RE: crimp-crimp PL-259's - I've never used them, only the crimp-solder
type. So I have no idea why the warning against soldering the center pin
on those connectors exists.
AFA DINs for stranded center conductor cable, to me a viable connector
type would be a single piece (with captivated center pin plus separate
crimp ring) connector with an open-on-the-end center pin (ala PL-259)
for flowing solder into.
But such an animal doesn't exist AFAIK. So we are left with the separate
center pin connectors, which I actually like like a lot for ham use.
Now as to my claim about mechanical superiority, I agree that since the
outer crimp ring is similar to the crimp PL-259's, the pull out strength
is probably similar. I guess the warm fuzzy feeling you get with DINs is
the way they conform to a precise mechanical standard. When you mate a
male DIN with a female, there is just a very robust feel to it.
-Steve K8LX
On 9/6/2016 9:51 AM, Kelly Taylor wrote:
Far be it for me to argue with someone in the industry, but…
The DIN install videos I’ve seen suggest the centre conductor is
soldered into a shallow well inside the connector, almost the way a
conductor would be soldered to the well inside a chassis-mount
SO-239. Considering the centre conductor of a PL-259 passes through
to the end of the connector and is soldered there, with perhaps a
greater degree of conductor-solder-connector contact to grip the
conductor, and given the crimp-and-solder style PL-259s employ a
similar clamping scheme to DINs, I’m just curious about the statement
regarding mechanical superiority.
It seems the centre conductor might be the weak link. Can you
clarify, Steve?
As for the crimp-crimp style PL-259s, is there a valid reason the
instrux typically warn against soldering the centre conductor?
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|