| To: | vhfcontesting@contesting.com |
|---|---|
| Subject: | [VHFcontesting] Rover Tech: LMR400 or 400UF? |
| From: | "JT Croteau" <jt.n1ese@gmail.com> |
| Date: | Tue, 10 Jul 2007 17:05:23 -0400 |
| List-post: | <mailto:vhfcontesting@contesting.com> |
Will I take a noticeable performance hit if I use LMR400 UltraFlex in the rover vs. regular LMR400 coax? I was planning on using it for 6, 144 and 432, runs will be less than 14'. Thanks -- JT Croteau, N1ESE - Manchester, NH _______________________________________________ VHFcontesting mailing list VHFcontesting@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | [VHFcontesting] looking for AM6155 parts, CatWhiskR |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [VHFcontesting] Rover Tech: LMR400 or 400UF?, Nate Duehr |
| Previous by Thread: | [VHFcontesting] looking for AM6155 parts, CatWhiskR |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [VHFcontesting] Rover Tech: LMR400 or 400UF?, Nate Duehr |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |