Single Splitter with both RG-6 and RG-59 connections

[allesnikt]

Hello all,

I have an existing RG-6 cable run for a VHF antenna and radio system. My co-worker has a VHF scanner that accepts a RG-59 bnc connection. Is there a way to split the RG-6 cable and run a RG-59 cable from the existing cable run? Like a splitter with both RG-6/59 connections in one? Or am I going to have to run an entirely new RG-59 cable? Any input is greatly appreciated

 

[AZ.]

Hello all,

I have an existing RG-6 cable run for a VHF antenna and radio system. My co-worker has a VHF scanner that accepts a RG-59 bnc connection. Is there a way to split the RG-6 cable and run a RG-59 cable from the existing cable run? Like a splitter with both RG-6/59 connections in one? Or am I going to have to run an entirely new RG-59 cable? Any input is greatly appreciated

RG6 is a far better cable!....Get rid of the 59....splitters accept both those cables the same.

 

[navychop]

BNC? Odd. And BNC and normal coax I thought had different impedences.

 

[allesnikt]

BNC? Odd. And BNC and normal coax I thought had different impedences.

Hmm okay.. I'll have to do more research

 

[allesnikt]

RG6 is a far better cable!....Get rid of the 59....splitters accept both those cables the same.

I agree.. we were just trying to go the easy route. Wasn't sure about the the splitting though

 

[Comptech]

For receive only the mismatch will not matter. Just get a f- female to BNC adapter from amazon.

 

[allesnikt]

For receive only the mismatch will not matter. Just get a f- female to BNC adapter from amazon.

Thanks!!

 

[harshness]

BNC? Odd. And BNC and normal coax I thought had different impedences.

BNC is seeing quite a few applications in the 75 ohm realm due to the popularity of SDI video. Generally speaking it used to be limited to 50 ohm but that's no longer the case.

That said, most radio gear is 50 ohm and that's not going to be optimal with 75 ohm cabling. I'm also not convinced that the typical TV antenna is entirely compatible with radio and vice versa.

 

[harshness]

For receive only the mismatch will not matter. Just get a f- female to BNC adapter from amazon.

Power transfer is power transfer and the only way to maximize it is to make sure it is matched whether you're receiving or sending.

 

[Comptech]

Power transfer is power transfer and the only way to maximize it is to make sure it is matched whether you're receiving or sending.

There 100's of people on Radio Reference that would love to have a conversation about it with you.

 

[harshness]

There 100's of people on Radio Reference that would love to have a conversation about it with you.

They are certainly entitled to their opinion but reduced signal and reflections are common issues with mismatched impedance that are largely avoided with proper impedance matching.

 

[NYDutch]

BNC and F connectors are just that, connectors. They have no direct relationship to the wire that's attached to them and are completely interchangeable as long as the mating connector matches. And of course the attachment method must correspond to the chosen wire of course.

 

[Comptech]

The added gain of the signal of good RG6 over the RG59 would probably more than make up for the unnoticeable fraction of a Db that slight ohm mismatch. Transmitting is a different animal, SWR would go up quite a bit. Remember we are talking scanners. All my antennas are fed by quad shield solid copper 3gig swept RG6 and my 1090 antenna has a 50 foot run, but get aircraft 250 miles out with no problem.

 

[TheTechGuru]

RG11 would be better IMHO...

 

[Comptech]

Yes, rg11 is great, but can be stiff to work with. Anything over RG59 will be a improvement. As for harshness I am a real man, have no reason to take every comment made by anyone , to twist it and make me feel smarter than anyone else here. Opinion are like A** holes, everyone has one, Facts are much better.

 

[arlo]

FYI. There actually are 50 ohm and 75 ohm specific F and BNC connectors. And the same for N-Type connectors.
And RR is definitely full of info. on mismatching cable. The scanner dudes use 75 ohm coax regularly.
I don't believe a ham would use 75 ohm ever for a high dollar xceiver. I wouldn't. The mismatch would be a trip and probably drive an antenna tuner nuts. I dunno. I've never tried it.
Adding a splitter to feed 2 radios will divide the signal and drop it 3dB, or 1/2 strength.
Using 50 ohm cable on a 75 ohm splitter. Nah. In a pinch maybe. Leaving one port unterminated invites reflections.
You can do it. Is it right? Out here in the sticks I need every bit of signal I can get. I use "fat" cable and big connectors for just about anything that runs outside.

 

[harshness]

Remember we are talking scanners. All my antennas are fed by quad shield solid copper 3gig swept RG6 and my 1090 antenna has a 50 foot run, but get aircraft 250 miles out with no problem.

The frequency range we're discussing tops out at 608MHz.

Signal loss in an RF impedance mismatch situation comes from some percentage of the signal being reflected back at the load in addition to the normal distance attenuation. This Stack Exchange article presents the formula for reflection:

Impedance mismatch vs Signal attenuation

I'm currently designing a 50Ω grounded coplanar waveguide (GCPW) which connects an antenna to an LTE modem. My question is: does there exist a standard graph/chart that attempts to generalise imped...

electronics.stackexchange.com

The result is that no matter what you do with the cable and its connectors (outside of baluns and amplfiers), the scanner is ultimately going to bounce back 0.177dB of the signal back into the cabling network. It isn't much, but what is there is all bad.

 

[Comptech]

I'm sure you could also fit a mattress in there, along with a mirrored ceiling... lol

Don't forget the disco ball!

The frequency range we're discussing tops out at 608MHz.

Signal loss in an RF impedance mismatch situation comes from some percentage of the signal being reflected back at the load in addition to the normal distance attenuation. This Stack Exchange article presents the formula for reflection:

Impedance mismatch vs Signal attenuation

I'm currently designing a 50Ω grounded coplanar waveguide (GCPW) which connects an antenna to an LTE modem. My question is: does there exist a standard graph/chart that attempts to generalise imped...

electronics.stackexchange.com

The result is that no matter what you do with the cable and its connectors (outside of baluns and amplfiers), the scanner is ultimately going to bounce back 0.177dB of the signal back into the cabling network. It isn't much, but what is there is all bad.

Ever taking into consideration the extra signal with quality RG6 compared to your .0.177 dB of loss?

 

[harshness]

Ever taking into consideration the extra signal with quality RG6 compared to your .0.177 dB of loss?

It is not only loss but also reflection at a phase that is undesirable.

 

[Comptech]

And does not manner one bit with scanner reception, I understand your logic, yes there is a loss, but very small and the advantage of better cable makes up for it tenfold.