Frequency Ranges
I tested these antennas on 49 frequencies between 27 & 938MHz. To better help with analysis of the data collected, I broke this down into 11 ranges : 27-60, 71-88, 92-107, 119-132, 147-163, 204-388, 445-464, 494-674, 853-863, 870-890, and 929-938 MHz.

Measurements
These readings were all taken on the same clear day with a temperature in the mid 90s and humidity in the upper 80s. Time of the measurements was from roughly late in the afternoon into early evening (about 4 - 8PM).

Since I had just purchased an AR3000A, I decided to put it to use right away in this evaluation. It appeared to have a well calibrated S-meter and its unrestricted coverage range and tuning modes meant it would be just perfect for the job at hand.

The AR3000A S-meter consists of an SQL indicator which simply indicates when the squelch has been broken. After this there are indicators for the following signal strength levels : 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 9, +10 and +20. The manual lists 1 = 1 microvolt, 7 = 30 microvolts and 9 = 300 microvolts.

Notation
In the raw data charts that follow, the measurement taken for a particular reading is listed as the number I assigned to that reading according to the S-meter indication. Mapping out the S-meter indicators directly, we get 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 9, 10 and 20 (which no reading attained). For signals that were fluctuating between 5 & 7 or 7 & 9, I assigned them a 6 or 8, respectively. Signals that just barely opened the squelch such that only the SQL indicator lit, a 0 was assigned.

For no S-meter indication of reception, a '-' is listed.

For the totals listed, the numeric values for the S-meter values listed were simply added. A -1 was added for a reading of '-'.

Raw Data & Totals

Summary

The 20-014 turned in some good numbers to finish the winner. But not by much. The 20-013 gave it a run for the money. The 20-013 actually finished more times in first place but the number of times it came in 4th hurt its overall rank letting it take second fiddle to the 20-014.

Considering the size differential between the 20-013 and 20-014, the 20-013 is a good value. At a little under three feet tall and a little over one foot wide, the 2013 is dwarfed next to the humongous 20-014. At some later date, it will be interesting to see how Radio Shack's latest 20-013, with an added VHF lo-band aerial, will change its receiving characteristics.

I was kind of surprised by the results the 20-176 turned in. I have always liked this inexpensive little antenna...that's why I have two of them. But I never expected it to put up the kind of fight that it did!

My previous review of the SkyScan 1300 indicated this was less than a stellar performer and this survey only backed that up. While never really awful, it consistently comes in third or fourth place most of the time.

I didn't expect the Grove dipole to come out near the top. Such antennas are designed for peak reception based on the frequency represented by the length of the split antenna leads. Except for VHF-lo and 900MHz, it came in last or next to last in every test.

Recommendations
While the 20-014 is the overall winner, those who find themselves hanging out in the UHF military aero band and 850-860MHz trunked systems will definitely want to avoid the 20-014. It came in last for both ranges.

For many people, this antenna is simply much too large for convenient placement. Too bad because at $35 it represents a very good value.

The 20-013 performs nearly as well and comes in a much more convenient package but at a slightly higher cost. This antenna never finished below fourth place and never came in last! It performs particularly well on the military aero band, UHF T band and regular 800Mhz.

It will be interesting to see how this antenna compares to the updated version which now includes a vertical whip like that found on the competing Diamond and iCOM discone models.

The 20-176 turns in very pleasing performance considering its diminutive cost and size. If you monitor VHF aero, VHF-hi or the military aero bands, this would be a good choice. Just don't expect much support elsewhere. For stealthy, cheap monitoring, this is the ticket.

The ANT-8 turns in a decent performance but never finishes in first place. Its results do seem to be scattered evenly across the spectrum much like what would be expected from a discone. For a little more money, you could get the 20-176 which is a little more conspicuous but will probably hold up better under outdoor conditions.

The ANT-06 should probably be avoided for the most part. An ANT-8 would be just as stealthy and useful for the most part and comes in a bit cheaper with better results.

The SkyScan turned in results that were matched by the ANT-8 but at nearly six times the cost! Unless you truly want to impress your friends with this bizarre item, I would suggest shopping elsewhere.

Above and beyond these recommendation, simply look over the results tables to see which of these antennas fit your target frequency monitoring bands. This should be your primary consideration which must then be weighed against mounting constraints or antenna invisibility.

Regardless of the antenna purchased, it will only be as good as the co-ax you use to connect it to your super-duper receiver. Don't pay good money for a nice antenna only to have it nullified by using cheap co-ax! For some more info, be sure to stop by my co-ax page if you have not already done so.

Also, if you plan to mount your antenna outdoors, ALWAYS be conscious of where power lines are and your clearance to them. Every year I read of people who get electrocuted because they did not follow these simple, commonsense rules. Don't you be the one the rest of us read about!

Update - January 10, 1999
The Ventenna line of base antennas are basically designed to be a stealthy form of reception for amateur radio, scanner, security and commercial applications. They are designed for those who desire an external antenna but wish to avoid the wrath of neighborhood restrictions.

Their inconspicuous nature arises from their design. They are basically all constructed from black ABS tubing and range in length from 16 to 36 inches. The antenna components are glued to the inside of the pipe and a short "pigtail" of co-ax, which ends in a SO-239 connector, runs along the inside of the tube and brings the signals outside, allowing attachment to a longer run of your choice of co-ax.

The Ventenna is designed to be directly attached to a current vent pipe on your roof. In many cases, the Ventenna can be slipped directly over the existing pipe and the base-mounted screws tightened into place. For those with larger 2-inch diameter pipes, a PVC collar is supplied. This collar can be glued to the vent pipe using ABS plastic cement and then the Ventenna is slipped into the collar and tightened into place with the its screws.

And all Ventennas are left unpainted. Black does afford some level of stealthiness but being able to paint them some form of tan or gray to blend in with your roof can make then almost invisible.

For amateur radio and scanner purposes, there are 8 models to choose from:

Except for the last two models, they can be used for both transmitting and receiving.

For commercial and security purposes, there are 3 models to choose from:

For the purposes of this evaluation, I tested a VT-27 and put it up against the winner of my base antenna survey, the Radio Shack 20-014. That should put it up against some hefty competition!

I connected a 10 foot length of RG-8/U to the ventenna and placed it about 6 feet away from the 20-014. I then tested each on numerous signals via my MVT-9000, noting the signal strength for each reading on both antennas. In my results that follows, the signal strength is listed. Where only the squelch was broken, a 'S' is listed and if no signal was heard, a '-' is listed.

Using these results, along with how the 20-014 compared to my other base antennas in various ranges, I was able to piece together a picture of the VT-27's reception.

It is rather good on VHF-lo and decent on VHF commercial aircraft, 450s and 460s. It is below average everywhere else, especially on VHF-hi, and is as deaf as the 20-014 above 900 MHz.

Keep in mind that this antenna makes sacrifices in reception but is better than many other solutions, or should I say, lack of them. For some, who may not be able to mount an unobtrusive antenna and do not have the option of an indoor model, this might be the only solution.

There are also many other models to pick from and they might allow for better reception in the ranges you like to monitor. Considering the VT-15S and the wider range commercial/security models would be a good idea.

Since I also use the 20-014 for some basic HF monitoring with decent results, I thought I'd test the VT-27 on some HF signals as well. I was pleased to see the VT-27 produce nearly identical results as the 20-014! One wonders how much would be gained by using the VT-SWL model?

For more information on this line of antennas, provided by The Forbes Group, be sure to stop by the Ventenna home page. They can be ordered there and are also carried by the larger ham radio stores like AES and HRO.

Copyright © 2010 by Richard J. Wells