CFWKA450KGFA-R0 was the original 50G filter in the modification and it contains six ceramic elements. The CFUCG450F contains only four ceramic elements and that is why it is smaller. It will have inferior attenuation outside the passband. Is a CFUCG450F better than the stock filter, CFWKA450KEFA? I'm not so sure it is. Better to use a CFWKA450KFFA available at Mouser.
I agree - you don't want to go with fewer elements for performance reasons as well as the obvious pcb landing footprint!
For me, when I get around to it, I think I will still go for the tighter G filter as my only affected unit is an analog only BCT15 and I only use it for NFM signals and occasional air AM. It will make it FAR AND AWAY more useful for me as I have a lot of local CDF traffic that uses closely spaced channels which, with the stock filter, are nearly impossible to deal with (hear two or three adjacent channels simultaneously!). If I can get some other things under control first I will surely be performing this mod in the future!
But for others, who may be listening to a a lot of P25 stuff and maybe not so much NFM analog, the F filter 6 element equivalent, CFWKA450KFFA, might indeed be the better choice.
Interesting to note, though, that the original stock filter as well as the F version have a 3dB quoted ripple in the passband as opposed to the 2.0dB quoted ripple in the passband of the G version. Not really a major issue for analog FM and maybe even C4FM P25 but could be problematic for more intolerant CQPSK signals; this may be why many are seeing some major improvement in some P25 systems when using the G version (a reason besides simply tighter bandwidth).
-Mike
Last edited: