Why We Won't Build the EFHW8010/EFHW4010 Anymore
Last updated: August 22, 2025.
At RF.Guru, we build antennas for real-world performance, not for marketing specs. After extensive testing and user feedback, we’ve decided to stop producing the EFHW8010 and EFHW4010 because they are compromised designs that underperform across multiple bands.
Better alternative: the EFOC29 — shorter, more efficient, full 80 m coverage, and actually usable on 10 m.
Too Long for Higher Bands
At 40 m wire length, the EFHW8010 is too long for efficient operation on 15, 12, and 10 m. It produces heretical lobes and poor DX angles:
- Poor, high-angle patterns
- Weak low-angle radiation → reduced DX
- Unpredictable in real-world installs
The EFOC29 is 12 m shorter, with a better λ ratio, making it usable on 10 m where the EFHW8010 fails completely.
Full 80 m Coverage
One of the biggest complaints: EFHW8010 bandwidth is too narrow on 80 m, limiting use to CW. The EFOC29 provides full 80 m coverage for SSB and CW without retuning.
Easier Installation
A 40 m wire is impractical for many hams. Often zig-zagged or sloped, which degrades performance. The EFOC29 is shorter and far easier to install while maintaining efficiency across 80–10 m (including 60 m).
EFHW Still Makes Sense — When Optimized
We continue to offer optimized EFHWs that truly work:
- ✅ EFHW16080 (160/80 m Inverted-L)
- ✅ EFHW8040 (80/40 m Inverted-L)
- ✅ EFHW4020 (40/20 m dual-band)
- ✅ EFHW2010 (optimized monoband 20 m)
Note: We do not design EFHWs above 20 m. They are inherently inefficient on 17–10 m. For higher bands we recommend OCFs, phased verticals, or dedicated arrays.
Final Verdict: EFHW8010 Is Obsolete
The EFOC29 outperforms the EFHW8010 in every way:
- ✅ Covers 80–10 m including 60 m
- ✅ Full 80 m coverage (SSB + CW)
- ✅ More efficient impedance match
- ✅ Easier, practical installation
Upgrade to the EFOC29 or one of our proven EFHW models for true multiband performance.
Mini-FAQ
- Why stop EFHW8010/4010? — Too long, narrow 80 m bandwidth, impractical installs, poor higher-band performance.
- What replaces it? — EFOC29 (80–10 m, incl. 60 m) or optimized EFHWs like EFHW16080, EFHW8040, EFHW4020, EFHW2010.
- Is EFHW still valid? — Yes, when limited to one or two bands with correct length and matching.
- Why no EFHW above 20 m? — Because efficiency collapses. We recommend other designs for 17–10 m.
Interested in more technical content? Subscribe to our updates.
Questions or experiences to share? Contact RF.Guru.