Hello Arunas,
While the relatively new 4.3-10 family of "mini DIN" connectors is
far superior to any connectors we've discussed in this thread, their
cost is nearly ten times higher.
On the other hand, the much bulkier 7/16 DIN connectors offer
similar high performance and they're widely
Interesting Arunas,
73, Jim - KR9U
-Original Message-
From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of
ly...@qrz.lt
Sent: Friday, December 7, 2018 6:39 AM
To: topband@contesting.com
Cc: topband@contesting.com
Subject: Re: Topband: Rather use N-type (was Re: The answer
Interesting discussion, and I appreciate the many viewpoints. One
consideration, when weighing N-connectors vs PL259s, is what happens
to the cable after the connector is attached. Nobody disputes that an
N-Connector properly installed on, e.g. a length of Heliax running up
the side of a
I worked in the commercial/industrial radio and broadcasting for 40 plus
years. While it it true that type-n is mostly used, we must remember
that hams deal with high power and high SWR sometimes, both are not
type-N strong points because of the small pin used in type-N can not
handle the high
The only coaxial cable (braided shield) I use are the Times LMR products or
equivalent with the LMR connectors. They have the captivated center pins...no
issues whether jumpers or cable runs up antenna supporting structures. On
hardline (non-air) the center conductor is bonded to the foam so
That crazyI’m in the utility industry and Andrew LDF cable terminated with
Type N connectors by the thousands, outside for years and no issues. Many with
the old solder on type N connectors for 1/2” and more recently the newer
simplified ring stop connectors and no problems for either.
There is new connector already widely used in cellular market - 4.3-10.
Designed to get rid of Intermodulation problems - outer contact is
torque independent.
Size is +- same as N/ UHF connector, inner pin is about 3mm in diameter,
graph shows 6 kW at 100 MHz at perfect mach.
Hi all,
I can confirm Martin's and Greg's experiences. It is strongly recommended to
avoid
using the PLs at all. I did the same changes and since that no problems at all.
Of course any adapters are avoided too. All cables must be properly assembled
with proper
and high quality N-connectors.
I agree with Rick,
If an N connector is not designed to fix the relationship of the center pin
(soldered to the center conductor) to the body it should not be used
outdoors or on long runs of unburied coax exposed to full seasonal
temperatures.
I learned that the hard way on unfixed pin N
The shield has to be soldered to be installed properly. If I use 259's I only
use silver plated ones where soldering the shield to the connector is easy.
CecilK5DL
Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone
Original message
From: Paul Christensen
Date: 12/6/18
The old school solder on type N connectors are to difficult for most to do
properly...
I don't fool with them anymore. The Times Microwave EZ series crimp connectors
for their LMR-400 & 600 cable is the only way to go. I use them on all my
stuff. Legal limit is no problem...3kw and up
re the pl259/so239: The impedance bumps are generally irrelevant where
the cable connects to the antenna or equipment due to the way most
wiring is done at those points. notice I said generally.
The only time it may be an impedance bump issue is in switching where 50
ohm is not maintained or
On Thu, Dec 6, 2018, 9:59 AM W3LPL wrote:
N connectors on HF? No thank you.
I'm with you, Frank. I just don't have these problems with them.
After soldering more UHF plugs in 42 years than I could possibly ever
count, I know how to properly assemble and solder them. And I keep the
contact
I agree with Frank, Not that I necessarily think PL-259's are the greatest,
they are not. But I have never really learned to put N-connectors together and
don't trust my skills at trying it again. For HF I don't think the added
expense with any lower loss is worth the difficulty with
>"Older generation N connectors with floating center pins are highly
problematic because its difficult to install the center pin with proper
depth and axial alignment."
Lived it. To support myself during college, I was chief engineer at an
AM/FM station in Dekalb, Illinois. One winter morning,
About twenty-five years ago I started replacing many of my PL259
connectors with N-connectors. I did this mostly because my VHF/UHF buddies
convinced me that the impedance bump of an N-connector was less than that of
a PL259. Also, about the same time I started using mil-surplus Transco
I think the primary flaw of the PL-259/UHF connector is that shield
connectivity is strictly a function of thread tightness. There's no inner
sleeve to maintain good electrical contact of the shield with any loosening
of the connector plug. Otherwise, I have no issues with either connector up
The issue with PL-259 is the leaking of common mode current into the
internal RF current. On higher bands the leaking is very bad but difficult
to see or understand.
I went to over 50 WF installation on contest station, DX station, city lot
QTH and very quiet rural areas. I noticed several
I agree Clive, there is no reason to switch from high quality UHF
connectors such as Amphenol 83-1SP silver plated connectors
on 6 meters or below. They have much better center pin contact
pressure than N connectors and are much less susceptible to
installation errors by either amateur or
Seeing I mentioned K2RIW this is a link to his comments about 259s at 70cms
much less 160m.
https://www.eham.net/ehamforum/smf/index.php?topic=34680.0;wap2
73 Clive GM3POI
-Original Message-
From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com] On Behalf Of N2TK,
Tony
Sent: 06
For anyone that doubts the loss of a good 259. Google K2RIW on the subject
who knows a thing or two about UHF and did some numbers on the subject.
I have used for a good long time the Silver plated Teflon with a gold pin
from the RF connection. I usually end up buying 50 at a time.
73 Clive
I have been using PL-259 connectors forever. I have switched to crimp
connectors when I need to make up a new cable. No sense replacing the
soldered connectors if they are working fine. ThePL-259 is a low loss, easy
to assemble connector for up to at least 6M (nothing higher in frequency
here)
Interesting.
I’ve used PL-259’s for over 45 years for HF & most all 6m & 2m plugs. The rare
random problems with them were the result of cheaping out with poor quality
connector, inadequate weather-proofing, or poor connector assembly/soldering.
Using N’s and then having to use N to PL-259
Greg,
I completely agree. For all my outdoors applications I use N connectors.
Unfortunately, amateur radio gear (even seriously expensive gear) is still
built with SO-239 connectors which perpetuate the use PL-259 male
connectors. As a result, my station and my DXpedition gear contain both,
Did he same. Since this change no problem anymore. Confirming what Greg
says and can only recommend - throw away all PLs and go to N!
73,
Martin, OK1RR
Dne 06. 12. 18 v 5:00 Greg-zl3ix napsal(a):
I continue to be mystified by the fact that the amateur radio
community insists on using
I continue to be mystified by the fact that the amateur radio
community insists on using PL259 connectors. N-type are much more
reliable (used by professional communicators), low cost, can be crimped
easily and quickly and have a well-defined impedance right up into GHz
frequencies.
Back in
26 matches
Mail list logo
