EPDM Coatings
rvupgradestore.com Composet Products Custom Yacht Interiors

Author Topic: TV Cable issue  (Read 600 times)

Frisbee22

  • ---
  • Posts: 9
TV Cable issue
« on: September 02, 2017, 11:45:37 AM »
I have a 2004 30 foot Winnebago Brave. I just had the original TV antenna replaced with a King Jack antenna and got rid of the crack handle. Also replaced the front and bedroom TVs with smart TVs.  Since being replaced, I get no cable TV on either main or bedroom TVs and the bedroom TV does not find any of the antenna stations. I have a Winngard switch box and have verified with a Winngard technician that it is functioning properly. I don't believe in coincidences and was wondering if there is a common connection at the original antenna location that could have inadvertently been cut or disconnected? No coax was replaced when the antenna was replaced.  Thanks for any help/suggestions.
 

BobNSam

  • ---
  • Posts: 1215
  • Travel/golf/reading/bridge in any order
Re: TV Cable issue
« Reply #1 on: September 02, 2017, 02:54:24 PM »
What is Winegard switchbox and how verified that it still works?
2017 Newmar Ventana LE
2010 Chevy Equinox LTZ
Road master tow stuff
DirecTV with Genie/Trav'ler Antenna
2+2 USAF Retired (2IDGITS)

B737doc

  • ---
  • Posts: 62
  • 1992 Challenger
Re: TV Cable issue
« Reply #2 on: September 02, 2017, 04:55:08 PM »
Bought a digital antenna, by-passed the winegard thing, get all local channels...
1976 BMW R90/6 "Airhead"
2005 Triumph Bonneville "America"
1992 Challenger Motorcoach

SeilerBird

  • ---
  • Posts: 10940
  • Everything I state is my opinion.
Re: TV Cable issue
« Reply #3 on: September 02, 2017, 05:22:01 PM »
No such thing as a 'digital' antenna. Pure advertising bs. Any tv antenna picks up all digital and analogue channels.
I would like to apologize to anyone I have not yet offended. Please be patient and I will get to you shortly.
My new Pixel camera:
https://photos.app.goo.gl/rMSw5eVkCfKuuEOP2
My portfolio:
https://goo.gl/photos/Cx4SaYhGfYFShSty7
My Grand Canyon shots:
https://photos.app.goo.gl/Nc1AT8tQp25wJwfm1

Frisbee22

  • ---
  • Posts: 9
Re: TV Cable issue
« Reply #4 on: September 02, 2017, 06:09:55 PM »
I might not be calling it the right thing. But basically its a component that was made by Winngard that allows your to select either Cable, Antenna or VCR to 2 different TVs. Internally, it just mechanical switches except for the 12vDC used to amplify the antenna. I contacted Winngard and was pleasantly surprised that they responded within 20 minutes.  Since TV 1 worked correctly when connected to TV1 antenna on the box, I connected the TV to TV2 on the box and the TV worked fine.

Alaskansnowbirds

  • Forum Staff
  • ---
  • *
  • Posts: 2618
Re: TV Cable issue
« Reply #5 on: September 02, 2017, 08:04:45 PM »
You stated that you're not receiving CABLE. Are you receiving OVER THE AIR channels? On the smart TVs when you do a channel search you have to select whether you are searching for cable or over the air channels.
Don & Peg
Alaska/Arizona
Currently located here.
Weather at Camp Verde, AZ.

Frisbee22

  • ---
  • Posts: 9
Re: TV Cable issue
« Reply #6 on: September 02, 2017, 08:20:35 PM »
I am receiving over the air channels on TV 1, not on TV 2.  Neither TV is picking up cable.
All was working fine until the antenna was replaced. Since replacement, TV 1 picks up over the air. TV 2, and outside TV do not. None pick up cable, even after redoing channel search.   

A Traveler

  • ---
  • Posts: 106
Re: TV Cable issue
« Reply #7 on: September 02, 2017, 09:13:46 PM »
Obviously things are not hooked up right. All you can do is check where each and every cable is connected to your antenna, switch box and the TVs themselves.

You made a lot of changes all at once. Somewhere there is a cable (or cables) not connected to the correct port.

