PL football on 19.2e?

This is a cutoff from the same cable.

cheap cable,
not even CC
looks like thin stuff too,
tbh, if its screw on connectors they could just have loosened off a bit, even more so with you swapping them over now.
probably no grease on the outside connectors either.
 
Bought it in a local sat shop a few years back, to be honest I wouldn't be too clued up on sat cable quality.
Thanks Steptoe, would you have any recommendations for decent sat cable, preferably with connectors?
 
I use 'PROPER' CT100 myself, but there are lots of cheap 'clones' of it about,
most guys on here recommend WF100 , which is same standard as CT100 , and TM'd so cant [shouldnt be] cloned/copied

EDIT : I use CT100 as I can get bit at very good value for money, WF100 is the same standard, but you pay a premium for the name, IMHO
be very careful of buying CT100 if you dont know what you are buying, lots of cheap imitations about
also loads of false information of it abound the internet
 
I use 'PROPER' CT100 myself, but there are lots of cheap 'clones' of it about,
most guys on here recommend WF100 , which is same standard as CT100 , and TM'd so cant [shouldnt be] cloned/copied

EDIT : I use CT100 as I can get bit at very good value for money, WF100 is the same standard, but you pay a premium for the name, IMHO
be very careful of buying CT100 if you dont know what you are buying, lots of cheap imitations about
also loads of false information of it abound the internet


they used to be different wf100 had the foam core (wf webro foam) ct100 did not.

wf100 is the better cable.

virgin use rg6 cable which does do an job but wf100/ct100 is far better.
 
they used to be different wf100 had the foam core (wf webro foam) ct100 did not.

wf100 is the better cable.
justify that then.
there is no difference,
WF100 is made to an original RG6 standard,
as is CT100 , and always has been,
except CT100 was often made to a lot lesser standard, and often airspaced,
'PROPER' CT100 IS JUST AS GOOD AS, IF NOT BETTER , THAN WF100

RG6 is an outdated standard that only nowadays relates to a physical size, not an actual quality,
do NOT use cable that simply calls itself RG6 cable, VM do not use basic RG6 cable

I want to know what proof you have that WF100 is any better than PROPER CT100
I have real working world evidence on this subject.
 
Last edited:
they used to be different wf100 had the foam core (wf webro foam) ct100 did not.

wf100 is the better cable.

virgin use rg6 cable which does do an job but wf100/ct100 is far better.

apart from editing your post,
do you know the actual difference in different types of co-ax apart from what google throws up, ?
RG [radio grade] is an outdated standard that is only now used to identify a physical size, not a quality.
still wondering why you say WF100 is better than CT100 .?
I'm not saying its not, just wondering why you say it is.
 
justify that then.
there is no difference,
WF100 is made to an original RG6 standard,
as is CT100 , and always has been,
except CT100 was often made to a lot lesser standard, and often airspaced,
'PROPER' CT100 IS JUST AS GOOD AS, IF NOT BETTER , THAN WF100

RG6 is an outdated standard that only nowadays relates to a physical size, not an actual quality,
do NOT use cable that simply calls itself RG6 cable, VM do not use basic RG6 cable

I want to know what proof you have that WF100 is any better than PROPER CT100
I have real working world evidence on this subject.


So Webro are lying then? I was around long time ago when webro first released wf100 i even chatted to them directly months later they had started talking about deals with Sky who then cut a deal with them for them to use only wf100 (sky used ct100 and rg6 before and had problems) also back then belden was only provider you could trust for quality

Sorry buddy you do not know what you are on about virgin use rg6 which is copper/alumin that is what rg6 is.

ct100/wf100 now are almost the same due to both being foam and if you stick with webro you know you will get quality but others use the same name which quality is not so good no one else uses wf100 name.
 
So Webro are lying then? I was around long time ago when webro first released wf100 i even chatted to them directly months later they had started talking about deals with Sky who then cut a deal with them for them to use only wf100 (sky used ct100 and rg6 before and had problems) also back then belden was only provider you could trust for quality

Sorry buddy you do not know what you are on about virgin use rg6 which is copper/alumin that is what rg6 is.

ct100/wf100 now are almost the same due to both being foam and if you stick with webro you know you will get quality but others use the same name which quality is not so good no one else uses wf100 name.

sky use wf65 , not WF100
and, CT100 is foam, CT100 copy is/was air spaced
as I said earlier, RG6 is a very old military standard that hasnt been used for a very long time, and now its only relevance is a physical size
I never said Webro were lying
I think you believe too much of what google tells you,
 
sky use wf65 , not WF100
and, CT100 is foam, CT100 copy is/was air spaced
as I said earlier, RG6 is a very old military standard that hasnt been used for a very long time, and now its only relevance is a physical size
I never said Webro were lying
I think you believe too much of what google tells you,


I can tell you are new at this I worked for Raydex I bet you do not even know who they was so I knew the full history of the cables and was involved in how they was produced was around fat the beginning of all these multi changes with the cables because of issues and in house fighting.

ct100 was not foam it is now

rg6 is used by virgin media i have no idea how you have come up with this story about it is not because it's old military spec are you sure that you are not confused because a lot of cables have gone through different life cycles and brands make a difference the very old rg6 is not the same as modern rg6 which has gone down same route as ct100 did now it's foam big difference between the two is ct100 is copper rg6 is alumin

no point really arguing over this lets just say wf100/ct100 if you go for proper brand like webro/belden you are getting quality
 
Last edited:
I can tell you are new at this I worked for Raydex I bet you do not even know who they was so I knew the full history of the cables and was involved in how they was produced.

ct100 was not foam it is now

no point really arguing over this lets just say wf100/ct100 if you go for proper brand like webro/belden you are getting quality

I am new to it bud,
how'd you guess.?
and no, proper CT100 has always been foam,
like I said, there were lots of 'copies' of it that were airspaced as they never trademarked [or copyrighted or whatever it is] the name, unlike WF100, which is a very new cable, more than likely a trademarked version of CT100
 
Back
Top