VHFcontesting
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [VHFcontesting] LMR400 vs RG213

To: "Dave Larsen (WS2L)" <dirknj@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: [VHFcontesting] LMR400 vs RG213
From: Steve Meuse <smeuse@mara.org>
Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 16:44:03 -0400
List-post: <mailto:vhfcontesting@contesting.com>
Dave Larsen  (WS2L) expunged (dirknj@comcast.net):

> I have LMR400 that is going to be routed from my radio out to the base of the 
> antenna masting. Since the LMR400 is not flexible I plan to run 9913 from the 
> base of the masting to the feedpoint of the antenna.

Unless you specifically have 9913F, 9913 isn't (as) flexible either. It's about 
the same as LMR-400, maybe a little more. Most people don't reccommend the use 
of 9913 outdoors, it's notorious for having moisture absorption problems. It 
uses an air dielectric, so the water travels easily down towards your radio or 
amp. The last time I found a puddle of water at the end of my coax I said 
"never again". 

The thing people need to keep in mind here is the term "not flexible" is 
relevant. LMR-400 is not flexible when compared to RG-213, but very flexible 
when compared to LDF4-50a. Someone people *do* use it around rotors without 
issue.

Since the UF version is pretty close in performance, I chose to spend a few 
more cents and get a *more* flexible cable. I've never had connector issues 
with LMR-400UF. I've already burned through about 700 feet of it already. 

-Steve
N1JFU

_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting

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