The loss compared to RG58 is about 2 times greater. But if you are typically runs about 5' or 6' lengths, then the loss is 2 X (next to nothing).
Expensive when you have connectors mounted for you. I've only used 174 which is almost the same with DIY SMA connectors to make much shorter WiFi cables. Now you have me thinking more about this. The HT already has SMA and SMA/BNC adapters are readily available to connect to my Arrow... hmmmm http://www.on4sh.be/ham/coax/ Or http://www.hamuniverse.com/coaxdata.html -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Amateur Radio Station W4MPS Sent: October 6, 2009 2:16 PM To: [email protected] Subject: [amsat-bb] RG316/U I will be traveling to Ireland next week and will be taking my FT60R handheld and an Elk antenna. I purchased a short length of RG316 with appropriate connectors installed to avoid the need for several adapters and bulkier RG58. I was shocked at how small the diameter is for the 316. Manufacturer assures me it will work quite well at 145/435 for the use intended. Has anyone had experience with this cable? Tnx 73 Marc, W4MPS [email protected] _______________________________________________ Sent via [email protected]. Opinions expressed are those of the author. Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb _______________________________________________ Sent via [email protected]. Opinions expressed are those of the author. Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb
