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