If you have 75 ohm coax, I would just try it.  If the Z of the antenna is in 
fact around 35 ohms, the Z at the shack end may be close to 35 ohms on some 
bands, but on others the Z will be transposed to well over 100 ohms with an SWR 
probably over 3 to one.  One of my dipoles has a SWR at the top of 75 meters of 
approximately 4:1, and I occasionally venture up there, but my K3S with 
internal tuner does not complain and quickly matches it to about 1:1.  Not 
ideal and this is not the way I usually build my antennas, but the loss is not 
too bad.  If you can build a unun with approximately a 1:2 ratio this should 
solve your problem.  If it does not cover all the way from 80 to 10 with low 
loss, I would not worry too much about say 10 and 12 meters now, since some 
loss, and/or lower power output should not be a problem with our sunspot 
situation. If you happen to have lots of 75 ohm cable, you could parallel two 
runs of exactly the same length, the pair would have a Z of 37.5 ohms,
  so nearly perfect if your actual antenna Z is in the vicinity of say 25 to 45 
ohms.  Not suggesting you spend much money on the coax, but if it is cheap or 
free, you could do this.  Later if you change antennas you would have an extra 
coax run already in place.  The power handling of the dual coax runs would be 
at least the same as a single run, and the loss could be either slightly higher 
or lower with the dual run depending upon whether the loss is I squared R, or 
due to the dielectric characteristics, but I would be surprised if the loss 
differed much at the HF frequencies. Just another idea to think about, not 
necessarily a recommendation.       Rick  KL7CW 

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[email protected]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Message delivered to [email protected] 

Reply via email to