I agree with Frank, Not that I necessarily think PL-259's are the greatest,
they are not. But I have never really learned to put N-connectors together and
don't trust my skills at trying it again. For HF I don't think the added
expense with any lower loss is worth the difficulty with N-connectors vs.
PL-259's. I may be challenged sometimes to get the solder to flow on the
PL-259's but I manage somehow. Also the new one's I just got with the screw
down back end looks like I will have less trouble with getting a solid
connection to the shield. That is where my biggest problem with PL-259's show
up. Even up at 2 mtrs which I use sparingly I've got them. If I get serious up
there I'll look more into 'how to put on N-connector' but the cost and the
possible lower loss I doubt will make any difference with the way I use 2 mtrs
compared to how I've always been challenged by N-connectors.
Terry
KI7M
> On December 6, 2018 at 7:58 AM donovanf@starpower.net wrote:
>
>
> I agree Clive, there is no reason to switch from high quality UHF
> connectors such as Amphenol 83-1SP silver plated connectors
> on 6 meters or below. They have much better center pin contact
> pressure than N connectors and are much less susceptible to
> installation errors by either amateur or professional installers.
>
>
> Older generation N connectors with floating center pins are highly
> problematic because its difficult to install the center pin with proper
> depth and axial alignment. If the pin is installed so its just a few ten
> thousandths of an inch too long, or the axial alignment isn't almost
> perfect, the male connector will permanently damage the mating
> female connector. If ithe pin is installed just a few ten thousands
> of an inch too short the connection will be very unreliable. If for
> some reason N connectors must be used, use only the modern
> generation of N connectors with captivated center pins.
>
>
> I have hundreds of Amphenol 83-1SP PL-259 connectors in my
> station and withour exception they have all been 100% trouble free
> for more than thirty years. K3LR has had exactly the same
> experience with hundreds of 83-1SP silver plated connectors in
> his station.
>
>
> N connectors on HF? No thank you.
>
>
> 73
> Frank
> W3LPL
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
> From: "Clive GM3POI" <clive@gm3poi.com>
> To: topband@contesting.com
> Sent: Thursday, December 6, 2018 3:42:35 PM
> Subject: Re: Topband: Rather use N-type (was Re: The answer to PL-259
> soldering/reliability problems)
>
> For anyone that doubts the loss of a good 259. Google K2RIW on the subject
> who knows a thing or two about UHF and did some numbers on the subject.
> I have used for a good long time the Silver plated Teflon with a gold pin
> from the RF connection. I usually end up buying 50 at a time.
> 73 Clive GM3POI
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Topband [mailto:topband-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of N2TK,
> Tony
> Sent: 06 December 2018 15:31
> To: 'GEORGE WALLNER'; topband@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: Topband: Rather use N-type (was Re: The answer to PL-259
> soldering/reliability problems)
>
> I have been using PL-259 connectors forever. I have switched to crimp
> connectors when I need to make up a new cable. No sense replacing the
> soldered connectors if they are working fine. ThePL-259 is a low loss, easy
> to assemble connector for up to at least 6M (nothing higher in frequency
> here) that makes good contact and are easy to seal with rescue tape followed
> by Scotch 33+. Some of my PL-259's have been in use outside for 40 years and
> still look good and work well. I hope manufacturer's don't change.
> 73,
> N2TK, Tony
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Topband <topband-bounces@contesting.com> On Behalf Of GEORGE WALLNER
> Sent: Thursday, December 06, 2018 9:13 AM
> To: topband@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: Topband: Rather use N-type (was Re: The answer to PL-259
> soldering/reliability problems)
>
> Greg,
> I completely agree. For all my outdoors applications I use N connectors.
> Unfortunately, amateur radio gear (even seriously expensive gear) is still
> built with SO-239 connectors which perpetuate the use PL-259 male
> connectors. As a result, my station and my DXpedition gear contain both,
> necessitating the use of adaptors. How do we convince manufacturers to
> change?
> 73,
> George
> AA7JV/C6AGU
>
>
>
> On Thu, 06 Dec 2018 17:00:53 +1300
> Greg-zl3ix <zl3ix@inet.net.nz> wrote:
> >
> >
> > I continue to be mystified by the fact that the amateur radio
> > community insists on using PL259 connectors. N-type are much more
> > reliable (used by professional communicators), low cost, can be
> > crimped easily and quickly and have a well-defined impedance right up
> > into GHz frequencies.
> >
> > Back in 2005 I started having contact problems with the connector on
> > my SteppIR 3-element. There was a thin layer of oxide that built up
> > around the centre pin of the PL259. I had had similar problems with
> > other connectors around my shack. I decided to change my entire
> > station, including the SteppIR, to N-type, and have never looked back.
> >
> >
> > 73, Greg, ZL3IX
> >
> > On 06.12.2018 13:29, Steve Ireland wrote:
> > G'day
> >>
> >> About five years I discovered this fool-proof and brilliant
> > way to solder PL-259s invented by Bill Maxon N4AR who taught this to
> > Tim K3LR. Tim uses this method throughout his contest station and did
> > a great job of documenting it - see
> > http://www.k3lr.com/engineering/pl259/
> > [1] and it has totally changed my angry and worried attitude towards
> > soldering PL-259s.
> >>
> >> The key component is Amphenol 83-1SP connectors.
> > The connector body is silver and the shell is nickel and you can buy
> > them from Mouser or DX Engineering.
> >>
> >> Vy 73
> >>
> >> Steve, VK6VZ
> >>
> > ---
> >> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus
> > software.
> >> https://www.avast.com/antivirus [2]
> >> _________________
> > Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband [3] - Topband
> > Reflector
> >
> >
> > Links:
> > ------
> > [1]
> > http://www.k3lr.com/engineering/pl259/
> > [2]
> > https://www.avast.com/antivirus
> > [3] http://www.contesting.com/_topband
> > _________________
> > Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband
> > Reflector
>
> _________________
> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
>
> _________________
> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
>
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>
> _________________
> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
>
> _________________
> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
_________________
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
|