Connecters

[Patrick1264]

I posed this question in the new users forum, but may have been too broad. I hear about connecters that are virtual "brickwalls" to anything above 800mhz. What are the names of these connectors? I am using N and BNC connectors. Their specs seem good but I just need some reassurance.

 

[AK9R]

Most quality BNC connectors are good to at least 1 GHz (1000 MHz).

Most quality N connectors are good to at least 2 GHz (2000 MHz).

 

[jim202]

If you ever have a question about the specs on any type of RF connector, all you need to do is do an internet search on it. You should find a wealth of selections to find the answer to your question.

The bigger question should be focused on the coax cable you will be trying to use. The higher the frequency you plan to use, the better coax should be considered. Also take into account the length of the coax cable run between the antenna and the radio. Longer runs will dictate use of lower lower loss coax cable.

 

[dlwtrunked]

Most quality BNC connectors are good to at least 1 GHz (1000 MHz).

Most quality N connectors are good to at least 2 GHz (2000 MHz).

It is usually accepted that good 50 ohm BNC are good to 4 GHz while 75 ohm BNC to about half that frequency.
https://www.amphenolrf.com/frequency-range-chart/
(And of course the chart shows why the PL-259/SO-239 is mis-named UHF connector as it actually is not good starting at UHF (300 MHz).

 

[AK9R]

Oh, that's an excellent chart!

I looked at specs for various Amphenol BNC and N connectors and used the lowest values which is why I said "good to at least...".

 

[Voyager]

It was likely UHF connectors that are those said to be "brick walls". They are only good to about 300 MHz. You won't find any 800 MHz radios (or higher frequency) with UHF connectors that were made after the 80's.

It's ironic that a connector named "UHF" is not spec'ed for the UHF band.

 

[AK9R]

From Wikipedia:

The UHF connector is a World War II or earlier threaded RF connector design, from an era when "UHF" referred to frequencies over 30 MHz.

Nowadays, UHF is 300 MHz to 3000 MHz.

 

[DPD1]

The length/type of cable used, will be a lot more important than the connector. If 800 is your thing, I would use a full RG8 size cable if over 30-40', for best performance, and keep it under 100' total. And if you use a long cable, you want to be using it to go up... not just across. Going up will help, but going across is just accumulating loss without gaining height to counter it.

 

[prcguy]

Its been a long time since I measured the loss of a PL-259/SO-239 combo, but it was not very much at 800MHz. I had several short jumpers from N to N and N to PL-259 and swept a pair of jumpers of each type with a double female barrel adapter in between.

The N to N jumpers with N barrel adapter were very low loss to 1GHz as it should be and something less than a few tenths of a DB for the cables, connectors and adapters. The N to PL-259 jumpers were a little worse but nothing outrageous and I remember roughly a half dB more loss for the two PL-259 jumpers with barrel adapter.

You would not want to degrade a commercial 800MHz system using PL-259s with an extra 1/2 dB here or there but a single PL-259/SO-239 connection in a scanner antenna system is not a problem with me.

It was likely UHF connectors that are those said to be "brick walls". They are only good to about 300 MHz. You won't find any 800 MHz radios (or higher frequency) with UHF connectors that were made after the 80's.

It's ironic that a connector named "UHF" is not spec'ed for the UHF band.

 

[lmrtek]

Regardless of connector type, if you buy qualty brand connectors like Amphenol brand this will never be an issue.
Most hams buy cheap junk hamfest connectors so they have nothing but problems.
............
Lots of old wives tales about connector and adapter loss can be traced to hams that buy junk chinese connectors.
...........
And quoting wikilies that were posted by these same hams simply
perpetuates their wives tales.