[Date Prev][Date
Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date
Index][Thread Index]
Re: RG6 vs CT100
- To: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: RG6 vs CT100
- From: "Mark McCall" <mark@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 12:35:36 -0000
- Delivered-to: rich@xxxxxxx
- Delivered-to: mailing list ukha_d@xxxxxxx
- Mailing-list: list ukha_d@xxxxxxx; contact
ukha_d-owner@xxxxxxx
- Reply-to: ukha_d@xxxxxxx
Agree with James. Your CT100 is a higher quality cable than RG6.
M.
--- In ukha_d@xxxxxxx, James Hoye <jhoye@l...> wrote:
> > I have installed CT100 cables for TV distribution in my house. I
am
> > considering signing up to NTL's digital cable service and
> > they tell me that
> > my existing cables (CT100) will not do and that I need RG6
> > instead. Are they
> > right? Does anyone know the difference between CT100 and RG6?
>
> Sounds like they could be talking bollocks. RG6 is standard 75 ohm
coaxial
> cable isn't it? Surely CT100 is far superior being shielded in
addition.
>
> Perhaps you installed your CT100 in the wrong direction, and the
cheaper RG6
> being bi-directional wouldn't matter ;-)
>
> James H
-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9699/3/_/2065/_/975328549/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->
Home |
Main Index |
Thread Index
|