Suitable coax & connectors for Sky or UPC

baggytiger

I've recently bought a house and I'm getting it rewired before I move in, including putting in coax cable for TV/broadband. I'd like to cater for the possibility of getting Sky in future, although I'll probably be going with UPC initially. So excuse me posting in the "Satellite" forum, because I believe some of this is Sky-specific.

One electrician who has quoted has told me what brand of coax he would use. On doing some research I've found that this is RG6 type, Copper Coated Steel. It sounds like there is better coax than this, and it shouldn't cost a lot more. So I'm thinking of buying the cable myself.

What I think I'm looking for is "shotgun" cable (2 cables joined together) which should be copper-on-copper (core, screen and braiding all made from plain copper).

So can anyone answer a few queries for me?

1. Does this sound right?

2. Are there any other important features I should be looking for in the coax spec?

3. What are suitable brands?

4. Where can I get them in the Dublin area / anywhere else in Ireland / on the internet?

5. On a different but related topic, another thread in this forum (sorry, not allowed to post the URL, but the title is "Sat Coax for Cable" started by Myrddin on 04-07-2010) inquires about switching from Sky to UPC and continuing to use the same cables. Apparently feasible, but the OP says "Obviously the end connectors would be different". Can someone explain why - and what I need to specify to the electrician in this regard?

Thanks.

The Cush

Webro WF100 (twin) cable, basically 2 WF100 cables joined together - http://www.satcure.co.uk/accs/WF100_cable.htm#WF100twin

Also smaller twin cable that fits through a standard CT100 cable hole but with higher signal loss - Webro WF65 Twin Satellite Cable.

CAI approved cable list - http://www.cai.org.uk/information/benchmarking-scheme/cai-benchmarked-cables

baggytiger

Thanks Cush. That list of CAI approved cables has a separate "Twin Type" section in which WF65 appears but not WF100. Given your comments, I would have expected WF100 to be more likely to be there. On the other hand, WF100 appears twice in the "Type 100" section. Perhaps one of these is the twin cable?

Any thoughts welcome - although I'm also intending to follow this up with Webro themselves, seeing as they have contacted me following my download of a couple of their datasheets.

The Cush

baggytiger wrote: »

That list of CAI approved cables has a separate "Twin Type" section in which WF65 appears but not WF100. Given your comments, I would have expected WF100 to be more likely to be there. On the other hand, WF100 appears twice in the "Type 100" section. Perhaps one of these is the twin cable?

There is a separate CAI Benchmark specification for CT100 twin cables but no company it seems has submitted or passed the testing.

Can't speak for Webro but maybe they didn't submit their twin CT100 cable for testing as the single cable version had already received its certificate and the twin version is just 2 of these cables joined. Cost of testing could be an issue, double the cost for basically testing the same cable spec?

RN Electronics carry out their cable testing.

baggytiger

The Cush wrote: »

maybe they didn't submit their twin CT100 cable for testing as the single cable version had already received its certificate and the twin version is just 2 of these cables joined. Cost of testing could be an issue, double the cost for basically testing the same cable spec?

Thanks - that sounds like a plausible explanation.