[TowerTalk] Alternate method, PL-259 on RG-8-type coax

[Dino Darling]

My experience....

The braid would break when being screwed (don't we all!).
The braid also performs the duties of mechanically holding the coax.
Some engineer was paid BIG bucks to come up with the "standard" method.
If it isn't broke, don't fix it!

An N-Connector is superior to the PL-259/UHF.  There is very little room 
for debate here but I'm sure some people would want to...just 
because.  But, this isn't really an issue for this thread.  The PL-259 is 
fine for most applications and you already pointed out about it being 
installed correctly!

I've said it before...check out CableXperts!  They are really doing it 
right with the right equipment!!!


At 12:31 PM 04/29/2004 -0600, you wrote:
>I read through an extensive, several-years-old archived thread the other
>day, -- somewhere, maybe on QRZ.com -- on UHF vs. N-type connectors. While
>the recent discussion of UHF connector loss at various frequencies has been
>very enlightening, the caveat "high-quality, properly installed" is always
>stated or implied.
>
>One of the things I read in the aforementioned thread was from a guy who
>believed that the PL-259 connector is much better installed in a manner that
>differs significantly from the "standard" method. I'm wondering what the
>group here thinks of this idea. This is paraphrasing from memory:
>
>"Slip the connector sleeve ring and a length of heat-shrink 2-3" long over
>the coax. Strip the outer jacket and center dielectric using the same
>dimensions as for the "standard" method, but don't trim the shield braid.
>Instead, pull the shield braid inside-out back over the outer jacket. Screw
>the connector body over the prepared cable end such that the braid is
>compressed between the connector threads and the jacket of the cable. This
>will be hard and will require hand tools, but keep screwing it on until you
>can just see the braid through the solder holes. You stop there. You don't
>solder it through the solder holes, but rather around the rear edge of the
>connector body. Then trim off the excess braid and apply the heat-shrink
>over the connector body and the cable behind it. Solder the center conductor
>and trim off any excess length. Then thread on the sleeve ring."
>
>That's it. I don't recall that the guy said exactly WHY he thought this was
>a better method, but after thinking about it, I'm not sure I like it. The
>good point is that it would result in less deformation of the dielectric
>material by soldering heat. But the shield connection seems problematical to
>me. While compression of the braid against the inside of the connector body
>would make a good unsoldered shield connection (assuming you were using
>good-quality silver plated connectors), that connection would degrade over
>time, as the connector is not weather-resistant like the N-type. Soldering
>it as proposed in his method, on the other hand, would effectively relieve
>the beneficial pressure of the braid against the inside of the connector
>body by melting the jacket material. Of course soldering would provide its
>own permanent electrical connection to the shield, but only at the back edge
>of the body. Because of the squirrelly back-looped path of the shield to the
>connector body attachment point, it seems to me that this method would
>create even more of an impedance hump that the "standard" method. (Though at
>HF, as discussed here earlier, it probably wouldn't matter a hill of beans
>one way or the other.)
>
>But I could be completely off the wall here. What do y'all think of his
>method?
>
>Bill / W5WVO
>_______________________________________________
>
>See: http://www.mscomputer.com  for "Self Supporting Towers", "Wireless 
>Weather Stations", and lot's more.  Call Toll Free, 1-800-333-9041 with 
>any questions and ask for Sherman, W2FLA.
>
>_______________________________________________
>TowerTalk mailing list
>TowerTalk at contesting.com
>http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk

Dino...k6rix at earthlink.net