John From Detroit

  • ---
  • Posts: 19734
  • ^My New Home^
    • Diabetics Forum
Re: TV Cable issue
« Reply #8 on: September 03, 2017, 07:08:58 AM »
IF you get NO cable TV then the middle cable on the wall plate (The wall plate with the switch and the light and the 12 volt outlet and antenna connection) is not proper. Likely since you do not get OTA on TV-2 I'd guess you've swapped the middle and (Looking at it from the rear) the RIGHT cable. (TV-2)

Sorry to hear of your downgrade of the antanna. That antenna is no where near as good as the one it replaced.
Nothing adds excitement like something that is none of your business
My Home is where I park it.

John Stephens

  • ---
  • Posts: 376
Re: TV Cable issue
« Reply #9 on: September 03, 2017, 02:56:45 PM »

Sorry to hear of your downgrade of the antanna. That antenna is no where near as good as the one it replaced.

Since the original crank up OTA antenna on my Adventurer just fell apart while on vacation, I was thinking about getting one of the new King permanent mount antennas so we wouldn't have to fool with the crank anymore. Please tell me why you have such a low opinion of them. The one I am replacing is 2005 technology that can't get HD, so I can't see how a new King will be any worse. If you have facts and experience with them, please share.
John

2005 Winnebago Adventurer 38J

nvrver

  • ---
  • Posts: 762
Re: TV Cable issue
« Reply #10 on: September 03, 2017, 04:01:16 PM »
John Stephens here is my write up on my Jack antenna, installed in 2013 and it works great.  Should be enough info to use for a search.  Dick nvrver

Re: Winegard RoadStar TV Antenna

Reply #23 on: October 02, 2013, 05:01:53 pm
Charter Life Member Good Sam
RVing since 1984
2006 Winnebago Class C, Ford V-10
2013 Honda CR-V EX AWD
Member WIT - Washoe Winnies

Frisbee22

  • ---
  • Posts: 9
Re: TV Cable issue
« Reply #11 on: September 03, 2017, 05:12:07 PM »
Yes, obviously something was not hooked up right, but I'm stumped. Supposedly, the only coax the installer had to fuss with was disconnected from the old antenna and connecting to the new. The line runs to a plate to provide the 12Vdc for the antenna. It has three connectors. 1. is labeled antenna is connected to the antenna, 2. is labeled to the Winngard 'antenna in' and 3. is not connected tp anything.  Swapping 1 and 2 did not resolve the issue.  Since all the cables in the coach appears to be routed correctly, I am suspecting that there must be an issue at the connector at the antenna. Not sure if the is a splitter joining the coach cable input.  I'll wait until the installer comes back next week and have him fix it.
As for changing out the original antenna, the crank handle was is bad shape and it was a pain turning the antenna to find the best signal.  I like the LED slights helping to adjust the antenna and reception seem slightl improved.

John From Detroit

  • ---
  • Posts: 19734
  • ^My New Home^
    • Diabetics Forum
Re: TV Cable issue
« Reply #12 on: September 03, 2017, 05:46:37 PM »
Why do I have such a low opinion.. Ok.
Basically they don't perform up to advertisement. Oh they perform to Specs all right but  I know how to read the spec sheets and they are NOT better than the Batwing

A basic Batwing (Sensar III) without enhancement is, at the worst, twice the antenna the JACK is (And that is the directional model) it is way way way better than any Omin-directional made.

Add the wingman and you double it again making it twice as good as it was on UHF.

That's nearly twice the range.. ON UHF. 1.414 on VHF.

BUT the range is increased by decreasing the beam width 

How to imagine it

You need two pair of binoculars.  1 low power 'Opera glasses" and the other high power "Field Glasses"

Look at somethign distant.. You can see it better with the higher power "Field Glasses"

But. you will see MORE (a wider field) with the Opera.

So if you are parked in the middle of a lot of stations. Yes the Jack is better

But darn few RV parks are so located.
Nothing adds excitement like something that is none of your business
My Home is where I park it.

A Traveler

  • ---
  • Posts: 106
Re: TV Cable issue
« Reply #13 on: September 03, 2017, 08:58:04 PM »
...The one I am replacing is 2005 technology that can't get HD...

The ANTENNA has absolutely NOTHING to do with whether or not you can get HD. ANYTHING that can serve as an antenna will pick up the signal...ANY signal. I have watched HD broadcasts using a 3-foot piece of wire stuck in the antenna connection on the TV. Worked fine.

This nonsense about needing a "digital" or "HD" antenna is nothing more than sales BS. It sells a lot of unneeded TV antennas, though.

