imax 2000 groundplane
- MO-raven
- 4 PILL USER
- Posts: 25
- Joined: May 6th, 2010, 10:09 am
- Real Name: Cherry
imax 2000 groundplane
we are running a max 2000 and thinking about adding a groundplane to it. I havn't heard much about those ground planes and was wondering what everyone's opinion on them?
- heavyD
- Skipshooter
- Posts: 279
- Joined: February 2nd, 2010, 10:27 am
- Handle: Heavy-D
- Real Name: mike
- Antenna: imax, steel whip
- Radio: galaxy,cobra,uniden
- Contact:
ground plane on an imax is really for looks in my opinion(or another way for the manufacturer to make a few mor bucks. From researching this site I can say the opinion veries about 55/45 against ground plane(close).. the antenna is really nothing more than a dipole. not taking any thing away from the antenna it is well put together and affordable, I got one. But even if the ground elements were effective they are far too short. would like do see some experimentation with some home brews starting off of the imax.. that stuff is beyond me though
Heavy-D. 529 in the Pile
- Sporty Mike
- Wordwide & Qualified
- Posts: 1,631
- Joined: November 13th, 2009, 5:02 pm
- Real Name: Michael
- Antenna: S.S. 102 / Maco V5/8
- Radio: Alot of 'em!!
- Contact:
I agree with Heavy D....and I'll add that a Ground plane kit won't hurt you at all....just don't be surprised if you notice 0 improvement as well.
I believe the applications were a GPK has helped are in situations were the antenna's very high like 50 feet and higher, with little topographical obstructions.
Because after all, that's what the GPK is supposed to do, LOWER your angle of radiation. So think about, if your antenna is 40 feet to the base or lower, in a hilly or tree spewn area, do you really wanna lower your angle of radiation??
Mike
I believe the applications were a GPK has helped are in situations were the antenna's very high like 50 feet and higher, with little topographical obstructions.
Because after all, that's what the GPK is supposed to do, LOWER your angle of radiation. So think about, if your antenna is 40 feet to the base or lower, in a hilly or tree spewn area, do you really wanna lower your angle of radiation??

Mike
Redbeard 759 , your non profit Prophet from the 'Bam!!!
- MO-raven
- 4 PILL USER
- Posts: 25
- Joined: May 6th, 2010, 10:09 am
- Real Name: Cherry
well, that was exactly what I was wondering.... there is obviously a reason why I haven't heard much on it. Now we are in the ozark mountains and in a bit of a hole as we call it, but the imax is on top on a 58' tower. My husband says that the tip of the antenea is right at the tree tops, or at least very close to the tree tops at the top of our little hill....We are doing our darndest to crawl out of this old hole... lol
Alright, another person from MO!!! About time, I am in Wright City MO.......
Snowman
Snowman
- MO-raven
- 4 PILL USER
- Posts: 25
- Joined: May 6th, 2010, 10:09 am
- Real Name: Cherry
LOL...... Nice to meet ya 420snowman! I'm originally from the Lou.... Moved away back in 97. Live south of Branson now.... Great place to live! 

I lived in Branson for 5 years, thats where my wife and I met!! I havent been back there in at LEAST 6 years, dont miss that Hwy 76 traffic AT ALL!!! I ran the kitchen at Mickey Gilleys and also at Paradise Grill, (right next to Shoji Tabouchi).. not sure what it is now.....
Snowman
Snowman
If the Imax acts anything like the A99 (with exception of it's wavelength is similar in design), then height will likely play a large role of "how much" difference you might expect. At around 60' (or so) to the base of the antenna, I'd expect you'd probably see some improvement (if only a little). My Imax is currently only at 40' to the base which is why I never bothered. But back when I was using the A99 I did some experimenting to see how much difference it made in my installation. At around 40' to the base there was no noticeable difference...at least long distance local. At 90' to the base however, it was quite noticeable. Somewhere to the tune of 1/2 s-unit (maybe a tad more) if I recall.
So the results of the experimenting I did indicated (to me anyway) that height played a huge role in the results...at least in my installations. But I'd expect soil properties (and a variety of things) would come into play as well.
Just my thoughts on the subject.
So the results of the experimenting I did indicated (to me anyway) that height played a huge role in the results...at least in my installations. But I'd expect soil properties (and a variety of things) would come into play as well.
Just my thoughts on the subject.
- likes2grill
- Duckplucker
- Posts: 105
- Joined: May 16th, 2010, 5:33 pm
- Real Name: Dan
- Radio: Midland 79-290
- Contact:
This is what I plan on doing with my final install of my imax2000 at 40' with the ground plane kit on it. [Please login or register to view this link]
1394
With that Imaxx, that grounding amounts to a safety ground, has very little to do with the antenna behaving 'right'. There are also several 'mistakes' in that 'Signal Engineering' explanation! Soldering is a particularly bad way of connecting safety ground conductors. That sort of connection seldom (if ever) survives a hit, or near hit from lightning. Those connections should be of a mechanical nature unless you are going to weld them. It's detailed in the National Electrical Code (NEC), which is a very nice thing to read about grounding.
As far as running a ground wire/cable down a metal tower, why not just use that tower as the ground wire? It's how it's typically done on most commercial towers. I think I'd be safe in saying that tower will conduct more than any wire/cable the average person ever uses for grounding. Then just make a mechanical connection to any ground radials at the base of the tower (where it can be seen!).
I would very much recommend taking a look at that NEC thingy! It has a lot of useful information in it and not just about grounding. And since it's used as a standard reference by most city/county and states, it can certainly help with legal things.
- 'Doc
As far as running a ground wire/cable down a metal tower, why not just use that tower as the ground wire? It's how it's typically done on most commercial towers. I think I'd be safe in saying that tower will conduct more than any wire/cable the average person ever uses for grounding. Then just make a mechanical connection to any ground radials at the base of the tower (where it can be seen!).
I would very much recommend taking a look at that NEC thingy! It has a lot of useful information in it and not just about grounding. And since it's used as a standard reference by most city/county and states, it can certainly help with legal things.
- 'Doc
- 1342
- 4 PILL USER
- Posts: 32
- Joined: March 28th, 2008, 1:47 am
heres mine with 102 and maco gpkMO-raven wrote:we are running a max 2000 and thinking about adding a groundplane to it. I havn't heard much about those ground planes and was wondering what everyone's opinion on them?
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
- str8stroke
- Donor
- Posts: 953
- Joined: April 30th, 2010, 2:49 pm
- Real Name: Ric Flair
- Antenna: 1/16 Wave Dipole
- Radio: Gold Cobra 29LTD
- Contact:
I put the GPK on my ole 99, and noticed no performance improvement. What I did notice was a drop in RFI around the house.
Ric Flair is on the Air, with Pink Underwear!!! WHAOOO!!!