"Rick Karlquist N6RK" wrote in message news:bBDJb.48697$I07.144572@attbi_s53...
Here's my experience.

On transmit:

160 meters: 90 foot vertical is 20 dB better than 60 ft high inv vee
80 meters: 60 foot vertical is 10 dB better than 60 ft high inv vee
40 meters: 30 foot vertical is equal to 90 ft high inv vee

Sounds about right, but try the 90 ft dipole against a 1/4 wave ground
plane mounted say at 55-60 ft. "That makes the overall height
about the same.. I bet the vertical trounces the dipole.

20 meters: 30 foot vertical is beaten by 90 ft high inv vee about 25% of
the time
I usually prefer the dipole on this band...

15 meters and up: Any dipole trounces any vertical.

Have to disagree here though. I've had numerous 10m verticals that
beat any dipole I tried on most low angles...Same for 17m, when I used
an elevated 5/8 ground plane at 36 ft. Dogged all my other antennas.

On receive:

160 and 80 meters: A low dipole trounces any vertical

Not sure on this one...I assume you see this due to a better s/n ratio
with the dipole...Overall, I don't totally agree with this one
though...I think it's reciprical. Which ever transmits best, usually
receives best in what I see here.
I often receive using the vertical. But I don't have any fancy receive
antennas like beverages, or small phased verticals, etc..
40 meters and up: best receive antenna is best transmit antenna

I agree..Actually, I think this is really the case on any band, not
counting any s/n problems with a certain antenna on receive. I'm a
firm believer in reciprical operation. Only in a very few cases will
that not pan out. No matter what band I'm on, I usually transmit on
the antenna that receives the best. Very, very rarely is it not also
the best transmit antenna. MK