Why?

[KB3LAZ]

Why is it that people are obsessed with RG-213? Dig out your calculator, some paper, or even an online loss calculator. 213 has more loss than 9913. Significantly more loss.

Another thing that gets me is the people that will use LMR-400 on 160-20...hum..The loss on 2MHz with 100' of 9913 is like .17 db. with a 100w transmitter what are you losing, like 4W. :chin: Hell even on 20m the loss is only like .5db.

Am I missing something here?

[KJ3N]

That's nothing.

My personal favorite is when someone thinks that using 50 feet or more of RG-8X to feed a VHF/UHF antenna is a good idea. :roll:

[KB3LAZ]

That's nothing.

My personal favorite is when someone thinks that using 50 feet or more of RG-8X to feed a VHF/UHF antenna is a good idea. :roll:

Lol....

[PA5COR]

I use a little bit beetter quality as LMR 400 for HF, all 60 feet to the anntenna, why? because i can, and while the losses might be very low with 100 watt, look at 1000 watt.

Why make lots of power to waste it in coax? same is for reception.
On 6 and up i use 1/2 inch Ecoflex 15 ultra low loss for all 70 feet to the antenna's
Same reasoning, why make power and use good antenna's to waste it with run of the mill coax.

http://www.dolstra.nl/Z&L-amateur/Coaxk ... flex15.pdf (http://www.dolstra.nl/Z&L-amateur/Coaxkabel/ecoflex15.pdf)

The antenna system as a whole should have no bad links.
But maybe people rather buy an expensive transeiver to show off and skimp on the antenna system?


:doh:

[KB3LAZ]

I use a little bit beetter quality as LMR 400 for HF, all 60 feet to the anntenna, why? because i can, and while the losses might be very low with 100 watt, look at 1000 watt.

Why make lots of power to waste it in coax? same is for reception.
On 6 and up i use 1/2 inch Ecoflex 15 ultra low loss for all 70 feet to the antenna's
Same reasoning, why make power and use good antenna's to waste it with run of the mill coax.

http://www.dolstra.nl/Z&L-amateur/Coaxk ... flex15.pdf (http://www.dolstra.nl/Z&L-amateur/Coaxkabel/ecoflex15.pdf)

The antenna system as a whole should have no bad links.
But maybe people rather buy an expensive transeiver to show off and skimp on the antenna system?


:doh:

I can afford to lose 40-60 watts out of 1000 on 75m. However my point was that if you go by the specs on RG-213 it has more loss than 9913 yet people hold it in higher regard, why?

Heck if you wanna use hardline on HF then be my guest. That is not my point.

[PA5COR]

I use a little bit beetter quality as LMR 400 for HF, all 60 feet to the anntenna, why? because i can, and while the losses might be very low with 100 watt, look at 1000 watt.

Why make lots of power to waste it in coax? same is for reception.
On 6 and up i use 1/2 inch Ecoflex 15 ultra low loss for all 70 feet to the antenna's
Same reasoning, why make power and use good antenna's to waste it with run of the mill coax.

http://www.dolstra.nl/Z&L-amateur/Coaxk ... flex15.pdf (http://www.dolstra.nl/Z&L-amateur/Coaxkabel/ecoflex15.pdf)

The antenna system as a whole should have no bad links.
But maybe people rather buy an expensive transeiver to show off and skimp on the antenna system?


:doh:

I can afford to lose 40-60 watts out of 1000 on 75m. However my point was that if you go by the specs on RG-213 it has more loss than 9913 yet people hold it in higher regard, why?

Heck if you wanna use hardline on HF then be my guest. That is not my point.

Every old timer advises RG213 to the new hams, why? because they then used it, and they never changed their way.
Yes you can loose 100 watts out of 1000 and nobody will be able to tell.
Point is your reception goes down as well, wich on 20 and higher with no bandnoise will make or break a connection.

But anyone is freee to do and use what he/she wants.

:mrgreen:

[N8YX]

9913 can get enough water in it to cause problems. 213 can't.

And I can get such deals on -400 that feeding my "pharm" is no problem, expen$e-wise.

Some of my feedlines have remote coax switchboxes tied to their ends, and from there the box might feed an HF, a VHF or a UHF array. Using low-loss coax up to that point makes sense, at least in my application.

That said: I do have a few runs of 9913 up but keep a real close watch on the SWR of a given line.

[N2RJ]

Why is it that people are obsessed with RG-213? Dig out your calculator, some paper, or even an online loss calculator. 213 has more loss than 9913. Significantly more loss.

Choice is often dictated by what the stores carrry. The stores carry rolls and rolls of 213. I use Davis RF bury flex where I have to use flexible cable.


Another thing that gets me is the people that will use LMR-400 on 160-20...hum..The loss on 2MHz with 100' of 9913 is like .17 db. with a 100w transmitter what are you losing, like 4W. :chin: Hell even on 20m the loss is only like .5db.

