Is there a F connector for RG6 that is 90 degrees?

I am replacing all my coax cables with RG6 and new connectors.
However Two of the cable outlet are behind something - a chest and a shelf. Currently I have the old store bought per-terminated cables 15 years old but have the 90 degree elbow on it so you can push the chest all the way in. But I have not seen (I went to Radio Shack looking) any F connectors I can use that are 90 degrees. Anyone knows of any?
Thanks,
MC
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
miamicuse wrote:

Radio Shack and others sell a 90 degree adapter onto which you can connect any F type connector.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
miamicuse wrote:

Any reason you need to replace the coax? Just curious. Tony, VE6CGX
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Tony Hwang wrote:

Maybe it's RG59. Not clear if he means the runs in the walls or just the interconnects.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 01 Dec 2005 12:58:08 GMT, Steve Kraus

RG59 is more suitable for baseband video signals vs. broadband broadcast RF.
If you want the best, specify RG6/U Quad shield cable. Use of cheaper cables can allow VHF broadcast signals (CH2 - 13) to penetrate the crappy shielding and cause ghosts and interference.
Also, theoretically, you don't want to have too many 90 degree bends in your cable (as is the case with that adapter). Even though I say this, I use them where they are convenient and usually everything works ok, but the theory says you are creating a discontinuity causing reflections, interference, and possibly reducing the bandwidth of your cable.
Beachcomber
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 01 Dec 2005 13:41:42 GMT, not snipped-for-privacy@xxx.yyy (Beachcomber) wrote:

Hokum. Blanket statements such as these suggest that you don't know what you're talking about.

Take a look at your nearest cell phone tower and note all of the paralleled cables running up the tower. They are carrying both transmit and receive signals, in the same frequency band, and they are all single-shielded cables.

A well-built adapter (an oxymoron in the cable TV business) might be a better solution than a tight bend in the cable itself. Foamed dielectric cables are highly prone to migration of the center conductor. The shielding effectiveness of foil shielded cable can also be unstable.
All of these houses with built-in cables, installed by electricans trained to minimize the length of wire used, are going to have future problems. I would rather have "old-fashioned" RG-59, solid dielectric, 99% copper braid cable than this new foamed tin-foil crap.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

But that's a copper corrugated cable, with a 100% shield, not braided like RG6/59. Apples to oranges.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I am replacing them because I am getting poor picture quality on two out of my four TVs. Lower channels was flickering.
I previously had ran RG6 on all the cables in the attic. This time I replaced a $5 1->4 splitter with a Monster cable splitter. The fickering on lower channels on both TVs disappeared. Then I ran new interconnect RG6 cables (instead of RG59) from the wall outlets to the TVs and VCRs and picture quality improved dramatically.
I used both compression connectors and crimped style connectors, not sure if they will make a difference. I love the compression fittings though, makes for a much cleaner connection.
One thing I still don't understand is why one has to fold back the braid and not just cut it out. What does the folded back braid do?'
MC
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

I guess "lower channels" is 2-6. I've heard of there being more problems with them.

I have just replaced most of the cable in my house, with considerable improvement too. Channel 6 (one of the lower ones) had a lot of problems before that.
BTW, did you know that CABLE (not UHF broadcast) channels 95 to 99 and then 14 to 22 are in the gap between 6 and 7 (the others are above 13)? I can remember getting cable 22 on an older TV (mechanical "KLUNK" tuner, not cable ready) by setting it to 7 and adjusting the fine tuning.

Crimped connectors are OK if you have a good crimper. The cheap ones don't work very well. The connections are noisier, and the ends fall off more easily.

Folded-back braid makes better contact with the connector, and avoids a hole in the shielding (allowing noise in). One cause of a noisy picture after making a new cable, is braid that was not folded back,

--
23 days until the winter solstice celebration

Mark Lloyd
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

95, 96, 97 are on the same frequencies as broadcast FM radio over the air. Some cable systems used to deliver radio services in this band but that's probably going digital these days. 98 & 99 are just above this. 14-22 are considered midband. 23 picks up right where 13 leaves off (super band). It doesn't start overlapping with over-the-air UHF channel 14 and above until about cable channel 65.
By way of general explanation, the reason for the difference between cable and over-the-air, or why didn't they just use all the same frequencies as VHF and UHF is that the higher the frequency the more difficult it is to pump it through a cable so they use all the frequencies.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sat, 03 Dec 2005 07:18:52 GMT, Steve Kraus

So you do know. I remember that UHF 14-69 are in the same frequency range as cable (around 65-125), but the channels are 1.25MHz off. The (newer, with automatic fine tuning) TV I tried it on could still tune UHF channels when set to "cable". At that time there were a couple of UHF channels here that you could get with an antenna, but were not on cable.
--
22 days until the winter solstice celebration

Mark Lloyd
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
miamicuse wrote:

http://mcm.newark.com/NewarkWebCommerce/mcm/en_US/endecaSearch/partDetail.jsp ;jsessionid=FJPDEPOVIF5ZCCXFEOFCFGQK2URYWIV1?SKU'-500&N=0
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Radio Shack has right angle adapters for the end of a normally terminated cable.
#278-235 is a push-on version.
http://www.radioshack.com/search/index.jsp?kwCatId 32058&kw=coax+connectors&numProdsPerPage&pg=2
#278-305 is a screw-on adapter.
http://www.radioshack.com/search/index.jsp?kw=coax+connectors&kwCatId 32058&numProdsPerPage&pg=3
I have never seen a right angle terminator for RG59 or RG6 but that doesn't prove anything.
SJF
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.