Hello
Well, what concerns me is that I may not have things working as well as
they could be. I'm not having any problems and in fact this system
works out quite well. I have read that a remote balun and coax will
work, and it does, but going direct to a balanced tuner is better. But
how much better? Is it worth the effort and expense? I'm satisfied
that the LMR400 and Radio Works balun are as low loss as I can get for
this kind of system, but I can never leave well enough alone if I think
there is room for improvement.
Thanks

Jim,
The differences between the two 'ways' can be fairly large. But,
on the whole, I honestly doubt if you would 'see' any difference in
performance. Running balanced lines near 'stuff' isn't as big a
'problem' as most people think. If you can stay away from things,
fine. If not, then try to stay as far away as possible, and keep the
proximity of the balanced line to other things 'symetrical' (if that
makes sence), both conductors an equal distance from the other stuff.
'Doc

PS - If the idea is to try something different or new, have at it!

wrote:
...I can never leave well enough alone...

Hi, Jim -

I know the feeling!

How about a *remote autotuner* that you can build yourself? Sound like a
good winter project? Browse on over to
http://www.ldgelectronics.com/index.html and check out the RT-11.

Best -

Lee H, NB7F

I considered a remote tuner and did in fact use the RT-11 for a couple
of years. It worked, but it was a bit troublesome. What I am doing
now is far better.
One of the things I have learned about autotuners is that they all seem
to have a higher insertion loss than a good manual tuner. Probably
due to the toroids, fixed caps, and relays they use. Good airwound
coils and variable caps are less lossy. So using an autotuner may be
convenient, but I have seen insertion loss figures as high as 65%
under some mismatch conditions!..
I can live with my current system, and it works just great. But since
I am in the market for a new tuner, I just wanted to know if I should
go T match or balanced, as I originally stated.
Thanks for all the feedback!
Jim

wrote:
One of the things I have learned about autotuners is that they all seem
to have a higher insertion loss than a good manual tuner.

The lowest loss is no tuner at all! Let the transmission line do the
tuning. How to accomplish that is covered on my web page under, "No-
Tuner All-HF-Band Antenna".
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

Cecil, what tests, measurements or calculations have you made to satisfy
yourself that loss in the feedline is no greater than in the tuner the
feedline replaces?
----
Reg.

========================================

"Cecil Moore" wrote
How to accomplish that is covered on my web page under, "No-
Tuner All-HF-Band Antenna".

On 6 Dec 2004 09:53:00 -0800, "
wrote:

But how much better?

Hi Jim,

Probably not enough for you to notice.

Is it worth the effort and expense?

Worth is subjective, even if you feel good about, but discern no
evidence of improvement in performance, that may be sufficient.

I'm satisfied
that the LMR400 and Radio Works balun are as low loss as I can get for
this kind of system, but I can never leave well enough alone if I think
there is room for improvement.

As Doc suggests, goferit. Bob's advice is not uncommon either,
although absorbent material could get damp and affect local line
performance. The question then becomes one of our academic knot
twisters in that would it matter. Myself, I see a potential short
across the line and tender nearby to support combustion or smoldering.

To solve my 15X15 inch basement window problem, I replaced the plate
glass with Plexiglas and drilled holes with abandon. This replacement
was not without taking so long a time that my buddy lost his patience:
"Just bust that $5 worth of glass out!" Instead, I had to do this by
carefully removing the petrified putty all around - and cracked the
pane in the last nip. Care and precision is not always worth the
effort.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC