Re: Antenna Diversity

[Sandy Duffy <sandy@pcnet.com>]

At 12:41 PM 3/6/96 -0500, you wrote:
>> But o'course, when you replace the radio, you have only one input.  I 
>> suppose I could make up a pigtail to connect both antennas to the single 
>> input, but I kinda doubt the advantage would be worth it....or it 
>> might even make it worse.  **Has anyone tried this?**
>
>Although I haven't done it yet, I am planning to swap the stereo from my '87
>5k to my '89 200q ... however, since I do listen to the radio frequently and
>don't want to install an external antenna (IMHO, the car looks nicer without
>one), I may be willing to pop for a new head unit that's designed for use in
>a diversity setup.  Personally, I'd be surprised if hooking the two antennas
>together offers any improvement over using just the one...
>
>Before I start calling around to the local car stereo emporiums, does anyone
>have any input/experience with this?  I seem to recall that Kenwood once had
>a few models that offered this feature ... any others?

Jeff:

Diversity antennas work but really are most effective if you a) live near a
city and get lots of reflected signals or b) live in the shadow of some
mountains,  They are the best system overall forgreat  FM reception. The
antennas are usually mounted a quarter wavelength apart so that when the
signal is maximum for one antenna it is minimum for the other.  This tends
to eliminate the chop...chop..chop of FM radio.  One antenna is in use at
any given time.  There is an electrical circuit that switches between the
two signals depending on which one is stronger.  Kenwood offered this on
some of their more expensive units a few years back but people didn't
understand the concept and refused to pay for 2 antennas on the car.
Kenwood quietly dropped it from the line a couple of years ago.  It is the
proper way to design a mobile high frequency receiving system for maximum
reliability.  However, the public voted with their wallets and we are the
losers.

Sandy