RG6 or RG6 quad shield for antenna run?

I installed a Channel Master 2016 antenna on my roof
I now need to run coax from it to the inside of house.... about 50 feet I think
Is RG6 quad shield the better choice over plain RG6 in most cases? The price diff isn't that much actually.
If yes, why?
Thanks!
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@privacy.net wrote:

just connecting to the antenna directly (w/o the impedance matching xfmr) and running 300 ohn twin lead?
Boden
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Boden wrote:

If I found that twin-lead worked, I'd still got with RG6. I'd lose a little signal strength in the transformer and the transmission line, but HDTV doesn't seem to need much signal strength.
With HDTV, anything that breaks the digital train can interfere with viewing. Coax is less affected by rain, sun damage, proximity to metal, and RF interference. Apparently the quad shield was developed for greater reliability, so I'd go with that.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 17 Nov 2008 10:44:47 -0600, snipped-for-privacy@privacy.net wrote:

Shielded "foam" twin lead is usually the best choice for antennas from my experience. Way back in the olden days when you had to get a Richmond station (from DC) to get blacked out Redskin games, that was the lead in of choice for our 60' masts.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Nov 17, 11:44 am, snipped-for-privacy@privacy.net wrote:

Quad shield might have lower loss than regular RG6. Even though its only 50 feet cable, if you have marginal signal strength, it might be the difference of getting a picture or not. Keep in mind most HD channels operate in the UHF spectrum which is more sensitive to cable loss. For example, for analog channels below 450Mhz, the loss might be 2 db per 100 feet, but for UHF 450Mhz and up the loss could be 5-6 db per 100 feet. So getting the right cable helps, and also keeping it as short as possible.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Nov 17, 10:44 am, snipped-for-privacy@privacy.net wrote:

I'd use the RG6QS with Thomas Betts Snap-n-Seal connectors, you'll never have a problem with signal loss, interference or water. Make sure you get connectors compatible with QS also. When I wired my house 10 years ago the price difference was so small I used QS and have never had a weak signal going to 10 rooms via a distribution amp in the basement. Both are just as much work why not do the best?
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

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

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.