rubber duck...

I remember a thread or two about the 5.5dBi rubber duck range extenders for
the Linksys that are sold at Radio Shack. What was the concensus on those?
I found a different rubber duck range extender that connects to my Netgear
WAP and ordered it, so even if they aren't worth it, it is too late <g>.
So, any opinion about them?

I don't need much for what I'm doing, but I do need a little bit of a boost.
I have a room in my house where I lose connectivity occasionally and it
doesn't seem to be caused by interferance from other devices... it just
seems to be a bit of a weak signal. Going from a 2.2dBi antenna to a 5.5dBi
antenna would logically provide a boost, but I recall some opinions in that
thread that indicated that perhaps those rubber duck antennas aren't exactly
what they are advertized as being(?)

"i'm_tired" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:dt_jb.578105$Oz4.553671@rwcrnsc54...
> I remember a thread or two about the 5.5dBi rubber duck range extenders
for
> the Linksys that are sold at Radio Shack. What was the concensus on
those?
> I found a different rubber duck range extender that connects to my Netgear
> WAP and ordered it, so even if they aren't worth it, it is too late <g>.
> So, any opinion about them?
>
> I don't need much for what I'm doing, but I do need a little bit of a
boost.
> I have a room in my house where I lose connectivity occasionally and it
> doesn't seem to be caused by interferance from other devices... it just
> seems to be a bit of a weak signal. Going from a 2.2dBi antenna to a
5.5dBi
> antenna would logically provide a boost, but I recall some opinions in
that
> thread that indicated that perhaps those rubber duck antennas aren't
exactly
> what they are advertized as being(?)
>
>
One participant in this group panned the antenna and claimed she has run
some tests on the antenna with professional test equipment, yet she has not
posted any quantitative data from her tests. Here is her web site where she
has promised to publish the results of her tests:
http://www.geocities.com/ritaberk200...nna/index.html

I see no reason to disbelieve Radio Shack's published specifications and 5.5
dBi is a little better than 3 dBi improvement over the stock Linksys
antennas. Netgear is probably the same. This should translate into a
modest signal and range improvement.

Don W.

I was the guy who went out, bought and tested them on my Linksys WAP11. Do
a google news group search for "radio shack orfanakos" and you will find all
the different discussions on this topic.

My tests were simple:

1) Using NetStumbler, and an Orinoco Silver card, I tested orig. antenna
versus RS antenna - and there was a measurable improvment at various
distances and locations.

2) Using the orig. antenna - I took my laptop to spots were I had weak or
no signal..... Then I changed antenna to RS, and went to the same
spots...and the signal was better/improved.

Scientific tests - no
Earth shattering results - no
Measurable Improvements - yes
Drastic Improvements - not really

I kept the antenna and now use them on two WAP11's I have set up as a
wireless bridge connecting two buildings together.....about 75 feet apart.

The other part that helped was hacking the WAP11's and increasing signal
strength.

http://www.seattlewireless.net/index.cgi/Wap11Hack

Jim Orfanakos wrote:
> I was the guy who went out, bought and tested them on my Linksys
> WAP11. Do a google news group search for "radio shack orfanakos" and
> you will find all the different discussions on this topic.
>
> My tests were simple:
>
> 1) Using NetStumbler, and an Orinoco Silver card, I tested orig.
> antenna versus RS antenna - and there was a measurable improvment at
> various distances and locations.
>
> 2) Using the orig. antenna - I took my laptop to spots were I had
> weak or no signal..... Then I changed antenna to RS, and went to the
> same spots...and the signal was better/improved.
>
> Scientific tests - no
> Earth shattering results - no
> Measurable Improvements - yes
> Drastic Improvements - not really

My antenna arrived yesterday. My results are the same as yours. I do not
notice any significant increase in range, but I do see a general
"strengthening" of my signal. The room I was complaining about still has a
rather low signal, but now it is strong enough that I do not lose my
connection.

i'm_tired <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> My antenna arrived yesterday. My results are the same as yours. I do not
> notice any significant increase in range, but I do see a general
> "strengthening" of my signal. The room I was complaining about still has a
> rather low signal, but now it is strong enough that I do not lose my
> connection.

I see the same thing with a $19.95 mag mount 5.5dbi antenna from HyperTech.
There doesn't seem to be any measurable change at all using NetStumbler, if
I am within good signal range of the internal antenna, but at the fringe, I
can at least see a WAP with the antenna that doesn't show up at all without
it. Not much change, certainly not the difference between no connection
and a solid connection in a particular spot.

