THERE'S the answer I was looking for and it all now makes perfect sense.
Thank you very much John.

Jerry
--
Jerry Bransford
To email, remove 'me' from my email address
KC6TAY, PP-ASEL
See the Geezer Jeep at
http://members.cox.net/jerrypb/

"John Passaneau" wrote in message
...
Hi:
RG-8 used to be a military specification cable but the military dropped it
in favor of a new specification called RG-213. They are very similar
coaxes
in general, but manufactures are free to make any cable they like and
call
it RG-8 so the quality and consistency can vary widely. Also RG-8 with
foam
a center insulator, and all the other variations are not nor never were
MilSpec.That does not mean that all RG-8 cables are crap, but it could be
and it depends on the manufactures idea of what kind of cable they want to
sell. On the other hand RG-213 as a current MilSpec cable is a higher
grade
cable and is more consistent from manufacture to manufacture. My feeling
is
that if I'm going to go to all the work of installing a antenna, I want to
use the best material I can. So I use RG-213. But my favorite coax is
Davis
RF Bury Flex, http://www.davisrf.com/ . It's a good coax that has low loss
and a very tough jacket. I have 500 feet of it in my antenna system and so
far I'm very happy.


--
John Passaneau W3JXP
State College Pa

This mail is a natural product. The slight variations in spelling and
grammar enhance its individual character and beauty and in no way are to
be considered flaws or defects.

"Jerry Bransford" wrote in message
news:moUAb.29779$Bk1.25134@fed1read05...
Ok so I'm getting back active with my ham gear and while looking into a
new
HF antenna, discovered a new cable type being recommended here and
there,
RG-213. What is so much better about RG-213 than what I have used so
much
of over the years, RG-8? TIA.

Jerry
--
Jerry Bransford
To email, remove 'me' from my email address
KC6TAY, PP-ASEL
See the Geezer Jeep at
http://members.cox.net/jerrypb/