"RG6 Quad Shield - 3 times faster reception than standard RG6 coaxial cable"

[WA9UDW]

The print version of this Menards flyer was recently included with a local free newspaper:
http://menards.inserts2online.com/customer_Frame.jsp?drpStoreID=1
Click on the left flyer titled "Menards Holiday Home Sale - Prices valid 11/28/10 - 12/5/10"
Then look at the bottom right of page 8 for: "100' RG6 Quad Shield"
I don't expect these links to be valid after the ad expiration date of December 5th, so take a look at the attached photos.

So how is it possible for signals to travel through this cable at 3 times the speed of light, (minus velocity factor, if it has any)? 

Would hooking the output to the input cause it to go into runaway self-destruction?

[KA0HCP]

Wow, that stuff would be a pileup breaker!  You could hear the "QRZ" before anyone else!!!

[KB5MD]

I think that stuff is designed to funnel your money to them faster.....sad thing is, some people will buy into it.

[WA1GFZ]

I bought the same stuff with the same color connectors at Deerfield for $6 per 100 feet, but I bet it still has a VF slower than light. Seems to function like coax which is good

[K1JJ]

"3 times faster than standard RG6..."


Bogus hype, of course. This is a classic example of wording an ad to target the current digital crowd's technical thinking. They measure almost everything in performance related to speed - Downloads, uploads, modems, CPU's, etc.

Same kind of pitch as "digital ready cable".

The proper alternative would be to sell it in terms of better shielding to prevent common mode or RFI. That doesn't rock the digital newbies into buying very much.

Missing from the ad: "Wait - there's more!"    

T

[w3jn]

I *know* Tommy's coal stove is digital ready.

[W9GT]

All kidding aside, with the high cost of coax these days, this stuff is great for lower power and receiving antennas.  I wish RG-8 and its many varients were as cheap!  I'm not sure, but I think this stuff will handle several hundred watts at 3.8 MHz.  I don't care much for F connectors...CATV junk...but you can even get adapters to go from F to UHF or just change them out to PL-259s.

As always, YMMV, but if you are looking for cheap coax, this is probably not a bad way to go, depending on your needs.  Take into account the bogus claims in the ads and just use it accordingly.

73,  Jack, W9GT

[k4kyv]

I think what they really meant is that it will allegedly transmit data at speeds 3 X faster.  Kind of like USB-2 cable vs USB Original.

Probably just as bogus a claim as it would be if they really had said its velocity factor was greater than 1.

About any decent co-ass should remain low-loss at a high enough frequency to pass data at any speed within the capability of consumer-grade home equipment. In any case, the data transfer speed would be limited by whatever the cable or DSL company hangs between the poles.

Kind of like the oxygen-free premium-grade $600 power cords and $150 hospital-grade mains outlets that make up the last 6 ft. of the run from the power substation to the high-end audio equipment.

But at $6/100 ft, you can't complain about the price.  The copper aluminium must be amply alloyed with oxygen.

[WA1GFZ]

Very easy to adapt F connector. A F bullet threads right into the back of a BNC connector. Then just a hunk of #20 between the bullet and BNC center pin. To get to PL259 just use a BNC to PL259 adapter.

[KA2DZT]

Been using quad shield for years for TV.  Most of the stuff has a copper clad steel center wire that will rust if water gets into the connectors.

It's good for receiving antennas,  but, if you're going to use it to transmit, it might be better to use cable that has a full copper center wire.

Belden also made a tri-shield RG-6 and RG-59.  Todays cables are usually sweep tested to a Ghz.  Some of the satellite cables are good to 2Ghz.

[W2PFY]

Would hooking the output to the input cause it to go into runaway self-destruction? Huh Shocked

I wouldn't use it, it melted the front end of my R-390A