some help on these so called great ebay antennas to see if they may be worth buying in my area. I would like to hear form some of you experts, I would also like to now more about tv singles. Thanks curt_dawg

The only think in my opinion those ebay antennas are good for is if you are limited to an indoor antenna.

If you go to TV Fool and put in your addess, then post the bold link back here provided, we can tell you how you could improve your reception if possible.

Also do you know the model number of your antenna? Is it UHF and VHF?

 

[curt_dawg2000]

Thanks for the helpful information

(orinally posted) Also do you know the model number of your antenna? Is it UHF and VHF?

It is a radio shack antenna, compare it to channel master 3020. That is about the size and shape of it. THe only difference is the side beam is stairght on mine and slated on the channel master 3020. Range is somewhere around 60 miles. YEs it is uhf and vhf antenna.

I am like you the know I now the less I understand.

I can just move my antenna as much as 30 feet around in my yard and the single on the dtv channels may go form 50 to 20 may not even get anything.

Thank for the information.

Do you know anything about, the new bay antenna systems form channel master. Will they do good in weak single areas.

 

[Piggie]

(orinally posted) Also do you know the model number of your antenna? Is it UHF and VHF?

It is a radio shack antenna, compare it to channel master 3020. That is about the size and shape of it. THe only difference is the side beam is stairght on mine and slated on the channel master 3020. Range is somewhere around 60 miles. YEs it is uhf and vhf antenna.

I am like you the know I now the less I understand.

I can just move my antenna as much as 30 feet around in my yard and the single on the dtv channels may go form 50 to 20 may not even get anything.

Thank for the information.

Do you know anything about, the new bay antenna systems form channel master. Will they do good in weak single areas.

In moving the antenna around the yard, you were finding "sweet spots" You need to mount it where the signals are highest.

No, the new Channel Master that the CM4221 and CM4228 are not that good. The old ones worked better.

The antenna you have probably is as good as you are going to get.

If you post your TVFool.com plot here I can tell if you might need an amp.

 

[curt_dawg2000]

Thanks

In moving the antenna around the yard, you were finding "sweet spots" You need to mount it where the signals are highest.
Yea thats want I finger myself. I tried rising it up in the air but recption only got worse.





If you post your TVFool.com plot here I can tell if you might need an amp.

I already have a amp, it helps out a good bit. I tried to get you the chart off tvfool could not finger it out. Not very good in computer smarts. Here is a list of channels in my area form dtv.org


WMUM PBS 29-1 this station is very strong get 90 + signle this is bout 30 miles

WGXA FOX 24-1 this is border line of the stations I can get if I move my antenna around in the yard to right spot single according to dtv weak this is bout 70 miles

WMAZ CBS 13-1 this is the other station I can get according to dtv signle weak this is bout 70 miles

WVAN PBS 9-1 this I cannot get according to dtv no single


WMGT NBC 41-1 this I can pick up some at nite according to dtv on single
this station about 70 miles

Here is some stations not included on dtv web site

wpga abc 58.1 which I can pick at nite\
this station bout 70 miles

wrbl 3.1 which I can pick early in the mornings
this station bout 130 miles


Some other stations have played if the weather was just right.

I just want to say thanks for your help. I guess in my area tv recption is just about in possiable. One reason I live so far out the other reason, the land in my area is hillily

 

[EscapeVelocity]

Here is the Quantum FX ANT 104 with the rear double elements removed. Gonna try it this way to see any difference in VHF forward gain especially but also how it affects UHF.

Cant get the pic rotated, oh well.