Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Amps\]\s+DIN\s+vs\s+N\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Amps\]\s+DIN\s+vs\s+N\s*$/: 36 ]

Total 36 documents matching your query.

1. [Amps] DIN vs N (score: 1): Author: donroden@hiwaay.net; Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2011 21:43:16 -0500; DIN connectors vs Type N ....... Is there a larger cable that mates with the DIN connector ? What's the advantage / disadvantages of the DIN ? Don W4DNR ______________________________________________; /archives//html/Amps/2011-04/msg00495.html (6,753 bytes)
2. Re: [Amps] DIN vs N (score: 1): Author: "DF3KV" <df3kv@t-online.de>; Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2011 05:05:59 +0200; The largest cable I use with them is 1 5/8". They are available for almost any cable. I don´t know of any disadvantage of those connectors, I use them for more then 40 years. One of the advantages is; /archives//html/Amps/2011-04/msg00496.html (7,865 bytes)
3. Re: [Amps] DIN vs N (score: 1): Author: TexasRF@aol.com; Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2011 23:31:27 EDT; Don, the advantage of the 7-16 DIN connector is it is very robust in the power handling department. They have excellent vswr characteristics and work very well through several GHz. The disadvantage i; /archives//html/Amps/2011-04/msg00497.html (6,858 bytes)
4. Re: [Amps] DIN vs N (score: 1): Author: "Carl" <km1h@jeremy.mv.com>; Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2011 08:39:54 -0400; They mate with the same hardline and the RG-213 and larger soft cables cables as an N. At HF, zero. An N and RG-213 will handle many times the legal limit. The DIN is popular with the 20-40KW and up; /archives//html/Amps/2011-04/msg00502.html (8,583 bytes)
5. Re: [Amps] DIN vs N (score: 1): Author: jeff millar <jeff@wa1hco.net>; Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2011 23:19:13 -0400; This reminds me of an event during the June VHF Contest. The 432 Station running about 800W quit. It used a DIN 7/16 on the GS-35b amp with a DIN to N adapter. We debugged it to the an open circuit i; /archives//html/Amps/2011-04/msg00512.html (7,442 bytes)
6. Re: [Amps] DIN vs N (score: 1): Author: Rob Atkinson <ranchorobbo@gmail.com>; Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2011 07:52:22 -0500; Cell phone sites only run a few watts, no more than 10 or 15. The adapter was probably okay for them. 73 Rob K5UJ _______________________________________________ Amps mailing list Amps@contesting.com; /archives//html/Amps/2011-04/msg00513.html (6,648 bytes)
7. Re: [Amps] DIN vs N (score: 1): Author: jeff millar <wa1hco@adelphia.net>; Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2011 10:58:07 -0400; This reminds me of an event during the June VHF Contest. The 432 Station running about 800W quit. It used a DIN 7/16 on the GS-35b amp with a DIN to N adapter. We debugged it to the an open circuit i; /archives//html/Amps/2011-04/msg00516.html (8,836 bytes)
8. Re: [Amps] DIN vs N (score: 1): Author: "Carl" <km1h@jeremy.mv.com>; Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2011 10:27:47 -0400; More like several hundred watts at the hubs. Carl KM1H _______________________________________________ Amps mailing list Amps@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps; /archives//html/Amps/2011-04/msg00519.html (7,694 bytes)
9. Re: [Amps] DIN vs N (score: 1): Author: "DF3KV" <df3kv@t-online.de>; Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2011 16:57:44 +0200; Those 10-15W are per channel, not per connector. Cell phone sites run multiple transmitters into the same antenna. That is also the reason why IMD by connectors and cables needs to be as low as possi; /archives//html/Amps/2011-04/msg00521.html (7,799 bytes)
10. Re: [Amps] DIN vs N (score: 1): Author: "Roger (sub1)" <sub1@rogerhalstead.com>; Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2011 18:00:07 -0400; Maybe if you don't try to cover all of 75 or 160, but I've blown out N connectors (Amphenols no less) running no more than the legal limit on 75 a number of times. I use a tuner so I can cover all of; /archives//html/Amps/2011-04/msg00523.html (10,855 bytes)
