Hi, I was looking for a better antenna for my 2M HT (Vx-120) today and ended up on the Nagoya and Diamond websites. Nagoya has more technical info than Diamond. I'm aware that A and E have many fakes, and that I have to shop via an authorised dealer. No issue there. In the 40cm (ish) bracket, both manufacturers have many options, and the antennas are described as 1\4 wave at 2M and 1\2 wave at 70cm. The two antennas below seem quite popular. E.g. Diamond RH771: 144/430MHz(2m/70cm) Length:40cm / Weight:42g Gain:2.15dBi(430MHz) / Max.rating:10W FM / Impedance:50ohms Connector:BNC-P / Type:1/4wave(144MHz),1/2wave radialless(430MHz) (http://www.diamond-ant.co.jp/english/amateur/antenna/ante_3hand/ante_hand1.html) Nagoya NA-771 Frequency : 144/430 MHz Gain : 2.15 dBi Length : 39 cm VSWR : Less 1.5:1 Impedance : 50 ohms Connector : BNC/SMA Male/SMA Female (https://www.nagoya.com.tw/en/product-384799/NA-771.html) (https://www.nagoya.com.tw/v_comm/in...lang=2&id=384799&file_name=p_160325_07186.pdf) Two questions arise from the above information: 1. Given that a HT antenna is only half of the antenna system (the bottom half being the HT chassis ground), what do they test against when coming up with these gains and SWR readings? a) Another identical opposed antenna (that's makes a dipole). b) Some 'industry standard' model of a universal HT antenna body? c) Nothing other than the metal body of the analyzer that's taking the readings - which makes the size of the analyzer important? 2. At 2m (145MHz), why would anyone want a 1\4 wave antenna on their HT - as a 1\4 wave needs an artificial ground or matched lower radiating element (making it a dipole) in order to work correctly? The SWR of a 1\4 wave HT monopole attached to a much shorter HT body to radiate against is very high. See below. I made a 4NEC2 model of the UV5R body attached a 52cm element at 144MHz over an average ground @ 1.8m. SWR=26. This doesn't account for capacitive coupling to a human body though. I'm aware that many recommend the use of a 'tiger tail' counterpoise to improve reception on HTs, but all this is really doing is creating the lower leg of a dipole. Why would an aftermarket antenna manufacturer create a 1\4 wave HT antenna that needs a tiger tail to operate correctly - and then not tell you about it. I'm missing something here, or perhaps I'm meant to be reading the spec sheet and 'deducing' that I need to add a ground plane or tiger tail - in which case why are 1\4 wave antennas marketed as HT antennas(?) Is this some new definition of marketing? The above antennas already have matching networks in them, so why don't they match the antenna to the shortened HT chassis? This is also possible according to 4NEC2. The sim below shows the same 1\4 wave monopole with a T match network (2 inductors and a cap) and the SWR comes down to <1.1. I'm guessing that as they don't know the HT chassis dimensions, they just tune the matching network to something else...or maybe they do try and match it to a 'standard' HT chassis but they don't tell us what that is. I'm not the only one that's noticed 1\4 wave HT antennas offer high SWR. The review below by Craig McVeay (N0CSM) sheds some light on this. He uses a field strength meter to check the radiation on a Yaesu rubber duck and a Diamond, with and without a tiger tail. The Diamond performs much worse than that stock Yaesu, both without the tiger tail. The Diamond out performs the lot with the tiger tail. At a guess, I'd say the Yaesu ducky performs better on its own because Yaesu actually matched it to the HT that they also made and shipped it with, whereas Diamond didn't - they just made a standard 1\4 wave. A lot of the HT antennas hide behind marketing and branding, so any further insight is appreaciated. Thanks.