On Mon, Oct 21, 2002 at 08:48:19PM -0500, Jon Ogden wrote:
>
>
> I think RG-213 is actually the lossiest of the RG-8 size group of cables.
> Its advantages are that it can handle more power than RG-8 and it has a
> direct burial jacket and a non-foam dielectric.
RG-213 has a non-contaminating jacket, not a direct burial jacket. As
I recall it is practically identical to one of the RG-8 versions and I
would expect that the loss figures are identical. In this respect, I
am referring to what was once a MIL-spec cable, but the term "RG-8" is
now applied to quite a few other cables in the .405 diameter class (as
is also the case with RG-6, RG-58 and RG-59, etc.)
>
> There are additional variations of LMR400 as well. Cable Experts sells
> their CXP1318FX which is very similar to LMR400UF. WARNING: I just found
> this out last week. There is a CXP1318FX from Cable Experts that AES
> carries that is NOT the same stuff! I found this out last week when I went
> to purchase some for a friend while at AES Milwaukee. The stuff they had
> was Cable Expert's version of Belden 9913. They said it was what Cable
> Experts sent them as "1318." Not sure why this is, but my gut tells me
> that the stuff that Cable Experts now sells is a redesigned cable. It is
> listed as "new" on their website. I bet they are selling off their old 9913
> equivalent stock at a bargain to the ham radio stores. So buyer beware!
One would hope that vendors who change the design also change the stock
numbers. Oh, well....
Bob, N7XY
|