I have modified PCMCIA Wi-Fi cards to take external aerials and can confirm what Simon said about things being a tad tricky at 2.4GHz !
The built in aerial is carefully designed to match the transceiver chip and must be removed from circuit if an external aerial is to be used. You would otherwise have two aerials working in parallel = impedance mismatch. The fact that you have an RF test point on the PCB is helpful. This is unlikely to be a true external aerial connector, but more like a coaxial test point and is used in the production testing stages with an automated prober. You can disconnect the internal aerial and use the solder pad of the test connector for your coax cable connection.
It is always best to draw the circuit of the transceiver output stage feeding the aerial so as to understand what components are in play. You can have important filters and matching components in such stages that must remain in circuit.
With regard to external aerials.... you MUST use decent quality coaxial cable to connect between the transceiver and the aerial. RG58U would not be my choice at 2.4GHz ! Decent PTFE miniature coax with silver plated conductors is my coax of choice for such applications. The coax feed should be kept as short as practical as every additional cm is additional signal loss, which can be significant on the receive path. Look up the coaxial cable loss figures at 2.4GHz or there about and you will see how much loss you will have for a given length. It is imperative that all connections are of good quality and tails are kept as short as practical.
External aerials can be advantageous over the small internal types but remember, the internal aerial is a well designed and, for it’s size, pretty efficient. Replacing it with a poorly designed aerial on a long coaxial feed will likely result in appalling performance inferior to the internal aerial. When considering external aerials I recommend you limit your high quality silver plated coaxial cable to less than 1m and use a quality aerial that gives true gain and not the stuff claimed on cheap OMNIDIRECTIONAL far east Wi-Fi antennas ! Many such antennas claim 8dBi or 12dBi gain yet when I have tested them they are very poor performers. When dissected they contain very cheaply produced stacked dipoles made from poor quality FR4 PCB material and tin plated tracks. Not all are bad but be warned that cheap ones do tend to be poorer performers.
A quality brand name antenna/aerial is recommended for serious work. Think Cisco, Racal or one of the really well known Wi-Fi brands and you will be fine. These will cost you a lot of money though !
One area where you can get VFM with regard to antennas is Yagi’s or patches. These seem to perform well even when sourced from the Far East via e*ay. The amount of gain that such a directional antenna produces tends to overcome it’s inherent inefficiencies ! Cheap ones rarely provide the gain they claim but are normally still pretty good. i.e a claimed 18dBi Yagi will often produce 12dBi useful gain on the antenna test range. They can be very cheap as well. The down side of such antennas is that they are very directional.
Consider this....
I have had excellent results placing an unmodified USB Wi-Fi 'stick' at the focal point of a parabolic dish. = High performance directional gain !
P.S. That 'Brass' track you mentioned....it's actually GOLD plated copper = high performance at microwave frequencies
Have fun