Gerry:
It's funny: I thought you might get a chuckle from that last comment in my
earlier post! (smile)
It's good to be hearing from you again, Mr. Leary! (grinning again)
Tom Behler: KB8TYJ
-----Original Message-----
From: For blind ham radio operators [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
On Behalf Of Gerry Leary
Sent: Saturday, April 25, 2015 11:22 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: RG8X VS RG8U
No, I'm the guy that's Leary!
Sent from my iPhone this time=20
> On Apr 25, 2015, at 9:00 PM, Tom Behler <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>=20
> I hear you, Pat, and didn't think of the extra weight issue with the
>RG8U.=
>=20
> I guess I'm just trying to save a few bucks here, but maybe a new run
>of RG8X might be my best bet.
>=20
> I guess part of my issue with the run of RG8X I think I'm having
>problems with is that it's really not that old, and I'm a bit
>disappointed it didn'=
t
> hold up better.
>=20
> I know this is going to sound really strange, but it just feels wet to
>me.=
> And, it smells kind of moldy, like Moisture got into it through the
> outer jacket somehow. Perhaps I could just put new connectors on it,
> and give i=
t
> a try, but I'm leary.
>=20
> Tom Behler: KB8TYJ
>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
> -----Original Message-----
> From: For blind ham radio operators
>[mailto:[log in to unmask]]=
> On Behalf Of Pat Byrne
> Sent: Saturday, April 25, 2015 10:51 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: RG8X VS RG8U
>=20
> Tom,
> The "U" will certainly be capable of handling higher power than the "X".
> And there is probably lower loss in the "U", but i bet you would never
>hea=
r
> it. My only concern would be the considerably higher weight and drag
> of t=
he
> replacement coax. i have a good run of "U" here but have been very
> reluctant to run it for just that reason. With an antenna in two
> trees which won't stay in sync. when the wind blows is problematic and
> the added=
> weight of the heavier cable could be an issue.
> Just my thoughts and good luck on the new installation.
> pat, K9JAU At 09:23 PM 4/25/2015, you wrote:
>> Hello, everyone.
>>=20
>>=20
>>=20
>> This afternoon, A friend and I took down my Alpha Delta DXCC
>>antenna=20 from the camp site we used last year, and I'm getting
>>ready to put the=20=
>> antenna up at a different camp site that we will be using this season.
>>=20
>>=20
>>=20
>> I have noticed that the 75 feet of RG8X coax I have used as a
>>feedline=20=
>> for probably the past 1 or two years seems flaky, in that I get a
>> short=20=
>> across both of the coax connectors when I check for continuity. I
>> took=20=
>> off one of the connectors that I felt was questionable, and installed
>> a=20=
>> new one, just to have the same problem recur. I am beginning to
>> think=20=
>> that my best option might be simply to replace the old coax with=20
>>something new, rather than risk getting the antenna up in the air
>>at=20 the new camp site, only to have a bad feed line.
>>=20
>>=20
>>=20
>> I have 100 feet of RG8U here, and am considering using part or all
>>of=20 that coax run, depending upon how much I will need, rather than
>>buying=20=
>> completely new RG8X. I will have to put connectors on the RG8U if I
>> go=20=
>> this route, but that shouldn't be too big of a deal.
>>=20
>>=20
>>=20
>> My question is this: Can someone tell me how RG8X and RG8U
>>compare,=20 for a simple HF installation? Initially, I was going to
>>put the RG8U=20 in my go kit, and use it for emergency VHF/UHF
>>communications, but if=20=
>> it would be ok for my HF RV installation, I may just go that route
>> for no=
w.
>>=20
>>=20
>>=20
>> Any wisdom on the topic would be appreciated.
>>=20
>>=20
>>=20
>> Tom Behler: KB8TYJ
>>=20
>>=20
>>=20
>>=20
>>=20
>>=20
|