LMR 195 for scanning?

[malignantpoodle]

Reading a few manuals, manufacturers are suggesting RG-58 (garbage) or RG-8 cables for attaching scanners to the antenna.

I'm curious, why not use LMR-195? I mean, it's a drop in replacement for RG braided cables. I'm curious as to why manufacturers would suggest cables with higher loss than the low loss cable. Does this have anything to do with the cable structure being more appropriate for scanning? Or is LMR-195 better.

I've 1000 ft of the LMR with all kinds of connectors ready for install.

 

[w0fg]

The loss charts here http://www.timesmicrowave.com/cgi-bn/calculate.pl indicate that LMR195 has twice the loss of RG-8/U or RG-213 and is just a 1.2 db improvement over RG-58 for a 100' run.

 

[malignantpoodle]

Argh! I was looking at the wrong cables. You're right, thanks.

Please disregard.

 

[K7CAR]

There's nothing wrong with using your 195. You already have everything you need for a run, so see how it performs. Generally the higher you can get your antenna the better with in reason and $$$. Makes no sense to pay $1 plus a foot for coax unless you have a run over 100ft. Too many get unnecessarily fixated about coax loss. 2-3 db of loss is not going to be heard at the scanner unless you are trying to pick off a very weak signal.

Start out simple and improve from there. Discone on the roof in the open away from any wires or trees is an easy light weight antenna. The AntennaCraft ST-2 that runs about $30 comes with 50 ft. of RG-6 and is an excellent antenna too.

 

[malignantpoodle]

Hey, thanks a bunch for that. I'll look into the ST-2. Thanks again.