[Elecraft] why mix rf connector types within the product line?

[Jeff Herr]

Finally! Some I can agree with!


You take the prize!

I wont use that type of cable on a trail radio.






-----Original Message-----
From: elecraft-bounces at mailman.qth.net
[mailto:elecraft-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of David Christ
Sent: Friday, April 26, 2013 18:14
To: Craig Smith
Cc: elecraft at mailman.qth.net Reflector
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] why mix rf connector types within the product line?

I can think of one other reason why UHF has hung around so long.  It is
cheap, easy to find, and mates nicely with the oh so common RG-8 sized cable
that is generally used in HF shacks.  N would probably be a better choice
but is more expensive and fussier to install.  BNC connectors for RG-8 do
exist but are not cheap.  A stiff chunk of RG-8/LMR400 can put quite a
strain on a BNC connector if not routed and supported properly.  

David K0LUM

On Apr 26, 2013, at 7:16 PM, Craig Smith wrote:

> Even at 100 W, BNC is clearly the best choice.   The first thing I did
when I got my K3 was to get rid of the UHF connectors and put in  proper
BNCs.
> 
> 73  Craig  AC0DS
> 
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Elecraft at mailman.qth.net
> 
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email 
> list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft at mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html