Corner reflectors helped my setup at home reach my favorite couch ;-)

http://www.rahul.net/dold/clarence/S...0-strength.htm
http://www.freeantennas.com/projects/Ez-10/




--
---
Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley (Lake County) CA USA 38.8-122.5

<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:bn70sh$bth$(E-Mail Removed)...
> i'm_tired <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> > My antenna arrived yesterday. My results are the same as yours. I do
not
> > notice any significant increase in range, but I do see a general
> > "strengthening" of my signal. The room I was complaining about still
has a
> > rather low signal, but now it is strong enough that I do not lose my
> > connection.
>
> I see the same thing with a $19.95 mag mount 5.5dbi antenna from
HyperTech.
> There doesn't seem to be any measurable change at all using NetStumbler,
if
> I am within good signal range of the internal antenna, but at the fringe,
I
> can at least see a WAP with the antenna that doesn't show up at all
without
> it. Not much change, certainly not the difference between no connection
> and a solid connection in a particular spot.
>
> Corner reflectors helped my setup at home reach my favorite couch ;-)
>
> http://www.rahul.net/dold/clarence/S...0-strength.htm
> http://www.freeantennas.com/projects/Ez-10/
>
>
>
>
> --
> ---
> Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley (Lake County) CA USA 38.8-122.5

The 'Radio Shack' antenna is not a client antenna -- it connects directly
with the Linksys access point. I bought one of the HyperTech mag-mounts
also and I suspect the additional gain is all 'eaten' by the tiny coax.

Don W.

Don W. wrote:
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
<snip>
>
> The 'Radio Shack' antenna is not a client antenna -- it connects
> directly with the Linksys access point. I bought one of the
> HyperTech mag-mounts also and I suspect the additional gain is all
> 'eaten' by the tiny coax.


I have to add something here. I'm certain that most of my limitations are
due to a lack of power from my client. While using a client antenna and the
new 5.5 antenna on the WAP, my range is greatly increased over using a
client antenna and the old 2.2 dBi antenna on the WAP.

Last week, I tried to connect to my WAP from another house in my
neighborhood. I have an Orinico b/g Gold and a 12 dBi cantenna. I could
see the WAP but I couldn't get a useful connection. Today, with the new 5.5
dBi antenna on the WAP, I was able to connect from the neighbors house while
using my 12 dBi cantenna. I picked a dozen line of sight locations in my
neighborhood to try to connect from. I tried with the old antenna and then
with the new antenna on the WAP. I was able to establish useful
communications as far as approx 1000 feet with the cantenna client and the
5.5 dBi WAP. 300 or so feet was maximum with the same client antenna/radio
and the 2.2 dBi original antenna on the WAP.

My comment in my other post about the one room in my house where my
connection drops was not including using a client antenna. The 5.5 dBi WAP
antenna solved the problem of the bad connection in that room all by itself
without any use of a client antenna. Without using my cantenna, I notice no
real range extention (I think due to limitations of the client radio), but I
do notice a stronger connection wherever I was already able to connect.

Don W. <dNOSPAMwiddersAThotmail.com> wrote:
> The 'Radio Shack' antenna is not a client antenna -- it connects directly
> with the Linksys access point. I bought one of the HyperTech mag-mounts
> also and I suspect the additional gain is all 'eaten' by the tiny coax.

The coax, which has no number on it, is about the same thickness as the
cord on my Sony headphones. I agree that it's not fat enough for all of
the electrons to squeeze through unabated. ;-)

--
---
Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley (Lake County) CA USA 38.8-122.5

<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:bn7jth$he0$(E-Mail Removed)...
> Don W. <dNOSPAMwiddersAThotmail.com> wrote:
> > The 'Radio Shack' antenna is not a client antenna -- it connects
directly
> > with the Linksys access point. I bought one of the HyperTech mag-mounts
> > also and I suspect the additional gain is all 'eaten' by the tiny coax.
>
> The coax, which has no number on it, is about the same thickness as the
> cord on my Sony headphones. I agree that it's not fat enough for all of
> the electrons to squeeze through unabated. ;-)
>
> --
> ---
> Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley (Lake County) CA USA 38.8-122.5

Try hanging a little abatement near the antenna and see if the electrons
will take it! ;-)

Don W.

If the abatement is very cheap and cheezy, it will probably work.

--
Bob Alston

bobalston9 AT aol DOT com
"Don W." <dNOSPAMwiddersAThotmail.com> wrote in message
news:nYOdnaAty-Y6wgqiXTWc-(E-Mail Removed)...
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:bn7jth$he0$(E-Mail Removed)...
> > Don W. <dNOSPAMwiddersAThotmail.com> wrote:
> > > The 'Radio Shack' antenna is not a client antenna -- it connects
> directly
> > > with the Linksys access point. I bought one of the HyperTech
mag-mounts
> > > also and I suspect the additional gain is all 'eaten' by the tiny
coax.
> >
> > The coax, which has no number on it, is about the same thickness as the
> > cord on my Sony headphones. I agree that it's not fat enough for all of
> > the electrons to squeeze through unabated. ;-)
> >
> > --
> > ---
> > Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley (Lake County) CA USA 38.8-122.5
>
> Try hanging a little abatement near the antenna and see if the electrons
> will take it! ;-)
>
> Don W.
>
>