# Bigger terminations



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

I use this company for anything new that is out there. I checked their catalog, but found nothing. You can call tech support.. they are good at problem solving.

http://www.adilink.com/services/productCatalog.php


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

Thanks! I wish I had an ADI around here. Seems like everyone has an ADI but me. I feel left out.


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

MDShunk said:


> Thanks! I wish I had an ADI around here. Seems like everyone has an ADI but me. I feel left out.


they are great with next day shipping when you need it NOW


----------



## hbiss (Mar 1, 2008)

Well, first off lets get the terminology right if you want to sound like you know what you are talking about. These are not "ends" or terminations. They are called fittings or connectors.

As to your question about one fitting for both 11 and .320- If you notice the construction between the two cables is considerably different. I expect that would explain why there is no "universal" fitting even though the physical size may be close. 

I also don't know of any system that uses .320 but that would be the only way to encounter it. So it's safe to assume that you really shouldn't be messing with this or at least realize that your work installing a fairly expensive fitting will be wasted when a cable tech cuts it off and replaces it. 

-Hal


----------



## B4T (Feb 10, 2009)

hbiss said:


> Well, first off lets get the terminology right if you want to sound like you know what you are talking about. These are not "ends" or terminations. They are called fittings or connectors.


I will continue to sound like I don't know what I am doing.. thanks anyway :blink:


----------



## hbiss (Mar 1, 2008)

Great attitude. :thumbsup:

-Hal


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

My observation... Hal is a world-class d!ckhead. Too bad he's actually knowledgeable too. Such as waste of knowledge. 

Hal... Comcast phased out RG-11 in my area several years back in favor of .320.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

Run this by me again...why do you need to be putting ends on RG11? :blink:


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

MDShunk said:


> My observation... Hal is a world-class d!ckhead.


A duck head? That's funny. :laughing:


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

Peter D said:


> Run this by me again...why do you need to be putting ends on RG11? :blink:


I guess I never actually said.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

MDShunk said:


> I guess I never actually said.


Right...I just assumed that if you were asking for a source for the fittings you would be installing them as well...silly me for assuming. :laughing:

I've just never heard of that size of cable. Doesn't the cable company put those fittings on for you?


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

Peter D said:


> I've just never heard of that size of cable. Doesn't the cable company put those fittings on for you?


Not if I'm the one that ran it. I normally take RG-11 (now I'm changing to .320) from the cable demarc to the various wiring closets in larger buildings that have, more or less, a star topography cable distribution. These would be buildings that are served with hardline in the first place.

Hal encouraged me to examine the construction differences between RG-11 and .320, which I already had observed. They're dimensionally dissimilar, but not any worse than the difference beween 6 and 6QS, which they do make a combination "fitting" for. That's what spurred me to question the possible availablity of a combination "fitting" (okay, the one new term I can thank the asshole for) for 11 and 320.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

MDShunk said:


> Not if I'm the one that ran it. I normally take RG-11 (now I'm changing to .320) from the cable demarc to the various wiring closets in larger buildings that have, more or less, a star topography cable distribution. These would be buildings that are served with hardline in the first place.


Right...should have known. You always seem to do the most bizarre stuff I've ever heard of.


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

Peter D said:


> Right...should have known. You always seem to do the most bizarre stuff I've ever heard of.


Yeah, I'm going to take some before and after pictures tomorrow of a nice one that will really get Hal cranked up.


----------



## hbiss (Mar 1, 2008)

_Doesn't the cable company put those fittings on for you? _

My point exactly. But-

_Not if I'm the one that ran it. I normally take RG-11 (now I'm changing to .320) from the cable demarc to the various wiring closets in larger buildings that have, more or less, a star topography cable distribution. _

Are you a cable subcontractor for MDUs? If you are not affiliated with the cable company I can't see how you are allowed to do this kind of work. Run the cable for them yes, install fittings no. 

-Hal


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

hbiss said:


> Are you a cable subcontractor for MDUs?


I've done a few MDU's as part of the overall electrical bid, but very few MDU's going up the last few years in my area. The one coming up here soon is an office building upfit. Why do you care?


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

hbiss said:


> If you are not affiliated with the cable company I can't see how you are allowed to do this kind of work.