John Stephens

  • ---
  • Posts: 376
Re: TV Cable issue
« Reply #14 on: September 03, 2017, 09:01:16 PM »
Why do I have such a low opinion.. Ok.
Basically they don't perform up to advertisement. Oh they perform to Specs all right but  I know how to read the spec sheets and they are NOT better than the Batwing

A basic Batwing (Sensar III) without enhancement is, at the worst, twice the antenna the JACK is (And that is the directional model) it is way way way better than any Omin-directional made.

Add the wingman and you double it again making it twice as good as it was on UHF.

That's nearly twice the range.. ON UHF. 1.414 on VHF.

John, thank you for your lengthy answer to my question. Unfortunately, I must take issue with two things. First, you failed to realize that I said I was interested in a permanent mount antenna and wanted to get away from the old fashioned crank model because they are too difficult for my wife and obviously, too easy to break. The Sensar you tout is a batwing antenna that must be cranked up and therefore, not in my interest to buy. By the way, if you buy a Sensor IV, it comes with a wingman included. Of course a batwing antenna is going to pull in signals from farther away; it stands taller than a permanently mounted antenna. Stating that it is,"at worst, twice the antenna the Jack is" is nothing more than opinion that hasn't been backed up by fact or specs. The fact that a taller batwing is better than a permanent mount is a tradeoff I am willing to make as long as the difference isn't drastic, and honestly, unless you can support your statement with fact, I have to believe the difference between the two isn't as drastic as you make it sound. Second, your comment earlier indicated that the poster had downgraded his equipment because "that antenna is no where near as good as the one it replaced." But in your explanation to me, you simply stated that the King Jack is not better than the batwing. Which is it? A terrible mistake, or just not any better?

Doing some research into this subject has led me to believe that for my purposes, the King Jack may be the best way to go. The Winegard Rayzor appears to be that company's answer to the Jack, but doesn't include an electronic signal finder, which in my opinion, is well worth it so you don't have to guess at which direction to point the antenna for the best results, something that you are still going to have to do with a batwing antenna. The only possible drawback for some people may be the height of other rooftop equipment on their RV that is in close proximity to the antenna that may block signals for a particular quadrant. Since I have basement a/c and no vents close by that stand taller than the antenna, I won't have that problem.
John

2005 Winnebago Adventurer 38J

John Stephens

  • ---
  • Posts: 376
Re: TV Cable issue
« Reply #15 on: September 03, 2017, 09:11:51 PM »
The ANTENNA has absolutely NOTHING to do with whether or not you can get HD. ANYTHING that can serve as an antenna will pick up the signal...ANY signal. I have watched HD broadcasts using a 3-foot piece of wire stuck in the antenna connection on the TV. Worked fine.

This nonsense about needing a "digital" or "HD" antenna is nothing more than sales BS. It sells a lot of unneeded TV antennas, though.

I am well aware that HD can be picked up by any antenna. However, this antenna picks up analog signals easier than digital and its UHF capabilities are not as good as some of the new ones on the market today, which is where many of the HD signals reside now. I thought I was getting a decent picture on my 40" television that had been installed by the previous owner of the coach but wondered if it was as good as the one I got in the house. OTA HD is almost always better than cable or satellite, but this one didn't seem as bright, clear or sharp. I found out just what I was missing when I stayed at a campground this past vacation that had upgraded their cable system and was offering nothing but HD service. The television came to life and looked just as good, possibly better, than the ones in my house. That told me the antenna wasn't doing its job. So when I say the antenna can't get HD, it really can't get a signal strong enough to provide an adequate HD picture. A lot of it depends on how far away you are from the transmitter and most campgrounds aren't next door to the station's parking lot.
John

2005 Winnebago Adventurer 38J

John From Detroit

  • ---
  • Posts: 19734
  • ^My New Home^
    • Diabetics Forum
Re: TV Cable issue
« Reply #16 on: September 04, 2017, 07:00:52 AM »
OH and I missed the part about "not able to get HDTV"

I have the older technology and am watching HDTV over the air as I type.

The antenna is a radio antenna (Television is a special case of Radio think radio with moving pictures)

IN the old days of ANALOG Tv  the stations broadcasts on  specific channels. numbered originally 1-13m then they dropped 1 and went to 2-13, then they added UHF 14-83 then dropped the higher end so we had UHF 14-69,,  Thus they settled on 2-69  Each chabnel is specified by FCC rules.

Thus the antennas were deisigned to pick up either 2-69 or, if old enough 2-83

Well with the chanbge to digital ,, from the view point of the antenna, ,Not many stations in VHF and in the VHF-Lo (2-6) I think there are only a few remainnig nation wide if any Many noved to UHF for reasons technbical I wont' go intot.  BUT THEY ARE STILL THE SAME BROADCAST CHANNELS.,

The difference.. Well where I am now 12 is still on 12..  But if I move about 2 miles I get different stations (Detroit collection) wher 2-1 2-2 and 2-3 (Chabnnels 2) are actually on broadcasting on the old Channel 7,,, Channels 7 noved to 40 sonething (I think 41)  UHF stations also moved frequency some up some down.  YOu (normnally) Do not need to know the actual carrier frequency (Broadcast channel) as the TV figures it out when you SCAN FOR CHANNELS.. but you do need if you use a Sensar Pro like I do,,  But again the SENSAR PRO gives you the primary (Strongest) then you can scan and ask the TV for what other broadcast channels to search. I peak on one of the lower strength signals here
Nothing adds excitement like something that is none of your business
My Home is where I park it.

Gary RV_Wizard

  • Forum Staff
  • ---
  • *
  • Posts: 60741
  • RVer Emeritus
Re: TV Cable issue
« Reply #17 on: September 04, 2017, 07:29:56 AM »
Quote
However, this antenna picks up analog signals easier than digital

That's impossible, since there is no difference between analog and digital at the antenna. It's all radio waves, which are inherently analog anyway. Onloy the tv tuner can tell the difference.   Perhaps what you are experiencing is poor UHF reception. With the changeover to digital tv, many VHF channels were moved to a UHF band, even though they retain their VHF channel designation. If that "digital signal" happens to be on a UHF band, you may get no or poor signal.
Gary
--------------
Gary Brinck
Summers: Black Mountain, NC
Home: Ocala National Forest, FL

Larry N.

  • ---
  • Posts: 4479
  • Westminster, CO
Re: TV Cable issue
« Reply #18 on: September 04, 2017, 08:21:44 AM »
Quote
The television came to life and looked just as good, possibly better, than the ones in my house. That told me the antenna wasn't doing its job. So when I say the antenna can't get HD, it really can't get a signal strong enough to provide an adequate HD picture. A lot of it depends on how far away you are from the transmitter and most campgrounds aren't next door to the station's parking lot.

And this is why John From Detroit said the batwing (with wingman) is better, since it is directional, in addition to being a little higher, and therefore will (if you rotate it) pick up weaker signals than the omni-directional ones will. However, since you have ruled out the crankup type (they can be electrified), you're stuck with an omni, thus  you'll have a shorter range than would be possible with the other type. If you just put the batwing up without rotating it, however, it will only get good signals if it happens to be pointing at the station, when the station isn't near.

In other words, the better performance of the batwing isn't (mostly) because of height, it's because it's directional, which works better (when aimed) with weak signals.  It's always a trade-off. The height is mostly needed for clearance on the roof to avoid hitting air conditioners and such when rotating the antenna. And, of course, Gary is right on (as usual) about VHF vs. UHF being part of your problem.

So it seems you've decided that having no action needed for the antenna is your desired trade-off -- that's fine once you understand the results of your choice. Hopefully it's more clear now.
Larry and Mary Ann N.
2016 Newmar Ventana 3709 -ISB6.7 XT 360HP
2015 Wrangler Sahara Unlimited toad
Formerly: Trailmanor 2720SL
  de N8GGG

RLSharp

  • ---
  • Posts: 1799
Re: TV Cable issue
« Reply #19 on: September 04, 2017, 09:41:56 AM »
One thing that I am experiencing with the Jack antenna is poor or no reception when our motor home is parked so that the front air conditioner is in direct line to the TV transmitters. If I turn the motor home around and park in the exact same spot, I get good reception. I thought that the Jack antenna was a problem and had a technician look at it. He suggested that the air conditioner was the problem and suggest turning the motor home around. Since the Jack cannot be raised and I need to park with the utilities on the proper side, we just live with questionable reception on a single channel.

