Lug or 259?

[Break It]

I've been searching around for a legitimate answer to this, and have yet to find one.

I am designing a custom installation for my Silverado, and the antenna location is causing an issue. It will primarily be used for the 11M CB frequencies, both AM and SSB. It would be a more simple approach to use a lug connection for the antenna, but a PL-259 seems to be the prevailing design.

My question; is there a difference between using a high quality PL-259 connector (like a silver plated Amphenol w/ Teflon), and using a neat and properly prepared lug-type connection (proper heat shrink with crimped & soldered HQ connections)?

I see the pro / con from an ease of installation standpoint, but is there a performance difference, or any defining criteria for using either method? I would be especially interested if there was any documentation I could refer to for a detailed explanation, if one exists.

Thank you in advance for your input.

 

[W5LZ]

I'm not sure exactly how you mean that comparison. There are several mounts that use a PL-259 for connection to the feed line, and some as the actual 'mount' for an antenna. And then there's the ones that use those 'lugs' for connections. The only one I can recall that use those 'lugs' is a typical 'ball-mount', or maybe a 'tear drop' type mount? I certainly haven't seen them all, so be aware of that too. In general, there's no practical difference between them ~if~ they are done correctly.
I have no idea how/what/where you plan to do that mounting, or what you're gonna mount on it. So, picking the 'best' for your particular situation is up to you. There are a couple of considerations in that. The larger type antennas need a 'firmer' mount than smaller ones do, which is basically a mechanical thingy. Where, or on what, you plan to do that mounting can also determine what kind/style of mount you'd want to use. Which of the two types will 'fit', or maybe 'look' better, for instance.
I have one particular antenna that can only be had with that PL-259 type mount. I didn't want to use that type mount in it's last installation (no room), so used a different mount and an adapter between the mount and the antenna. It worked, which isn't always the case.
So, while this isn't an exact answer to your question, I hope it helps in deciding which you want to use.
Good luck.
- 'Doc

 

[Break It]

Doc -

Thank you for your concise answer. The actual mount in question is stout indeed, hence the limited space for connections.

I should have specifically stated the question regards the coax connection to the antenna. There are PL-259 connections, which are the most common. Then there are the lug connections, which require stripping back the center conductor and seperating the braid, into 2 distinct crimped, soldered, and heat shrink treated eylets. This is sometimes seen on some adjustable HF antennas, a few regular CB antennas, and almost always on "competition" antenna setups.

There's a lot of detail about this installation that may or may not be pertinent to the question, so I'm trying to keep with just the major details.

It just seems odd to me that the lug connection - stripped back with the center conductor literally swinging in the breeze - is used at all. There is a great deal of money and time spent on the coax cable, with proper shielding, dielectric, core design, and protective measures. It seems strange to just strip that away at the point of transmission. I could be completely off, but I was under the impression that it was preferred to keep the signal within the shielded environment right to the point of transmission, including the shielding provided by the connector threads, whether it be PL-259, N type, etc. Maybe it doesn't make a notable difference in performance. However, I know very little about signal propogation and characteristics, which is why I asked. Maybe there is a benefit to this, and if so, what?

Thank you again for your input. I will have more questions as this build progresses, and hopefully have some things to contribute as well.

 

[Beetle]

The PL-259 is not designed to be weatherproof/waterproof at all. If it's carefully installed and covered with the proper material, it CAN be made "virtually" water/weatherproof.

As far as using ring connectors ("lugs", as you're calling them), they've been in use longer than PL-259s, with excellent results. The end of the coax must, of course, be carefully prepared and sealed to prevent water intrusion, but this isn't difficult nor time consuming, and will give you a good connection. Crimp the connectors well, and then solder them. Clean rust, paint and other foreign matter from the connection area, and touch up the area with primer as soon as you tighten the connection. Keep the shield as close to its natural position as possible, and when it has to separate from the center insulation, keep the shield connection as short as possible.

 

[Break It]

Beetle -

I completely understand the PL-259 being weather sensitive. Ring connectors have no issues with increased signal loss, ingress, or egress over a PL-259 connector? That would be a bit of a relief as far as my planned mounting scheme goes.

Which is a better form of connection for a quality antenna using less than 500watts?

Is there a recommended source for high quality ring connectors? Sometimes forums either support particular vendors, or the admin gets a kickback when their members shop there. Just trying to show support.

Thanks for the intel, sir.