Why? The cable police going to swoop down and spank me? :laughing:


----------



## hbiss (Mar 1, 2008)

Not necessarily you because you or your company is working for the owner and they are responsible. They do tend to get a little pissy if the work isn't at least done in accordance with a design furnished by them. 

-Hal


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

hbiss said:


> They do tend to get a little pissy if the work isn't at least done in accordance with a design furnished by them.


The great thing is, that after all these years, I have not experienced this pissy-ness you speak about. I must be doing, at least, okay.


----------



## mikeg_05 (Jan 1, 2009)

off subject, but I heard it was "against the law" to daisy chain your phones together. Ive been waiting for the low volt police for awhile and they have not shown up:whistling2:


----------



## crazyboy (Nov 8, 2008)

mikeg_05 said:


> off subject, but I heard it was "against the law" to daisy chain your phones together. Ive been waiting for the low volt police for awhile and they have not shown up:whistling2:


It's against the Standards.


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

Thought I'd post a picture of a connector installed on .320 cable. I was doing a bit of this work earlier this week and took a picture, since some people seemed unfamaliar with .320. It's pretty darned close to RG-11.


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

MDShunk said:


> Thought I'd post a picture of a connector installed on .320 cable. I was doing a bit of this work earlier this week and took a picture, since some people seemed unfamaliar with .320. It's pretty darned close to RG-11.


That's the most interesting thing I have seen in quite some time. :sleep1:


----------



## mikeg_05 (Jan 1, 2009)

What do you even use RG 11 for? CCTV?


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

mikeg_05 said:


> What do you even use RG 11 for? CCTV?


RG-11 is for times when RG-10 isn't quite enough and RG-12 would just be overkill.


----------



## Lighting Retro (Aug 1, 2009)

MDShunk said:


> RG-11 is for times when RG-10 isn't quite enough and RG-12 would just be overkill.


:laughing:


----------



## kornbln (Apr 4, 2008)

Speaking of coax fittings...

T&B has a Snap-N-Seal fitting designed for 320 cable, but it specifies CommScope only. Would it work for others?

The right-angle 6/6QS fitting is pretty slick, too.

http://www.tnb.com/pubint/docs/snapnseal.pdf


----------



## hbiss (Mar 1, 2008)

_T&B has a Snap-N-Seal fitting designed for 320 cable, but it specifies CommScope only. Would it work for others?_ 

What does ONLY mean? This is what I'm saying. If somebody has to ask a question like that they have no business doing this kind of work.

_The right-angle 6/6QS fitting is pretty slick, too. _

Never seen them used nor can I think of a reason to use them. If you provide space for the proper cable bend radius, straight fittings are all you need- and at a much lower cost too I suspect.

-Hal


----------



## Lighting Retro (Aug 1, 2009)

I bet Hal NEVER had any questions growing up. He just knew everything. Ya'all need to get it together.


----------



## hbiss (Mar 1, 2008)

No, I didn't have all the answers. I learned how to get information and learned by doing from the work of others who had been in the trade for years whose work I respected. I didn't have the internet to get a quick answer that may or may not be correct. I didn't expect to make any money doing something until I was competant enough to know and do work at least as good as the people I learned from. I know my limitations and won't do something that I am not knowledgeable about or competant doing. If I want to do something bad enough I will learn how to do it first. There is no such thing as telling a customer that I can do a job so I can get it then trying to figure out later how to do it. 

Stick to that philosphy and be anal and a perfectionist and you too can be as smart as me.:laughing:

-Hal


----------



## Lighting Retro (Aug 1, 2009)

Good enough brother!


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

hbiss said:


> There is no such thing as telling a customer that I can do a job so I can get it then trying to figure out later how to do it.


I've made a pretty good living.... nay, an entire lifestyle, out of telling customers that I could do something and figuring out how to do it as I go. Education is expensive. I get mine on the customer's dime, and I'm not the least bit ashamed of it. :thumbsup:


----------



## hbiss (Mar 1, 2008)

Somehow I knew that.:whistling2:

-Hal


----------



## steelersman (Mar 15, 2009)

All I wanna know is, what the hell is .320 and RG-10,11,12 and any other number out there? All I've heard of is RG-6 and 59. Is RG-6 bigger than 10,11, and 12 or smaller?


----------



## Lighting Retro (Aug 1, 2009)

According to Hal, if you ask that question, you should not be allowed to utter the word electrician.


