RG6 Quad vs RG11

[ozifer]

Hi,
What is the quality difference between these two cables in long runs(175-200ft). Is there a significant differance in signal quality?

Are they the same size? Can I run all the cables as RG11 right into the reciever from the dish and lnb or do I need to still use the quad shield to start and end connections.

Do you install the connectors the same on RG11 as you would the quad RG6? Will my compression RG6 tool work on the RG11 compression connectors?

Any other helpful insights into RG11?
Anybody running with RG11 care to share there cable setup?

I want the best signal I can get with my long run. I have the quad shield working now but If I can improve my signal or picture quality I want to think about going with the better cable.

Thanks,
Oz<Tom>

[bobkat]

Hi Tom:

Save your money. RG11 is very expensive and 200 feet is not a long run. I have run up to 800 feet with RG6 and only noticed about a 6 dB drop.

kat

[pmb1010]

I agree.
For satellite stuff, good RG-6 is sufficient.

I do some ham repeater work, and using big diameter hardline is almost a necessity to get the thing to hear mobiles and handhelds from any decent distance away from the repeater.

Using the same theory, I bought some RG-11 to use on my UHF antenna for HD OTA signals. I was using RG-6 and some of the canada UHF stations are just on the edge of not being received (they blink the lock light on my OTA receiver).

So I put the RG-11 on it to see if it would pull in the Canada stations. Nope, pretty much the same reception as before. RF is RF, I surely would have thought it would have made a big difference, but it didn't.

RG-11 is thicker, heavier, harder to manipulate thru the walls, and uses special connectors (different from RG-6) so your crimp tool is probably no good on it.

For digital satellite, having a digital lock at 70% with RG-6, then 75% with RG-11 will make absolutely NO increase in picture resolution or quality. It will be the same. Analog TV is different, but from my experience RG-6 is just fine.

[wejones]

Originally Posted by pmb1010

I agree.
For satellite stuff, good RG-6 is sufficient.

I do some ham repeater work, and using big diameter hardline is almost a necessity to get the thing to hear mobiles and handhelds from any decent distance away from the repeater.

Using the same theory, I bought some RG-11 to use on my UHF antenna for HD OTA signals. I was using RG-6 and some of the canada UHF stations are just on the edge of not being received (they blink the lock light on my OTA receiver).

So I put the RG-11 on it to see if it would pull in the Canada stations. Nope, pretty much the same reception as before. RF is RF, I surely would have thought it would have made a big difference, but it didn't.

RG-11 is thicker, heavier, harder to manipulate thru the walls, and uses special connectors (different from RG-6) so your crimp tool is probably no good on it.

For digital satellite, having a digital lock at 70% with RG-6, then 75% with RG-11 will make absolutely NO increase in picture resolution or quality. It will be the same. Analog TV is different, but from my experience RG-6 is just fine.

I agree with respect to signals. In addition, the examples you give above (ham and ota reception) are both weak signal situations. These satellite signals are not really weak signals once they get to the coax, because you have an amplifier in the lnb, so for signal transmission, RG6 should be fine. My only question is getting the DC and DiseqC signals out to the dish. That is a bit more problematic, but I still think RG6 is fine.