11. Re: [Amps] DIN vs N (score: 1): Author: "Carl" <km1h@jeremy.mv.com>; Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2011 18:22:31 -0400; Ive run PL-259's at 5:1 VSWR for decades on 75/80 without a problem, no need to run anything else at 6M and below. Whats an antenna tuner, a different fish species(-; Carl KM1H ______________________; /archives//html/Amps/2011-04/msg00524.html (12,209 bytes)
12. Re: [Amps] DIN vs N (score: 1): Author: donroden@hiwaay.net; Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2011 17:35:58 -0500; I think the plain ole PL259 due to more contact area will handle more AMPS than a type N at 6M and below. But again, is there a larger cable than 213 for rotor duty ? Don W4DNR ______________________; /archives//html/Amps/2011-04/msg00525.html (8,940 bytes)
13. Re: [Amps] DIN vs N (score: 1): Author: N1BUG <paul@n1bug.com>; Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2011 18:41:56 -0400; My personal preference is LMR600UF. Paul N1BUG _______________________________________________ Amps mailing list Amps@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps; /archives//html/Amps/2011-04/msg00526.html (8,822 bytes)
14. Re: [Amps] DIN vs N (score: 1): Author: Jim Brown <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>; Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2011 16:20:57 -0700; I wouldn't blame this on the cell phone industry -- you just got suckered by JUNK connectors. Don't feel like the Lone Ranger -- I did too, buying a bunch at hamfests about 8 years ago. Caused me no; /archives//html/Amps/2011-04/msg00527.html (8,347 bytes)
15. Re: [Amps] DIN vs N (score: 1): Author: Shane Youhouse <kd6vxi@gmail.com>; Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2011 16:24:52 -0700; PL 259s I've personally witness run at 2Kw carrier, 10 Kw pep. N's AND BNC's I've seen about 5-6 kw carrier, 100 percent modulated. LC I've seen go to about 55Kw, modulated. I've seen the DIN go in t; /archives//html/Amps/2011-04/msg00528.html (12,205 bytes)
16. Re: [Amps] DIN vs N (score: 1): Author: "Carl" <km1h@jeremy.mv.com>; Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2011 19:51:22 -0400; But again, have you looked at LMR-600 Ultraflex? Carl KM1H _______________________________________________ Amps mailing list Amps@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps; /archives//html/Amps/2011-04/msg00529.html (9,598 bytes)
17. Re: [Amps] DIN vs N (score: 1): Author: "DF3KV" <df3kv@t-online.de>; Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2011 02:58:26 +0200; Yes, as said before, I use 5/8" Cellflex (LCF58-50)by RFS on 144MHz around the rotator. The Andrew type will be LD4.5-50. 73 Peter I think the plain ole PL259 due to more contact area will handle mor; /archives//html/Amps/2011-04/msg00530.html (9,822 bytes)
18. Re: [Amps] DIN vs N (score: 1): Author: Shane Youhouse <kd6vxi@gmail.com>; Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2011 18:29:18 -0700; Take an Amphenol rt angle PL259 apart. Your opinion may change :) I had 2 fail mobile, turns out they where TINY springs for the interconnect. Transistors have ratings, tubes have guidelines! --Shane; /archives//html/Amps/2011-04/msg00531.html (9,080 bytes)
19. Re: [Amps] DIN vs N (score: 1): Author: Shane Youhouse <kd6vxi@gmail.com>; Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2011 18:34:57 -0700; _______________________________________________ Amps mailing list Amps@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps; /archives//html/Amps/2011-04/msg00532.html (7,447 bytes)
20. [Amps] DIN vs N (score: 1): Author: "Jim Thomson" <jim.thom@telus.net>; Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2011 18:45:02 -0700; Those 10-15W are per channel, not per connector. Cell phone sites run multiple transmitters into the same antenna. That is also the reason why IMD by connectors and cables needs to be as low as possi; /archives//html/Amps/2011-04/msg00533.html (12,151 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 20
Page: [1] [2]