----------



## hbiss (Mar 1, 2008)

_All I wanna know is, what the hell is .320 and RG-10,11,12 and any other number out there? All I've heard of is RG-6 and 59. Is RG-6 bigger than 10,11, and 12 or smaller?_

Marc is pulling your leg with RG-10 and 12, kinda like the 220, 221 whatever it takes thing. I would have to look to see if there are such numbers, there may be but it wouldn't be used for anything we would be interested in. 

The RG designation dates back to WWII and the military. The numbers are meaningless unless you look up the spec. So if there is a RG-10 and an RG-12 they probably would have no resemblance to each other.

Although some true RG spec cables are still made, (RG-59 is widely used for video) the CATV cables we are familiar are only called RG-59, 6 and 11 and are of a completely different construction than the military spec. The RG designation is only maintained as a size reference. There is a recent RG-7 that never had an actual RG equivalent and is a bit larger than RG-6. 

Cables like .320 are a modern departure from this antiquated designation system. The number represents the actual outside diameter of the shield or outside conductor. All solid sheath or hardline cables are designated this way by their OD. 

-Hal


----------



## user4818 (Jan 15, 2009)

MDShunk said:


> I get mine on the customer's dime, and I'm not the least bit ashamed of it. :thumbsup:


Tell me...do you have any shame whatsoever? I'm really curious. From reading your replies over the years, it seems like there is nothing you won't stoop to to make a buck. To put it bluntly, you kind of seem like a whore to me. :laughing:

This is actually a serious question and not my usual nonsense.


----------



## Lighting Retro (Aug 1, 2009)




----------



## monitormix (Aug 23, 2008)

MDShunk said:


> My observation... Hal is a world-class d!ckhead. Too bad he's actually knowledgeable too. Such as waste of knowledge.
> 
> Hal... Comcast phased out RG-11 in my area several years back in favor of .320.


Is the .320 they are using still RG-11 or is RG-8 or variant of it? Most specs still list 11 as the predominant head end cable. What's the application video, cctv, dbs other?


----------



## hbiss (Mar 1, 2008)

No. .320 is actually solid sheathed or hardline. RG-11 is the usual braid over foil. .320 has a bit less attenuation than RG-11 with better shielding due to it's solid sheath. The application is a CATV drop cable though I could see it used for long DBS runs. No need to use it for video because baseband video only goes to 6Mhz. That's why the old mil spec RG-59 with copper braid, solid copper center conductor and solid poly dielectric is normally used.

As to RG-8, don't confuse your cables. RG-8 is similar in size to RG-11 but is a 50 ohm cable used in communications like to connect a transmitter or receiver to an antenna. It's smaller counterpart is RG-58 which you might remember from the CB radio days and the old thinnet computer networks. All CATV cables are 75 ohm. 

You mentioned head-end cable. If you are talking about the cable used to interconnect equipment in the racks at a cable companies head-end, that would usually be either an RG-59 or an RG-6 size cable. Head-end lashup cable is a special highly shielded cable with a silver plated center conductor. 

-Hal


----------



## monitormix (Aug 23, 2008)

I am aware that RG-8 is 50 ohm. I've only used it for uhf antennae to da's for rf mics. Actually we usually used RG-8x from Belden. Who actually manufactures the .320? Is it Commscope, Belden other?


----------



## hbiss (Mar 1, 2008)

I have only seen Commscope although Times may make it also. 

-Hal


----------



## cochise7969 (Jul 23, 2009)

The coax thing always puts me between the charred walls of the dammed. So many different coax sizes and so many different connector sizes. I was buying these F type compression connectors from Ideal that was a 1 size fits all and they were $1.95 each, I know that's expensive but worth it for me but they stopped making them. I hate getting to the job site pull cable and then the ends don't fit!!


----------



## drsparky (Nov 13, 2008)

cochise7969 said:


> The coax thing always puts me between the charred walls of the dammed. So many different coax sizes and so many different connector sizes. I was buying these F type compression connectors from Ideal that was a 1 size fits all and they were $1.95 each, I know that's expensive but worth it for me but they stopped making them. I hate getting to the job site pull cable and then the ends don't fit!!


Just splice the cables together. Connectors are overrated.:thumbsup:


----------

