Maybe I'm doing something wrong but I never seem to see more than 100Mbps out of 2.4G antennas built into routers or WAP. 5G antennas seem to be fine. The 2.4G APs seem to be rated up to 300Mbps but I can't imagine that happening from what I've seen. Have a look at the Luxul XAP-1210 for example. It says up to 300Mbps and I would like to tell customers that. Is it really going to happen? What am I doing wrong?

Where to start???

First it's a single band AP. So it will always take lowest common denominator. You need dual band so that 2.4 devices don't affect your faster N/AC devices. Secondly, 300 is the max speed through the 5ghz radio and that's line-of-sight with you standing next to the device. I'm guessing max 2.4 is 120-150 best case scenario.

Keep in mind, 2.4 signal travels (penetrates) much better than 5. So you aren't likely to cover any large house with 1 5ghz radio.

If you want the output higher, consider using a dual band AP with a 3x3:3 MIMO chain. MIMO helps your overall capacity meaning a 3x3:3 MIMO AP can produce higher speeds than a 2x2:2 AP. Also, test on more than one device. Devices themselves will affect your speed tests along with how many devices are connected wirelessly.

You're not doing anything wrong. Your expectations are ill conceived.

Manufacturers are in the exaggeration business. "Maximum" speeds are never achieved in real world scenarios.

ever see a $199 best buy receiver claim to output 150watts by 7? lol

what exactly is it that you think needs to go that fast wirelessly?

I want them not to think they are getting a slower speed than what the ISP speed is rated at when they realize they can test it. The Luxul XAP310 is an entry level solution that advertises 300Mbps and I was hoping it wasn't just advertising. I've used the dual band Luxul XAP-1510 included in one of their controller kits and the 2.4G definitely does not go over 100mbps right next to the device, when most people have service faster than that. How many of you Luxul dealers are installing the entry level kit with XAP310?

I"ll have to check Luxul to see if their access points have these features.

Those specs are theoretical speeds in vacuum of space.
Totally unachievable by anything you and I can get our hands on.
Many times, those are done in anechoic chamber with two matched (identical) devices performing in bridge modes.

Any real world scenario will have other networks in range that will degrade performance as well as other devices that will ping your radio.

Your devices are also not 100% efficient and scan other radios while connected to the AP in question.

It's like saying that you can get your bicycle up to 200MPH. Sure it can if you drop it out of an airplane and let it reach terminal velocity.
Realistic? No. But it's possible, right? :-)

Cut rated performance in half or more and you might be getting close(er).

This comes up a bit when clients complain about not getting the 150Mb they are paying for from their ISP.

First, the device may have a cheap received (iPhone) and not realistically going to achieve those speeds.

Secondly, (this may be totally untrue) but I explain the total advertised ISP speed as a total for the home, and if multiple devices are on the network, there's no way each device can reach the max speed. It's going to be divided somehow.

It's an ignorant way of explaining it, but simple enough to get past the initial complaint.

XAP310s suck for me and disappoint my clients, i've started only spec'ing the 1410s and 1510s and made them my starting point APs before going to Ruckus.

Don't forget that wireless is "half duplex", so you'll only get half the connection speed anyway. MIMO antenna helps this, along with multiple device support, but you will rarely get the full connection speed with wireless.
I recently upgraded my service to 200mb, hardwired everything I could, added a 3x3 MIMO Access point and with nothing else connected, was able to test out at 176mb. Under real world conditions (multiple phones / tablets going, + regular web traffic) and it tests out 80-120mb....

I'm pretty sure some kind of aerodynamic suit would be needed as well as an enclosure for the bike if you want to hit 200MPH.

Impaqt covers it pretty well!

You're trying to get maximum advertised speed out of an entry level device. If this were your first electronics product, maybe you'd expect that. But you?

I didn't realize the "half duplex" thing. Great point.

As for the entire concept of the number attached to the thing, measure their TV screen, then compare the actual size to the advertised size. Note that TVs are called such and such "class" size, an invitation to exaggerate. And this is easily verified numbers, inches or cm, and they exaggerate! Then consider that the same TV, in Canada, might be called a few percent smaller. Also consider that when it came time to figure out how to put a number on a TV, they chose the largest possible number that one could easily measure on a TV -- the diagonal. They should have chosen the height, because that more realistically gives an impression of size. Just be glad they didn't choose perimeter!

Terminal velocity is actually faster but I already figured in a coefficient for drag -- so there. (-:

I just tested a ruckus R500 install we did and regularly connected to the access points at 370+ MBps these were with distances of typically 30-40' from each access point.

Impressive... Screen shot worthy in fact... What was the test client?

This comment reminded me of something else:

You mean the UP TO 150 mbps they're paying for, right? The modem has advertised values, which means they're subject to being exaggerated from reality, but so does their internet service.

Ever go to a sale where everything in the store was for sale for UP TO 50% off? There are things for 50% off, but they're hard to find. Anything for sale at any price fits within the category of "up to" fifty per cent.