R
Richard & Linda
Rochester, NY (summer)
Tucson, AZ (winter)

Gary RV_Wizard

  • Forum Staff
  • ---
  • *
  • Posts: 60741
  • RVer Emeritus
Re: TV Cable issue
« Reply #20 on: September 04, 2017, 10:19:59 AM »
An alternative to the Jack is the Winegard Rayzar. The Razar Automatic does directional tuning at the push of a button. The slightly less elegant Razar Z1 is also directional and requires no cranking. Either one is a better choice than the fixed mount jack, but of course they also cost more. You pretty much get what you pay for in these.

http://www.winegard.com/over-the-air-television-antennas?q=mobile
Gary
--------------
Gary Brinck
Summers: Black Mountain, NC
Home: Ocala National Forest, FL

RLSharp

  • ---
  • Posts: 1799
Re: TV Cable issue
« Reply #21 on: September 04, 2017, 10:51:40 AM »
An alternative to the Jack is the Winegard Rayzar. The Razar Automatic does directional tuning at the push of a button. The slightly less elegant Razar Z1 is also directional and requires no cranking. Either one is a better choice than the fixed mount jack, but of course they also cost more. You pretty much get what you pay for in these.

http://www.winegard.com/over-the-air-television-antennas?q=mobile

My Jack came with the motor home and is fixed in height but can be rotated. Rotation does not help when the air conditioner is in the way. It needs to be higher to get over the air conditioner.

Replacing at this point is not likely. We don't watch any TV except the evening news.

R
Richard & Linda
Rochester, NY (summer)
Tucson, AZ (winter)

ChasA

  • ---
  • Posts: 242
Re: TV Cable issue
« Reply #22 on: September 04, 2017, 11:16:35 AM »
Yes the Jack is directional. Something  I have found is that reception is better with the arrow on the dial pointed 180 from the TV station. As someone has said, the Jack is at a fixed height. That is precisely why I chose to have the original batwing replaced by the dealer as a condition of the sale.
Apex, NC
2010 Winnebago journey Express 34Y (pre DEF)
2007 Saturn Vue

John Stephens

  • ---
  • Posts: 376
Re: TV Cable issue
« Reply #23 on: September 04, 2017, 04:02:00 PM »
And this is why John From Detroit said the batwing (with wingman) is better, since it is directional, in addition to being a little higher, and therefore will (if you rotate it) pick up weaker signals than the omni-directional ones will. However, since you have ruled out the crankup type (they can be electrified), you're stuck with an omni, thus  you'll have a shorter range than would be possible with the other type. If you just put the batwing up without rotating it, however, it will only get good signals if it happens to be pointing at the station, when the station isn't near.

In other words, the better performance of the batwing isn't (mostly) because of height, it's because it's directional, which works better (when aimed) with weak signals.  It's always a trade-off. The height is mostly needed for clearance on the roof to avoid hitting air conditioners and such when rotating the antenna. And, of course, Gary is right on (as usual) about VHF vs. UHF being part of your problem.

So it seems you've decided that having no action needed for the antenna is your desired trade-off -- that's fine once you understand the results of your choice. Hopefully it's more clear now.

Now you have me really confused, because the King Jack antenna I have researched indicates it is directional, just as the batwing. You have to turn it to get the strongest signals. I think you misunderstood that I don't want to have any action whatsoever. All I said was I didn't want to crank it up anymore. I recognize that unidirectional antennas are much stronger than omni, and for that reason, I will not buy an omni.

I really don't care about anyone being able to pull in signals with a piece of wire. I am saying the batwing antenna I have is bad, plain and simple, whether it is because it is old technology, which I assumed and am now being told I am wrong, or because it is nothing more than a piece of garbage. The reason I know that is because at one campground I was at last week, I could only pull in one digital channel and thought it was because we were too far away from a large town to get a decent signal. Then, I talked to my next door neighbor about it and he said he was getting 63 channels on his King Jack. Kinda tells me that his antenna was better than mine.

I wasn't saying that John from Detroit was wrong. He made definitive and strong claims without backing them with fact; just his opinion. So I was simply asking for proof for what he was claiming. It is a given that uni's are better than omni's in terms of strength, but weaker in terms of coverage area. But he was not talking about uni vs. omni; he was addressing a batwing vs. a King Jack, which is another uni and he claims the batwing is at least twice as good. This is what I want answered. If the King uni is that inferior to a Winegard Sensor IV, I will sacrifice having to crank and get the Winegard. But I want proof that is the case. My wife has already broken one crank up style antenna; I don't want it to happen again.
John

2005 Winnebago Adventurer 38J

John Stephens

  • ---
  • Posts: 376
Re: TV Cable issue
« Reply #24 on: September 04, 2017, 04:05:39 PM »
That's impossible, since there is no difference between analog and digital at the antenna. It's all radio waves, which are inherently analog anyway. Onloy the tv tuner can tell the difference.   Perhaps what you are experiencing is poor UHF reception. With the changeover to digital tv, many VHF channels were moved to a UHF band, even though they retain their VHF channel designation. If that "digital signal" happens to be on a UHF band, you may get no or poor signal.

