[Elecraft] Your opinion on antenna connectors wanted

Fri Oct 17 19:09:02 2003

I think that the BNC has become popular for QRP for reasons of light =
weight,
small size and availability.=20

RCA-type audio connectors were never reliable. I used one on my HW-8 25
years ago and replaced it with a BNC 24 years and 8 months ago because =
the
RCA became intermittent <G>. It got a lot worse when the spring-leaved =
type
of RCA's became scarce. Their replacement, with the hard cylindrical =
outer
ring, were okay for audio, perhaps, but terribly intermittent at RF.=20

The difference in loss and SWR characteristics between an SO-239 and a =
BNC
at HF is so small as to be below the levels of measurement by most hams.

We're seeing type N connectors starting to show up at VHF/UHF because =
they
really ARE better up there. Never mind that the popular SO/PL-239 is =
called
a "UHF" connector. It earned that moniker when Amphenol developed it in =
the
1930's. Back then UHF was 50 MHz! And it was better than no connector =
and
clip leads such as used on the open wire lines that were the most =
popular HF
transmission line in use then. Nowadays, at 144, 222 or 444 MHz, a type =
N
offers some advantage - enough to be worth the trouble in the minds of =
many
UHF ops.=20

Maybe type N will take over some day, but I wouldn't expect it at HF any
time soon.=20

Ron AC7AC

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] =
[mailto:[email protected]]
On Behalf Of David Toepfer
Sent: Friday, October 17, 2003 3:36 PM
To: #elecraft
Subject: [Elecraft] Your opinion on antenna connectors wanted

It seems that the BNC seems to have supplanted the RCA in QRP RF
applications for reasons of loss, bandwidth, and reliability.

The same seems true for power with the 2.1mm for low-current and =
Anderson
Power Pole for hi-current applications (both supplanting a variety of
connections (primarily banana connectors)).

What my question is, does anyone think the N-connector is poised to =
supplant
the SO/PL-239 (UHF) for the same reasons in QRO RF applications?

dt
.