• Effective immediately we will be deleting, without notice, any negative threads or posts that deal with the use of encryption and streaming of scanner audio.

    We've noticed a huge increase in rants and negative posts that revolve around agencies going to encryption due to the broadcasting of scanner audio on the internet. It's now worn out and continues to be the same recycled rants. These rants hijack the threads and derail the conversation. They no longer have a place anywhere on this forum other than in the designated threads in the Rants forum in the Tavern.

    If you violate these guidelines your post will be deleted without notice and an infraction will be issued. We are not against discussion of this issue. You just need to do it in the right place. For example:
    https://forums.radioreference.com/rants/224104-official-thread-live-audio-feeds-scanners-wait-encryption.html

Best Coax Cable For Scanner

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
1,026
#22
Just ordered 40 ft of Times Microwave LMR 240, more flexible for my condo HOA scanner rx situation. Can't wait to see it perform.
Actually, from a dB loss perspective, you would have been better off ordering RG6-U coax instead of LMR-240 especially for the higher scanner frequencies. At 900 MHz LMR-240 has a loss of 7.6 dB per 100 feet and RG6-U has a loss of 6.0 dB per 100 feet. RG6-U is also very flexible and easy to work with. See this coax attenuation chart for further details: Coax Attenuation Chart

The cost of RG6-U would also be much less per foot compared to Times Microwave LMR-240. Comparing prices at DX Engineering, RG6-U Quad Shield sells for $0.24 per foot (https://www.dxengineering.com/parts/dxe-6uq-ctl) while Times Microwave LMR-240 sells for $0.69 per foot (https://www.dxengineering.com/parts/tmv-lmr-240). Doing the math the RG6-U would be about 1/3 the cost of the LMR-240 AND have less dB loss at all scanner frequencies compared to the LMR-240.
 

ChrisABQ

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jul 12, 2016
Messages
441
Location
Albuquerque, NM
#23
Update: LMR 240 works great. I have used the RG-6 in the past but the reception distance just could not compare to the 50 ohm cables. Everybody's situation is different, but in my case, this works best. Thanks for the feedback.
 

JamesO

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 22, 2003
Messages
1,812
Location
McLean, VA
#25
Just use a quality RG6 and properly terminatel it and you will be fine.

If you used LMR240 and it was noticably better than RG6, something was wrong with the RG6 imstall or you were not comparing apples to Apples.
 
Joined
Jul 27, 2005
Messages
10,075
Location
Point Nemo.
#26
Update: LMR 240 works great. I have used the RG-6 in the past but the reception distance just could not compare to the 50 ohm cables. Everybody's situation is different, but in my case, this works best. Thanks for the feedback.
If it works for you, then that is what counts.
You've likely got a short cable run, and the minimal difference between LMR-240 and RG-6 won't be something you'd hear.

The upside to LMR-240 is that it's a 50Ω cable, so if your interests ever branch off into GMRS or amateur, you've got a good useable cable.
 

n1chu

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Oct 18, 2002
Messages
189
Location
Farmington, Connecticut
#27
Reading the following on the Zip Scanner site...

“RG6 coax is the best OOH scanner antenna cable to mitigate loss.”

Who agrees with this broad description?

First off, the add is misleading. They SHOULD have added “that we offer”. Because when the spec sheets for RG8 and LMR-400 are compared the RG8 comes out a poor Second choice. Zip does not offer the LMR-400 coax.

Zip Scanners are the new guys on the block and for the most part offer a lot of valuable information. So, I guess when they get it wrong they should be forgiven but there is still no excuse for misleading or erroneous information when they claim they are the best in the business.

Just sayin
 
Joined
Sep 30, 2006
Messages
155
Location
Southern California
#29
Reading the following on the Zip Scanner site...

“RG6 coax is the best OOH scanner antenna cable to mitigate loss.”

Who agrees with this broad description?

First off, the add is misleading. They SHOULD have added “that we offer”. Because when the spec sheets for RG8 and LMR-400 are compared the RG8 comes out a poor Second choice. Zip does not offer the LMR-400 coax.

Zip Scanners are the new guys on the block and for the most part offer a lot of valuable information. So, I guess when they get it wrong they should be forgiven but there is still no excuse for misleading or erroneous information when they claim they are the best in the business.

Just sayin
Did you mean to compare RG6 to LMR 400? (not RG8) Ad reads RG6.
 
Joined
Jul 27, 2005
Messages
10,075
Location
Point Nemo.
#30
Reading the following on the Zip Scanner site...

“RG6 coax is the best OOH scanner antenna cable to mitigate loss.”

Who agrees with this broad description?
Some people will buy whatever the internet tells them to, and there is no arguing with them.
 

wa4dou

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jul 30, 2015
Messages
36
Location
Eastern NC
#31
Reading the following on the Zip Scanner site...

“RG6 coax is the best OOH scanner antenna cable to mitigate loss.”


Who agrees with this broad description?

First off, the add is misleading. They SHOULD have added “that we offer”. Because when the spec sheets for RG8 and LMR-400 are compared the RG8 comes out a poor Second choice. Zip does not offer the LMR-400 coax.

Zip Scanners are the new guys on the block and for the most part offer a lot of valuable information. So, I guess when they get it wrong they should be forgiven but there is still no excuse for misleading or erroneous information when they claim they are the best in the business.

Just sayin
Bill, I think that statement is not to be taken literally, but to be understood as having assumptions built in, and should be read in this manner:
"Consistent with the requirements and experiences of a broad range of scanning enthusiasts, we recommend RG-6 coax, for having acceptable losses vrs. cost".
There simply is no single statement or recommendation that can be made, that would fit all scanner enthusiasts, and they are catering to "entry level" folks, more often than not, who are going to be very price conscious.
 
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
1,026
#32
Reading the following on the Zip Scanner site...

“RG6 coax is the best OOH scanner antenna cable to mitigate loss.”...
Whether you decide to use RG6 for a scanner antenna installation or opt for a lower-loss coax like LMR-400 is your own personal decision/preference. I would imagine that decision would be based on what you are looking to accomplish with your installation and what your budget can afford.

That being said, if I were to opt for the RG6 coax I would NOT be purchasing it from Zip Scanners as I find their prices to be very high compared to what is available elsewhere. They offer a 50-foot length of RG6 with BNC male connectors on both ends for $69.99 and a 100-foot length of RG6 with BNC male connectors on both ends for $89.99. Here's the link to their RG6 coax offerings: https://www.zipscanners.com/rg6-coax-cable-scanner-antenna.html

For comparison purposes you can purchase good-quality RG6 Quad Shield coax from DX Engineering for $0.24 per foot (https://www.dxengineering.com/parts/dxe-6uq-ctl). Doing the math 50 feet would cost $12 and 100 feet would cost $24. Of course you would now need to terminate the coax and I would suggest using RG6 BNC compression connectors (Radio Shack #278-033 or equivalent). You can pick up a 6-pack of those Radio Shack #278-033 connectors for $6.89 on eBay with FREE shipping included: https://www.ebay.com/itm/RADIO-SHAC...BNC-CONNECTOR-6-PACK-P-N-278-033/272755771926

The bottom line:
50 feet of RG6 with BNC connectors at Zip Scanners $69.99
50 feet of RG6 QS with 6 RG6 BNC compression connectors (with 4 left over) $18.89 which is a 73% savings

100 feet of RG6 with BNC connectors at Zip Scanners $89.99
100 feet of RG6 QS with 6 RG6 BNC compression connectors (with 4 left over) $30.89 which is a 66% savings
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top