Gps Antenna

[+TeamHopewell]

I would like to know what the difference is between the Quadrifilar Helix internal antenna vs internal patch is?

[+SBPhishy]

Well, it seems the general consensus is that a Quad Helix will work better under tree cover than a patch will. I don't think there will ever be a unanimous agreement about that though.

 

I think the Quads are better at picking up sats on the horizon, while the patch is better for overhead. Also, the patch is meant to be oriented flat, while the Quad is meant to be held vertical.

 

In my personal opinion, I prefer the Quads. With my experience with Quads side by side with an eTrex, I much preferred the quad. It seems to acquire and hold a lock much better. Other people prefer the patches. Overall, you will be happy either way.

[+JohnnyVegas]

I talked to Garmin tec support about this about a year ago. THey told me that the quad is a much better antenna. I have use both side by side in the field, that patch is a better antenna. Let face it a GPSr is in all reality a radio reciever, with any radio, the better the antenna equals better reception. Just remove the antenna for your car radio and what happens?

[+GeckoGeek]

I would like to know what the difference is between the Quadrifilar Helix internal antenna vs internal patch is?

In the end, it doesn't matter. You have to look at the total package, not just the antenna.

 

I think the only generality that anyone would agree with is that most external antennas will run circles around the built-in antenna.

[+SBPhishy]

I talked to Garmin tec support about this about a year ago. THey told me that the quad is a much better antenna. I have use both side by side in the field, that patch is a better antenna.

 

Did they really say that? That's surprising.

 

Oh yeah, as mentioned before, I have also used both, side by side in the field, and the quad was a better antenna.

 

So, as you can see, one probably isnt really much better than the other.

[BeatonNo1]

here is a very good article comparing different antenna designs http://www.gpsinformation.org/joe/gpsantennaspecs.htm

 

However, I have found that the magellan quadifiler antennas seem to work better than other companies designs (maybe leaving out the r makes all the difference).

[+JohnnyVegas]

I talked to Garmin tec support about this about a year ago. THey told me that the quad is a much better antenna. I have use both side by side in the field, that patch is a better antenna.

 

Did they really say that? That's surprising.

 

Oh yeah, as mentioned before, I have also used both, side by side in the field, and the quad was a better antenna.

 

So, as you can see, one probably isnt really much better than the other.

Yes they did say that, It was in reponse to a question regarding the e-treks models Vs the Map 76. I am now retired.

I was working as a GPS buyer for a local retailer at the time. I did that for many years. I am now retired. And I have used the e-trex models side by side with the Map 76, Magellan sport track map, and Magelland Meridian gold. The e-treks just did not work as well.

 

I have an external anetanne that I used for about a week and I did not see any improvment in my truck. like I would tell my customers, try using the GPS by itself first.

[+JohnnyVegas]

I would like to know what the difference is between the Quadrifilar Helix internal antenna vs internal patch is?

In the end, it doesn't matter. You have to look at the total package, not just the antenna.

 

I think the only generality that anyone would agree with is that most external antennas will run circles around the built-in antenna.

It sure does matter, the antenna is very important to the ability of the GPS to maintain a good position fix. Try taking the antenna off your radio and see what happens.