Maybe they improved them. If you are happy with them, I won't argue that. I'd still use their other models, if I was buying one.
Chuck WB2EDV ----- Original Message ----- From: "Eric Lemmon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, June 10, 2005 9:18 PM Subject: Re: [Repeater-Builder] although they do have a particular model that is a dog > Chuck, > > I guess your statement brings new meaning to the phrase, "Your Mileage May > Vary." > > I have two Sinclair SRL-222 VHF antennas in service now, and will continue > to > specify them because of their consistent high quality, consistent > ruggedness, > consistent smooth broadband coverage, and consistent (and very desirable) > vertical pattern. I will readily admit that they are expensive, but as in > almost all endeavors, you get what you pay for. IMHO, the Sinclair > SRL-222 is > an excellent antenna. I can't comment on the -224, haven't used it. > > 73, Eric Lemmon WB6FLY > > Chuck Kelsey wrote: > >> However, as I listed in a previous post: >> >> The SRL-222 and SRL-224 should be avoided. These are a folded dipole >> design, >> but they are problematic. I don't understand why they (Sinclair) continue >> these models when they have other similar models that work well. >> >> Chuck >> WB2EDV > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Repeater-Builder/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
