Re: QCX mini: RF output BNC or SMA #poll-notice


namerati@...
 

On Thu, Aug 06, 2020 at 06:28:35AM -0700, Russ@va3rr via groups.io wrote:
The NanoVNA group has been seeing some issues with SMA connectors.
The consensus at the NanoVNA group was that the "ideal" solution was the APC3.5 connector:
https://www.maurymw.com/pdf/datasheets/5A-011.pdf

Unfortunately this is not exactly cheap.

Since professional grade test equipment uses SMA connectors, where they are mated thousands of times over the life of the instrument, it seems unlikely to be *that* much of an issue for a HF transceiver where connector impedance is of such little importance that people are suggesting RCA plugs instead (!!!).

(why not binding posts?!)

Personally I am quite alright with using SMA in the field and I much prefer to save the size/weight.

However the poll as given omits the option of including both SMA and BNC footprints on the PCB, which seems to be clearly the best option!

Join QRPLabs@groups.io to automatically receive all group messages.