Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#13
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Mon, 02 Jan 2006 10:20:30 -0800, Dan Richardson wrote:
On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 14:56:49 +0000 (UTC), "Reg Edwards" wrote: Why use a balanced tuner when a less expensive, easier to operate, unbalanced tuner, in conjunction with a simple choke-balun, will do just as well? Insert the 2-wire choke-balun between the unbalanced tuner and the balanced transmission line. ---- Reg. My link coupled tuner (Johnson Matchbox) cost me less than 60 USD, I can tuner faster than a T-type tuner, doesn't need nor use a balun. (Read one less component and its associated loss). So why would I want to replace it with something that works almost as good? I use my 500+ foot horizontal loop on 6 and 2 meters with homebrew balanced tuners from the '63 ARRL Handbook. On HF a balanced double-L tuner does the trick. The balanced-L tuner does use a balun but it is between the rig and the matching device. The only problem with using the Johnson Matchbox is 30M 73 de n4jvp Fritz |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Balanced vs. Unbalanced Tuner | Antenna | |||
MFJ balanced line tuner efficiency? | Homebrew | |||
MFJ balanced line tuner efficiency? | Homebrew | |||
Balanced Tuner for Balanced Antennas? | Antenna | |||
Adjustment of simple balanced tuner | Antenna |