Am I missing something here?

Some people think that the difference in loss is enough to warrant using that particular cable. Placebo effect, probably.

As for me, I use LDF4-50A heliax for my HF runs primarily for durability reasons. The low loss is a nice extra, but not why I chose it.

[KB3LAZ]

Nice. John, Ryan, that makes perfect sense. Never heard of the durability issues with 9913. Now as to what I use. I bought it surplus, it is military grade stuff. Believe it or not there was a phone number on the roll when I got it so I called it. The lady on the phone told me that it was discontinued but that it was 50 ohm and gave me the loss factor which is .98db per 100' per 150Mhz. It is a bit larger in diameter than 9913/213 or what not. Sure is a bitch to get the PL-259s on the end. :lol:

Can't bitch too much as it was a flea market find. 1000' for 100$.

[KB3LAZ]

I use a little bit beetter quality as LMR 400 for HF, all 60 feet to the anntenna, why? because i can, and while the losses might be very low with 100 watt, look at 1000 watt.

Why make lots of power to waste it in coax? same is for reception.
On 6 and up i use 1/2 inch Ecoflex 15 ultra low loss for all 70 feet to the antenna's
Same reasoning, why make power and use good antenna's to waste it with run of the mill coax.

http://www.dolstra.nl/Z&L-amateur/Coaxk ... flex15.pdf (http://www.dolstra.nl/Z&L-amateur/Coaxkabel/ecoflex15.pdf)

The antenna system as a whole should have no bad links.
But maybe people rather buy an expensive transeiver to show off and skimp on the antenna system?


:doh:

I can afford to lose 40-60 watts out of 1000 on 75m. However my point was that if you go by the specs on RG-213 it has more loss than 9913 yet people hold it in higher regard, why?

Heck if you wanna use hardline on HF then be my guest. That is not my point.

Every old timer advises RG213 to the new hams, why? because they then used it, and they never changed their way.
Yes you can loose 100 watts out of 1000 and nobody will be able to tell.
Point is your reception goes down as well, wich on 20 and higher with no bandnoise will make or break a connection.

But anyone is freee to do and use what he/she wants.

:mrgreen:

That reminds me...Anyone ever make a dipole or any antenna out of coax. Something such as a Double bazooka (just an example)? I have heard guys discuss making a loop out of coax.

The though just kind popped into my mind...

[N2RJ]

Nice. John, Ryan, that makes perfect sense. Never heard of the durability issues with 9913.

9913 is durable for most amateur applications, but 9913 is not Heliax. Heliax is much more durable because it is basically a pipe with dense foam inside and a solid or hollow center with a hollow wall. It's not braided so it won't wick moisture.

I also have a 210' run, so yes I like the fact that heliax has low attenuation.

[KB3LAZ]

Nice. John, Ryan, that makes perfect sense. Never heard of the durability issues with 9913.

9913 is durable for most amateur applications, but 9913 is not Heliax. Heliax is much more durable because it is basically a pipe with dense foam inside and a solid or hollow center with a hollow wall. It's not braided so it won't wick moisture.

I also have a 210' run, so yes I like the fact that heliax has low attenuation.

Holly shit dude...Oh BTW, I know what Heliax is. I have installed it for a few people. Hoisting it three hundred foot in the air is a bitch. :lol: Then again the 8B dipole was not simple task either.

[N2RJ]

I didn't say you didn't know what it was. I was explaining why I used it.

Basically I have a long run, part of it underground so I need something that the critters can't chew and in the off chance that they do, it won't be completely compromised.

I also partly blame my nice signal on heliax. Almost no power wasted up the tower.

[WØTKX]

Losses? We got no stinkin' losses... :snicker:

http://www.ve7gdh.ca/HF/images/G5RV_DSC_6044.JPG

[KJ3N]

Yeah.... what losses?

[KB3LAZ]

I didn't say you didn't know what it was. I was explaining why I used it.

Basically I have a long run, part of it underground so I need something that the critters can't chew and in the off chance that they do, it won't be completely compromised.

I also partly blame my nice signal on heliax. Almost no power wasted up the tower.

I know you did not say that Ryan, I was just letting you know that I do know what it is and that I am familiar with it.

Someday I will upgrade my coax but for now it will do the job. I operate mostly 75/40/20m so I don't have phenomenal loss anyway. Actually I don't have any loss as my tower is down(well I do with the temp setup but you get the joke). :lol: At the moment I have a temporary set up on my flagpole (for the third time in three years) that has my 10m, 2m/70cm/6m, and a homemade fan dipole. It will work until I get everything in order and the tower goes back in the air at the end of August.

[KB3LAZ]

Yeah.... what losses?

You use that on your VHF gear? :snicker:

[N2RJ]

Losses? We got no stinkin' losses... :snicker:

http://www.ve7gdh.ca/HF/images/G5RV_DSC_6044.JPG

I got some of that too for my 75m doublet.