I wouldn'tuse both tuners.  Use one or the other.  If you tune for 
mininum noise, your match should be 50 ohms.  It is a little tricky some 
times, you neexc to cut way back on the rf gain or it is hard to find 
the dip.  I run one here on my screw driver and like it a lot.
73
Butch
WA0VJR
Node 3148
Wallace, ks.


On Wed, 1 
Jan 2014, Tom Behler wrote:

> Hi, all, and Happy New Year!
>
>
>
> Earlier last week, I borrowed an MFJ 212 noise bridge from a local ham
> friend, just to try it out here at the home QTH.
>
>
>
> It actually was fairly easy to use, and I like the idea of being able to
> tune an antenna without transmitting a signal, which I believe to be the
> main benefit of the device to begin with.
>
>
>
> As a result, I am probably going to purchase one, with the idea that it
> might be useful in the RV, where my antenna situation is quite challenging.
>
>
>
> I have an old MFJ 901B versatuner that I could take out to the RV to use as
> the tuner in conjunction with the noise bridge, but I have a couple of
> questions.
>
>
>
> 1.  Am I correct in assuming that, if I can eliminate the pulse noise from
> the noise bridge, I am safe to operate?  I have an old talking SWR meter
> that I purchased from Remy Simard (VE2AW) back in the 1990's that I could
> employ to doublecheck things, but it is rather cumbersome to use, especially
> in the RV where space is at a premium.
>
>
>
> 2.  Someone suggested that I could first tune my antenna with the noise
> bridge and versatuner, and then employ the TS480's auto-tuner to totally
> finish the job.  However, with two tuners now in the system, wouldn't that
> further decrease the amount of RF power that ultimately gets to the antenna?
>
>
>
> As I'm sure you can tell, I'm not an expert on these things.
>
>
>
> I just want to fully understand the functions and possible usefulness of an
> MFJ noise bridge, especially for my RV operations, before I actually make
> the purchase.
>
>
>
> Tom Behler: KB8TYJ
>
>
>
>