[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Topband: Measured Loss in Copper Clad Steel RG-6 on 160 meters

Subject: Re: Topband: Measured Loss in Copper Clad Steel RG-6 on 160 meters
From: "Richard (Rick) Karlquist" <>
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2018 12:10:33 -0800
List-post: <>
AFAIK, the only reason they even make solid copper RG-6
at all is for applications that send DC over the coax to
operate such things as preamps.  DirecTV does that
a lot.

Rick N6RK

On 1/10/2018 11:58 AM, wrote:

I measured the difference in loss (dB per 100 ft) between solid copper
(SC) center conductor RG-6 vs. copper clad steel (CCS) Quad-Core RG-6 coaxial 
cable. The difference is insignificant on 160 meters until
cable length exceeds 350 feet. You can see the affect of the steel
core and its thin copper plating at 7 MHz and below in this table The cables 
were manufactured by two different companies, but the
relative loss measurements should be valid.

A 1000 foot run of RG-6 with the more common CCS center conductor
has 6 dB loss on 160 meters vs. 3 dB loss for the less common RG-6
with an SC center conductor.  For most of us, the additional 3 dB
loss in 1000 feet of CCS RG-6 will be insignificant. Solid   Copper  Cable 
length in
Freq   Copper  Clad    feet for a 1 dB
MHz    Loss    Loss    loss difference

1.8    0.3     0.6          350
3.5    0.4     0.6          500
7.0    0.6     0.8          500
10     0.7     0.85         650
14     0.75    0.9          650
21     0.9     1.0         1000
28     1.0     1.1         1000


----- Original Message -----

From: "Grant Saviers" <>
To: "Ryszard Tymkiewicz" <>,
Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2018 4:23:34 PM
Subject: Re: Topband: Supporting Ladder line

The shield is always the antenna element. The coax provides the signal
return path when the direction is set with the far end as the feed point
of the antenna. Since you likely will have a preamp for the large
negative gain of a RBOG, a few db more from the coax won't matter except
for a few db gain change when switching directions.

Here is some RG174 measured loss data (1db/100')

Much RG6 is Copper clad steel (CCS) so how much loss it has with copper
that might be less than 1.8MHz skin depth is an interesting question.
Any data out there? Solid Cu RG6 would be a safer bet. There are many
RG6 variations and ones that are flooded might the best RBOG choice.

Grant KZ1W

On 1/10/2018 3:50 AM, Ryszard Tymkiewicz wrote:

Hi Frank..I understand in the case of BOG we should use both
transformers T1 and T3 with
4:1 impedance ratio... ?
I wonder if it is possible to use RG174 which unfortunately has quite
big attenuation even on 160m?

73 Rys

A reversible Beverage or BOG can be constructed out of a single run
of RG-6, there's no need to form an open wire line out of two runs
of RG-6,

See ON4UN's Low Band DXing, Volume 5, page 7-88 and fig. 7-118


Topband Reflector Archives -

Topband Reflector Archives -

Topband Reflector Archives -

Topband Reflector Archives -

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>