[TowerTalk] LMR 900 Question
Dick Green" <firstname.lastname@example.org
Sun, 15 Nov 1998 00:00:37 -0500
Please summarize the replies you get on this. I'm interested in doing
exactly the same thing -- replacing 260 feet of LMR400 with LMR900. Another
reason I may need to use the LMR600 instead of (used) hardline is that I've
got two 16" diameter 90 degree sweeps in my 4" buried conduit. I could have
real problems trying to pull 7/8" hardline through that, but the LMR900 has
nearly the same loss factors with a much smaller bend radius. Sounds like
the ticket, but boy is that stuff expensive!
73, Dick, WC1M
From: Jim Reid <email@example.com>
To: TowerTalk <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: Saturday, November 14, 1998 8:10 PM
Subject: [TowerTalk] LMR 900 Question
>I want to get more of my xmt signal out to the antenna field, and
>have been thinking about replacing my run of LMR 400 with
>LMR 900 -- it is a lot more expensive than what the 400
>cost, but also is a lot lower loss. At $3.76 per foot for
>around 165 feet run, is this the best way for me to pick
>up10% more xmit signal on 20M, and 12% more on 15M??
>These are the efficiency increases over LMR 400 per the
>Times Microwave web site cable calculator, see:
>LMR1200 would pick up only 2% more eff. over the 900,
>and is much more costly!! And how about LMR1700
>at over $7 per foot!
>LMR 900 is 0.87 inch diameter; LMR1200, 1.2"
>Show my ignorance about these some more: are these
>considered "hard line" or just lower loss coax??
>Thanks for any comments,
>73, Jim, KH7M
>FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/towertalkfaq.html
>Administrative requests: towertalk-REQUEST@contesting.com
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/towertalkfaq.html
Administrative requests: towertalk-REQUEST@contesting.com