And that is precisely why I started this query with the statement that my antenna is old technology.
John

2005 Winnebago Adventurer 38J

Larry N.

  • ---
  • Posts: 4479
  • Westminster, CO
Re: TV Cable issue
« Reply #25 on: September 04, 2017, 05:09:34 PM »
Quote
Now you have me really confused, because the King Jack antenna I have researched indicates it is directional, just as the batwing. You have to turn it to get the strongest signals. I think you misunderstood that I don't want to have any action whatsoever. All I said was I didn't want to crank it up anymore. I recognize that unidirectional antennas are much stronger than omni, and for that reason, I will not buy an omni.

OK -- two things here. One, I misunderstood your statement about cranking up as not wanting to maneuver the antenna at all. Two, I didn't realize the Jack is directional (they look like omni, to me). But there is another fact, that the batwing has more physical antenna length, which tends to pick up more signal.

BTW, from your original post, it appeared that you were not very knowledgeable about antennas ("2005 technology that can't get HD") and you mentioned King antenna, but not which one (I thought you were referring to the King's I'd seen, which it turns out were King Omni antennas). So we didn't know your background, and having seen many people with misconceptions about so-called "HD" antennas we attempted to address that. You've now made it more clear about your knowledge level and also about what you want and don't want.

A properly working batwing should outperform the rather tiny Jack, even if they're both directional, but apparently it'll be quite a bit less convenient than the Jack. And at least part of the basis for this statement is that, in every antenna I've seen (ham, CB, TV, AM/FM, etc.) the ones that use electronic "tricks" to get the electrical length for proper antenna operation into a smaller space will lose efficiency, won't get as strong a signal as the ones that use proper physical length elements.

Now this isn't saying those smaller units don't work, they do work, and often fairly well, just not AS well as the larger units.

Hopefully the two-way communication here is now getting more clear... :)
« Last Edit: September 04, 2017, 05:12:02 PM by Larry N. »
Larry and Mary Ann N.
2016 Newmar Ventana 3709 -ISB6.7 XT 360HP
2015 Wrangler Sahara Unlimited toad
Formerly: Trailmanor 2720SL
  de N8GGG

John Stephens

  • ---
  • Posts: 376
Re: TV Cable issue
« Reply #26 on: September 04, 2017, 10:52:36 PM »
Larry - My apologies for not being more clear with my terminology and for starting my post sounding like a complete idiot. I think you can see my train of thought regarding this issue: a neighbor tells me he is getting a far better reception from his Jack than I am from my batwing, which is 12 years old and has never worked well. So when my wife broke the crank, I decided to buy a Jack so she wouldn't have to fool with it again. Then, John from Detroit says the batwing is at least twice as good as the Jack in a post to someone else - the unit I was ready to buy is now being called inferior. I simply wanted to know the facts behind this statement or if it was merely an unbacked up opinion so I would know if I was going to make a mistake. Yes, I know the quality difference between uni and omni and I was into CB back in the 60's and 70's and know quite well what you stated about shortcuts never being as good. A 3' CB antenna will never outperform a 9' whip because of the wavelength. I am willing to accept a bit less reception signal strength for a fixed uni, knowing full well its height will never provide as good a signal as a considerably taller batwing. However, I am not willing to accept a signal that is less than half of the batwing, which is what John was stating, and if that is factual, I will stay with the crank up batwing. From all the conversation several members, including yourself, have had regarding this issue since it came up, I am now of the opinion that John was overstating the actual negativity of the comparison and the difference isn't really that great. If someone can disclaim that statement, please clarify, but right now, I have read more favorable reviews of the King Jack than I have negative.

I also do not have the problem that many posters have brought up regarding something blocking the signal to the shorter Jack. I have basement a/c and the Jack will still be the tallest structure on the roof of the coach, being roughly the same height as the Dish located about five feet away. This was something I had already taken into consideration when contemplating buying the Jack. It stands 8.9" above the roof.
John

2005 Winnebago Adventurer 38J

Larry N.

  • ---
  • Posts: 4479
  • Westminster, CO
Re: TV Cable issue
« Reply #27 on: September 05, 2017, 07:08:33 AM »
It's much more clear now, John, and I'm sure that the Jack will work for you -- best of luck.
Larry and Mary Ann N.
2016 Newmar Ventana 3709 -ISB6.7 XT 360HP
2015 Wrangler Sahara Unlimited toad
Formerly: Trailmanor 2720SL
  de N8GGG

 

Hosted by Over The Network