Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Site Notices
Posted: 8/12/2011 12:55:33 PM EDT
My FIL gave me a NIB balun he has had for eons. The paperwork for it says it is broadband from 3 - 40 MHz. Obviously this is from the days prior privileges on 160M. Is there any reason I couldn't use this on 160M?
Link Posted: 8/12/2011 1:20:15 PM EDT
Might be a bad match at those lower frequencies. Gets lossy and hot. Use a lot of of your RF heating up the balun instead of the ionosphere. Does the paperwork have any graphs of loss versus frequency?

Link Posted: 8/12/2011 2:03:49 PM EDT
No info about losses at various frequencies. Time to hit the online radio shops to find a new balun. Thanks!
Link Posted: 8/12/2011 2:29:21 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/12/2011 2:32:33 PM EDT by Gamma762]
It probably just doesn't have enough "balun" to work on 160m, it's a common design compromise. 160m would require twice as many ferrites, so the balun would be twice as long and quite a bit more expensive. 160 isn't a big deal to most amateurs because of the antenna size, noise and propagation, and for those who are active verticals are a lot more common due to the propagation characteristics. If it's the typical ferrite bead style balun, you could always add a few additional ferrites, or a small coil of coax as a feedline choke.

Or just ignore it, and/or ground the feedline shield at some point before it goes in the shack.
Link Posted: 8/12/2011 2:57:58 PM EDT
It likely would not predate the authorization of amateur radio frequencies at 160 meters because hams have used that band essentially "forever"...

Top Top