Hi Larry,
I am the designer of Bury-Flex Tm some 15 years ago. DAVIS RF holds the Tm .
So, one could say I am biased. But as most folks
who have dealt with me, or DAVIS RF, know that I provide pertinent info for the
application involved, so the customer gets the best product for his situation.
I am more known for "Down selling" (saving price when equal technical results
can be accomplished) vs.
"Up selling"
Also, we sell the complete LMR line, direct and to dealers including HRO.
It is good that you mentioned use at HF, as that helps me to opine.
The attenuation of both cables are the same at HF, and B Flex is equivalent to
2800 MHz, after which LMR 400 is a bit lower loss.
Both LMR 400, and Bury-FLex Tm, use a PE (polyethylene) outer jacket which is
direct burial. There are a few durometer (relates to density) specs for PE,
but LMR 400 and Bury-Flex Tm, are OK as direct burial in dirt (and water, oil,
gas and certain chemicals).
The main difference between the two is the flexibility. LMR- 400 uses a solid
center copper clad aluminum conductor where my design uses a 19 strand tinned
copper conductor (not aluminum clad). Stranded conductors, OD size to size,
are most always more flexible than solid, but that assumes same strand
metallurgy and same durometer outer jacket. Both OD's are the same @ .406 " .
Our price for any LMR products (and any Times Microwave , the mfr. parts for
any Times cable products) is lower than any other dealer, with
Bury-Flex Tm being a little less in price vs. LMR-400.
Bury-Flex Tm has been used by NASA ground station , Lockheed Northrup, and many
other commercial & military entities.
I hope this info helps in your decision. You may contact me at any time for
any other questions.
Best regards, Steve Davis K1PEK Snr. Cable Design Eng'r and Founder,
DAVIS RF, a div. of Orion Wire Co., Inc.
and DavisRopeAndCable.com
Message: 1
> Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2021 09:54:10 -0700
> From: Larry Gadallah <lgadallah@gmail.com>
> To: towertalk@contesting.com
> Subject: [TowerTalk] Coax Q
> Message-ID:
> <CAPtFaQtpAC9dwCn1x6aiUg2H5P=jcp6nwW9OvRX1Jp4ytRJTww@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
>
> Hi all:
>
> Does anyone have any thoughts on the merits/shortcomings of LMR-400 vs.
> BuryFlex for on/in ground use at HF?
>
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Coax Q (Richard Bell)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2021 12:01:41 -0500
From: Richard Bell <richfbell@sbcglobal.net>
To: towertalk@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Coax Q
Message-ID: <1DE2178F-4BCC-4135-9A37-43E86D7B813C@sbcglobal.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
How about a little more info such planned frequencies, length of run, power.
73 W5BXE
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Sat, 28 Aug 2021 09:54:10 -0700
> From: Larry Gadallah <lgadallah@gmail.com>
> To: towertalk@contesting.com
> Subject: [TowerTalk] Coax Q
> Message-ID:
> <CAPtFaQtpAC9dwCn1x6aiUg2H5P=jcp6nwW9OvRX1Jp4ytRJTww@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
>
> Hi all:
>
> Does anyone have any thoughts on the merits/shortcomings of LMR-400 vs.
> BuryFlex for on/in ground use at HF?
>
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|