Any one know the frequency response of rg313?  I'm looking at it for wireless microphone receiving antennas in  the 700MHz band in a TV studio.  Would use rg58 but the runs are between 15-20 meters and I am told it will be to lossy. It's possible  we could end up with units in the 2GHz band. 

Scott

Sent from my iPhone

On 18/06/2014, at 3:15 AM, Steve Forst <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Mike,
> 
> Nice theory on  the numbering system, but not right.  RG-213 is  the 
> same size as RG-8, which is kind of the  "standard" size.  Both of 
> these, and a bunch of others in the RG-8 catagory, are just under a half 
> inch diameter.   I think .405 inch.  A regular PL-259 connector threads 
> onto the jacket without any adapter.
> 
> For what it's worth, several years ago I redid the station with Davis RF 
> Bury-Flex, which is a low loss, direct buryable RG-8 size with a super 
> tough jacket made of  poly something or other.
> 
> Davis also carries a wide variety of other cables, like Andrews.   They 
> are in New England.  Coax can be heavy, don't know if shortening the 
> distance would save any on shipping compared to  getting from somewhere 
> else in the States.
> 
> davisrf.com
> 
> 73, Steve KW3A
> 
> On 6/17/2014 10:11 AM, Michael Ryan wrote:
>> Hi all:
>> 
>> As I got to order some tubes from RF Parts, I'm looking at ordering some replacement coax as well as the prices look pretty good.
>> The problem is, I'm not sure on what to order as the site has such a variety from Andrew Heliax to LMR600 and everything in between.
>> I need a direct berry, low loss to replace my RG-213 and I'm wondering if the LMR240 will do?
>> I'm thinking that the LMR240 is a little larger than the 213 and that's what those numbers mean. 213 = .213 of an inch, 240 = .24 of and inch and so on. Therefore the LMR400 or 600 would be a pretty thick cable and may require me to drill a larger hole to thread it. LOL
>> My current PL-259s fit the exit hole of the shack.
>> 
>> 73:
>> Mike VO1AX
>> 
>> 
>> 
>