On Fri, 27 Nov 2009 14:16:36 -0600, Vic Smith
wrote:

On Fri, 27 Nov 2009 12:03:01 -0800 (PST), Skip Gundlach
wrote:



If I ignore the header, I see 400 at 1.2, 8x at 2.5, 58 at 4.6, etc.
Is it not there, or am I missing the 213/4?

Too confusing for me to look at. But I've seen in multiple places
that the 213 and 214 are identical on the electronics signal stuff.
The difference is double shielding versus single, copper versus
silver, implied longevity/signal degradation, and "guaranteed" quality
- all in 214's favor. Price is in 213's favor.

--Vic



Another "better" use for the price difference would be for purchase of
a second antenna on a fold down mount. These are often mounted to a
lifeline stanchion. If your call for help involves a dismasting, your
main antenna may be 50 feet under water, pointed towards Davey Jones.
No cable is going to overcome THAT, or when you lose your mast top
antenna in a knock down.

My guess is that more radio failures are caused by the cheap included
mics that come attached to most VHF radios, and the extremely failure
prone coily cord for the mic. Do you carry a spare mic and cord? You
can have the healthiest VHF carrier in the world, but without high
quality modualtion it won't matter. I often hear weak, garbled VHF
transmissions that have an adequate carrier to reach me. Stock mics
tend to be a very weak link.