signal strength comparison between 802.11 routers

Anyone know where I can see published a comparative study of the signal
strength of various routers?

I am having what I suspect are everyone's problems with transmitting a
signal through a few thin walls in an 80s building and (for example) Buffalo
tells me that I may have a problem with those thin walls and a virtual line
of sight between my router and my NIC. I keep on getting a high signal and
a low signal a few minutes later switching between those reports for no
reason at will. Curiously it doesnt seem to switch between a low signal and
a high one, always the other way around. At the moment I am getting no
signal at all and want to try some other routers

No interference shows on NetStumbler at all. No I haven't got a 2.4HGx
phone or microwave and I HAVE made sure that my signal on channel 6 isn't
interfered with by my neighbour's one which is on channel 11 through a thick
concrete floor but which nevertheless shows up as an excellent signal
whenever I (accidentally or am forced to) connect to it. What is more
baffling is that a scan in my area shows networks which are up to a block
away from me through numerous walls whereas my own router wont RETAIN a
signal through those few thin walls for more than a few hours at all.

Buffalo says that if I get even a low signal, I will get good throughput
which is true. However weak the signal, I get the same throughput. So I
suspect that throughput isn't what counts and wonder why no manufacturer
quotes signal strength.

Has anyone done output tests showing signal strength comparison on Netgear,
Buffalo, Siemens, and ultimately SWC routers? I know that magazines are
starting to take signal strength seriously as they are starting to cite
802.11n machines which have a HIGHER signal strength and up to three aerials
on the router

Try putting a silver foil covered A4 card bent in half at 90deg behind the
AP aerial and if poss also the receiving end.
You may need to try USB adapter on (up to 5m) of cable which can easily be
positioned for best signal, higher is usually better,
also easy to use with silver foil backing.
Regards,
Martin

"Martin²" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:41ec7388$0$14580$(E-Mail Removed)...
> Try putting a silver foil covered A4 card bent in half at 90deg behind the
> AP aerial and if poss also the receiving end.
I had a strong suspicion that this was the problem rather than signal
strength??? I simply dont understand how anyone can produce a NIC card
which is DESIGNED to go at the back of a desktop computer, stick out three
inches, be surrounded by metal and still work properly?

The Buffalo router doesn't actually have an aerial at all!

> You may need to try USB adapter on (up to 5m) of cable which can easily be
positioned for best signal, higher is usually better,

Curiously enough I have also had this strong suspicion that when I use those
pocket-clipped USB pickups situated at the end of long USB extensions and
wave them around, I don't get these problems as badly

Many thanks