Can anybody comment on the build quality of their antennas since MFJ
took them over?

--
Bert Hyman W0RSB St. Paul, MN

Hi Bert:

I don't have any empirical evidence one way or the other. However,
knowing a bit about manufacturing... I think that I can reliably say
that any antenna design prior to the acquisition would in all
likelihood be unchanged from the original design parameters.

The other side of that thinking... a new design, post acquisition
would be an unknown.

Just my two cents...

Merry Christmas

Tom G, Sr.



On 20 Dec 2010 14:29:17 GMT, Bert Hyman wrote:

Can anybody comment on the build quality of their antennas since MFJ
took them over?

In "T. & D. Gregor, Sr."
wrote:


Hi Bert:

I don't have any empirical evidence one way or the other. However,
knowing a bit about manufacturing... I think that I can reliably say
that any antenna design prior to the acquisition would in all
likelihood be unchanged from the original design parameters.

I agree that they're unlikely to have changed the design on any of the
existing products.

I'm wondering about the quality of the manufactured parts.

Are all the holes in the right place, are the tubes of the correct
length, are all the soldered connections actually soldered, etc?

More generally, will the things go together and stay together?


The other side of that thinking... a new design, post acquisition
would be an unknown.

Just my two cents...

Merry Christmas

Tom G, Sr.



On 20 Dec 2010 14:29:17 GMT, Bert Hyman wrote:

Can anybody comment on the build quality of their antennas since MFJ
took them over?





--
Bert Hyman W0RSB St. Paul, MN

"Edmund H. Ramm" wrote in message
...
In Bert Hyman
writes:

[...]
Are all the holes in the right place, are the tubes of the correct
length, are all the soldered connections actually soldered, etc?
[...]

Properly soldered connections and MFJ amount to an oxymoron.

73, Eddi ._._.

I hae bought several things from MFJ and think of it as an almost done kit.
Have had to go and resolder a few connections, callibrate a wattmeter,
tighten many screws.

Hi (again) Bert:

On 20 Dec 2010 15:44:38 GMT, Bert Hyman wrote:

In "T. & D. Gregor, Sr."
wrote:


Hi Bert:

I don't have any empirical evidence one way or the other. However,
knowing a bit about manufacturing... I think that I can reliably say
that any antenna design prior to the acquisition would in all
likelihood be unchanged from the original design parameters.

I agree that they're unlikely to have changed the design on any of the
existing products.

I'm wondering about the quality of the manufactured parts.

My experience is as follows:

Hygain - Over the years I've owned a number of their products. Build
quality was consistently high. With overall fit, feel and finish what
one would expect from an old line firm.

ChushCraft - Much smaller sample base. Build quality was fairly high.
With overall fit, feel and finish acceptable, though a bit rough
around the edges. Good but not great.

Are all the holes in the right place, are the tubes of the correct
length, are all the soldered connections actually soldered, etc?

Generally, yes. With the above comments taken in to consideration.

More generally, will the things go together and stay together?


In my experience, yes. No failures over time. Survived high winds and
ice loading without catastrophic failure.

The other side of that thinking... a new design, post acquisition
would be an unknown.

Just my two cents...

Merry Christmas

Tom G, Sr.

73

Tom G, Sr.

On 20 Dec 2010 14:29:17 GMT, Bert Hyman wrote:

Can anybody comment on the build quality of their antennas since MFJ
took them over?