Towertalk
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TowerTalk] Rotor loop coax

To: "'Steve Maki'" <lists@oakcom.org>, "'towertalk'" <towertalk@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Rotor loop coax
From: "Jim" <jimw7ry@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2018 21:58:56 -0500
List-post: <mailto:towertalk@contesting.com>
Because he asked a SIMPLE question. I'm not going to judge what type of
quality of cable he's using... I would assume if one is going to put up a
new tower and tribander and spend 1000s of $$ doing it, he would not scrimp
on a piece of RG-213 coax.



That said, Jim. K9YC, was making a mountain out of a mole hill.

That is my opinion.

Your opinion appears not to be the same.. So be it.

73
Jim W7RY




-----Original Message-----
From: TowerTalk [mailto:towertalk-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Steve
Maki
Sent: Sunday, August 19, 2018 9:47 PM
To: towertalk <towertalk@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Rotor loop coax

I'm trying to to figure out what was wrong or hard to understand about Jim's
answer? I've seen many examples of poor quality cables with
*RG213* stamped on them...

-Steve K8LX

On 08/19/18 17:39 PM, Jim wrote:

> Oh for Pete's sake Jim!
> 
> He asked a simple question. He is referring to cable with RG-213 
> stamped on the side of it like he could buy from DX Engineering or ABR
enterprises!
> 
> 
> He did not ask HOW TO BUILD RG-213 from pieces of small copper wire!
> 
> No wonder the information in your papers is so difficult for the 
> average ham without an engineering to understand.
> 
> 
> Really read what I have just sent you above.... Then flame on if you wish.
> 
> 73
> Jim W7RY
> 
>   
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: TowerTalk [mailto:towertalk-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of 
> Jim Brown
> Sent: Sunday, August 19, 2018 1:16 PM
> To: towertalk@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Rotor loop coax
> 
> On 8/19/2018 10:07 AM, Terry Brown wrote:
>> Is RG 213 the best and most flexible coax to use
> 
> In general, RG-numbers are not a specification for coax. Rather, they 
> define little more than the characteristic impedance and approximate
physical size.
> This has been true for at least 50 years.
> 
> The only meaningful way to specify coax is with a reputable 
> manufacturer's part number and data sheet for it. I agree with others 
> that Davis BuryFlex is a good choice for this application.
> 
> 73, Jim K9YC

_______________________________________________



_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk

_______________________________________________



_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>