My opinion are that the difference in cost of coax and connectors between RG6 and LMR400 doesn't justify the performance gain. It is also much easier to install the RG6.
Using 100 feet coax the RG6 attenuate 2.5dB at 144MHz and LMR400 1.5dB and at 900Mhz the RG6 attenuate 6dB and LMR400 4dB.
RG6 are made for satellite dishes with frequencies up to 2GHz from the LNB.
/Ubbe
I agree with you with one exception. It needs to be RG6 quad. I have considerable experience using it with good results. You are correct that it is actually intended for up to 3 gigahertz. The important things are the connectors. I use quality connector's better than the cable TV company uses with my own compression tool. They go on rock-solid. So I am in basic agreement with you.
However. The cost of RG6 quad and LMR 400 is is about equal. Depending on where you are located and what you are trying to hear, for example where I am at and simplex VHF fire frequencies are important, I use lmr400. It has 1.7dB loss at 155 MHz. Close enough. LOL. On the other hand, if I'm listening to command which are all repeaters RG6 quad is just fine. But I'm not sure why you think the connectors for LMR 400 are cost-prohibitive. They are generally PL 259's and the user ends up putting a BNC adapter on it. A 2-pack is only $2.99.
Where I'm located at 6,300 feet I use yagi's pointed at incidents. At a minimum I use a 9 dBd gain vertical and I can hear mobiles 120 miles away in San Diego. That backfires because they share the same incident command repeaters as where I'm located so during Fire season I actually have to hear two fires. That's when the yagi's come in handy. In most cases it'll hear the repeater just fine as well. It's my opinion that when every dB counts use the proper cable for the job. That's why I use 7/8" hard line on my 2 meter repeater with gold plated POS N connectors. The difference at 800mhz is considerable. 7dBd loss compared to 4dBd is half the signal.
Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk
