X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com
Return-Path: <marv@lancaironline.net>
Received: from [70.118.110.50] (account marv@lancaironline.net)
  by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro WEBUSER 6.0)
  with HTTP id 5952799 for lml@lancaironline.net; Sun, 16 Dec 2012 11:15:20 -0500
From: <marv@lancair.net>
Subject: Re: Which coax for antennae?
To: lml
X-Mailer: CommuniGate Pro WebUser v6.0
Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2012 11:15:20 -0500
Message-ID: <web-5952817@logan.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAEFKvnwkk-Yq-0bfHsWgDV7YKhr94+6oiDZ4e6R6bSY9YLNYhQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAEFKvnwkk-Yq-0bfHsWgDV7YKhr94+6oiDZ4e6R6bSY9YLNYhQ@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/html;charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

<div id="_htmlarea_default_style_" style="font:10pt arial,helvetica,sans-serif"><br>Posted for Jon Hadlich &lt;hackmo15@gmail.com&gt;:<br><br> You get
what you pay for. RG =58 is 1950's technology. RG -400 is modern,<br> double shielded, tefezel type jacketed and spec'ed in all modern install<br>
manuals as the coax required. Spend the extra $100-$200 ( for the simple<br> install) and receive a lifetime of quality radio performance.<br> <br> --
<br> Jon Hadlich<br> AI Systems<br> (541) 815-7381<br><div align="left"><br></div><div align="left">[Thanx for the input. &nbsp;Will do.
&nbsp;&lt;marv&gt; &nbsp; &nbsp;]</div><div align="left"><br></div></div>