That is a superficial comparison of the two simulators. Now that you are a member of the ham-antennas group, you should find and read the posts in that group from W0LEV comparing the two simulators.
The bottom line is that 4NEC2 will give ¡°better¡± results, but is much more difficult to learn.
Caveat: I¡¯ve been using Roy¡¯s EZNEC for decades but have never used 4NEC2 (I have downloaded it and plan to start learning it at some point in the future when I am ready to erect antennas on my new property).
I know Dave Eckhardt, W0LEV, pretty well, having worked in the same location as he did at StorageTek in CO and having had many personal conversations with him over the years about antennas and propagation. One should read his posts carefully. He is very knowledgeable about antennas and antenna modeling.
DaveD
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Oct 14, 2022, at 05:25, F1AMM <18471@...> wrote:
?4nec2 is much less efficient than EZNEC. EZNEC offers, in particular, a very good antenna geometry editor. EZNEC "opens" .NEC files but unfortunately they are only rarely compatible because 4nec2 authorizes variables in GW cards (lines) which EZNEC does not support.
Now that EZNEC is "free", we must abandon 4nec2 as we abandoned MMANA-GAL Basic for 4nec2.
--
F1AMM Fran?ois
-----Message d'origine-----
De la part de Joseph DiVincenzo
14 octobre 2022 11:05
