[Milsurplus] JTV680 Vertical antenna SO239 connector

[Jim Degenhart]

I will go with Robert on this one. Assembly of N connector is precise. 
It is a good connector if you worry about the minor difference between 
UHF and N,BNC etc. Put together sloppily You throw it away and start 
over. Cost is a major difference. N will cast you twice as much as PL 250.

As for the foreign market. PL259/SO239. TNC,MINI U, SMA. Both 
male/female. And the N connector is most common on antenna bases.

Jim KF9XK


On 11/8/2016 2:05 AM, WA5CAB--- via Milsurplus wrote:
> The problem with the Type N (and C and BNC) is that unless you use 
> either the crimp type or the shipboard armored type, they are sorta 
> fragile.  And although impedance wise they are flatter than the UHF, I 
> would take exception at least at HF to saying that they are "much" better.
>
> In a message dated 11/08/2016 00:34:21 AM Central Standard Time, 
> antqradio at sbcglobal.net writes:
>> John
>> Why not replace the SO-239 with an N connector?  At least these have 
>> a gasket to keep water out and are a much better connector.
>>
>>
>> I wonder, is the American market the only one that still uses the 
>> "UHF" connector?  What connectors are used on European and Japanese 
>> marketed equipment?
>> Jim
>>
>
>
> Robert & Susan Downs - Houston
> wa5cab dot com (Web Store)
> MVPA 9480
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Milsurplus mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/milsurplus
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Milsurplus at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/milsurplus/attachments/20161108/87faeab6/attachment-0001.html>