When to use 50ohm, or 75?

[wambulance]

Ouch! RG-213 is expensive hehe. I'll stick with the RG-58/U for now unless I need to run a longer cable or put more than 15 watts into it. Thanks for letting me know about that though, as I had no knowledge of RG-213 before you said something about it.

 

[W5LZ]

Nothing wrong with RG-8 either.

 

[Beetle]

I haven't seen any genuine RG-8 coax for decades. It's no longer a Military Specification cable, so ANY bozo can throw together something and call it "RG-8", "RG-8/U" or whatever he wants to call it. REAL RG-8 hasn't been made in about 30 years, and any Cold War/Viet Nam era surplus is way past the pull date.

 

[W5LZ]

'Real' or not, most every manufacturer of coax still makes some kind of version of it. Typically has the same characteristics as that of 30 years ago. What's the difference?
- 'Doc

 

[Beetle]

Radio Shack "RG-8" has probably 70% shield coverage, IF THAT. I've seen "RG8 TYPE" coax with a center conductor about 2/3 the correct wire size (and very skimpy shielding).

Dielectric layers broken or just not there, like "foamed in place" construction that skipped a few inches.

Because it's no longer MILSPEC cable, the manufacturers don't have to comply with ANY of the old RG8 criteria. And far too many of these fine manufacturers seem to agree with that statement.

"Genuine BELDON [sic] RG8 TYPE" coax.

No thanks. I'll stick with name brands that are at least spelled correctly! :headbang

 

[jazzsinger]

'Real' or not, most every manufacturer of coax still makes some kind of version of it. Typically has the same characteristics as that of 30 years ago. What's the difference?
- 'Doc

Have to agree with beetle on that one,buying rg8 is suicidal,as he correctly says it was surpassed by rg213 as the US mil spec decades ago,anything called rg8 now will just be a cheap imitation of the original spec,probably cheaply made in china.

RG213 is now also being cheaply copied,especially here in Europe where real M17/74 is nigh on impossible to get.Buying that sort of crap just encourages them to make more of it,insist on the real deal QPL mil spec coax.

Be very wary when you see the word "type" printed on coax,it means this shit isn't real with the emphasis on the word SHIT.

 

[W5LZ]

Gee, having used RG-8 for more than 30 years, I guess I've just gotten used to it's shitty characteristics and don't expect any more from it than I do. I guess I can look forward to th same lessening in quality with RG-213, and...gasp, the LMR series of cables. Oh! Ain't it awful? The whole world is going to hell in a hand basket!
- 'Doc

(Preceding liberally laced with sarcasm. Excuse it if necessary.)

 

[Beetle]

You can look forward to it happening to RG-213, LMR-xxx and other cables if/when the US military decides to eliminate it from their specifications.

I'm not saying that there isn't any decent quality RG8 out there. What I AM saying is that very little of the stuff that's marked "RG8" is in fact any good, and even less of the stuff that's marked "RG8 TYPE".

What does "RG8 TYPE" really mean? That depends on the manufacturer and how many liberties he took with the specifications for the cable you're spending good money on.