James P. Cassidy wrote:
>If the thermal movement of the center conductor was a problem with the
>capitivated pin N connector, would this not also be a problem with a
>PL-259? Or is the PL-259 capitivation a stronger assembly than the on the
The 259/239 is much stronger than the tiny ridge of brass/PTFE on the N
- but probably not strong enough to resist the full force of a long
length of expanding hardline.
Returning to the captive-pin N connectors for RG213 and similar, the
European ones have another very good feature for terminating and
anchoring the braid. There is a thin brass ferrule shaped like this
which simply pushes under the braid to make a flat flange all around.
The end of the braid is flared-out on the back of the flange, and a
thick rubber sleeve slides down over the jacket. When the compression
nut is tightened, the sleeve compresses the flange down onto the body of
the connector, and at the same time squeezes the jacket to make a
strong, waterproof anchor.
Overall, these connectors are a major re-think of the original MIL
pattern, with significant improvements all around. Operating mainly at
frequencies where 259/239s are not an option, I try to use only the
improved type of N connector - they are SO much better.
It is also the only type of cable grip that really works with the
European equivalents of 9913 with light braid over a foil screen (we
don't see 9913 itself over here). An option is available with a larger
solder bucket for the center pin, or penny-pincher like me just file the
center conductor down. To add strength to the cable grip with this type
of cable, I use heat-shrink tubing lined with hot-melt glue to cover the
73 from Ian G3SEK Editor, 'The VHF/UHF DX Book'
'In Practice' columnist for RadCom (RSGB)
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/towertalkfaq.html
Administrative requests: towertalk-REQUEST@contesting.com