Thread: RG6 and RG59
View Single Post
  #5   Report Post  
Old January 31st 10, 04:17 AM posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna
Lostgallifreyan Lostgallifreyan is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Sep 2006
Posts: 613
Default RG6 and RG59

Roy Lewallen wrote in
:

If there was a "best" cable, there would be only one type. Some have
lower loss, some are more flexible, some have better weather resistance,
some have better shielding, some have a longer lifetime, some tolerate
temperature extremes better, some are more uniform, some are less
expensive, and so forth.

So deciding which cable is "better" requires a lot more information
about what your requirements are.


If I went into most places selling cables I'd get laughed at if I took that
line, they'd say 'hie me to a research lab, if not an actual nunnery'. Not
that you're wrong, but if you want a single general purpose cable for HF and
VHF especially if stocking it for general sale, then there IS a 'best' cable,
defined simply by that which most likely serves the wide range of purposes at
a low price. Currently in the UK that cable seems to be RG6; few places like
to stock more than one type for RF if they think one will do. Perfectionism
is NOT the first base. It's reasonable to expect some standard without being
told to either become an expert or use a bell wire and stay in ignorance. RG6
works, but they sell it for VHF/UHF, not RF. I'm not so concerned with
moderate losses, but SNR maintained by good shielding matters to me.

I take your point about poor foil/braid shields being worse than good braids.
That's partly what drove my question. It seems to me that RG6 in all forms I
have found is optimised for VHF and higher. Nothing I've seen either before
or after that question has yet convinced me that RG6 is the better choice for
HF. I've seen plenty of posts saying it will work, but just as many saying
they've seen old RG59 cables doing fine at UHF too.

So far I think I'm likely to go with the more costly double braided BT2002.
Most posts I read stated that poor performance was usually due to
difficulties connecting firmly to the soft aluminium shield than to the
cable's own qualities. I suspect the extra cost for double copper braid will
be repaid in easier (soldered) connections and other savings elsewhere, plus
a certainty that it is effective at HF. I'm not going to be using it for UHF
(although I have done once, it worked ok for a long TV aerial extension), and
I've already used it for VHF with good results. Main thing with the BT2002 is
that it's old, there might be something directly equivalent made for British
Telecom data links now, perhaps thinner, or cheaper, or more flexible, but I
don't know how to check for that. I've seen a list of BT type cables but I
think it was as old as that cable is.

Last time I got the BT2002 I found it, didn't have to pay for it. The only
thing making me wary of it now is that it won't be free this time.