Getting 50 watts actually out of repeater

[WSEL330]

That was 48 Watts outta the repeater and 24 Watts outta the duplexer.... that loss is huge and lame at the same time!

 

[WRYZ926]

That is just how it works with duplexers. You will always have a lower power output after the duplexer than what going in. How much loss will depend on the quality of parts used and how well tuned the duplexers are.

I did an unscientific test to see if 50 watts had more reach than 20 watt. There is a GMRS repeater about 50-55 miles away and while I can get in at 20 watts, others had a hard time hearing me. My signal was loud and clear. The extra power did not get me anymore range but it did punch through foliage and other obstacles better than

[LeoG]

I've confirmed this too.  I was able to hit my house with my repeater (50w) but the 20w base couldn't hit the repeater reliably.  I swapped up to a 50w mobile at the house and now it's a reliable connection.  Before it would come in some days and others I could barely hear it.

Now I've changed a few things out and it's so much better.

[WSEL330]

foliage punch is what I was looking for. Now I will work on better coax, verify quality of connectors and connections, upgrade the antennas. OF COURSE, I am new and excited but I need to take time to evaluate the amount of RF junk and etc... in the shack of radios A.O. Oh yeah, get the truck outta the trees and gain elevation! Calling my realty person, LOL.

[WSEL330]

FYI, the Duplexer I am/was using which gave me 24W from a 47W input is the DP-GMRS-100 by XLT.

[WSEL330]

Soooo... I might have a duplexer for sale, Justa sayin....

[LeoG]

I have the similar XLT 100 watt duplexer, DP-GMRS-100R and it has less than a 1.3dB loss through the duplexer.  I think the difference is it's in a rack case and has N connectors instead of 239s.  I saw almost no difference between the 3 duplexers I have from the output of my repeater.

[WSEL330]

5 minutes ago, LeoG said:

I have the similar XLT 100 watt duplexer, DP-GMRS-100R and it has less than a 1.3dB loss through the duplexer.  I think the difference is it's in a rack case and has N connectors instead of 239s.  I saw almost no difference between the 3 duplexers I have from the output of my repeater.

Noted, I may need to visit that facet

[LeoG]

Maybe your tune is a bit off.  Doesn't take much.

[TerriKennedy]

3 hours ago, WSEL330 said:

FYI, the Duplexer I am/was using which gave me 24W from a 47W input is the DP-GMRS-100 by XLT.

That's either a very mis-tuned duplexer or a broken one.

I'm using an EMR 526-4 on my repeater, tuned to .700 by a dealer. Other than being huge, heavy, and looking like an out-of-control party at a steamfitter's convention it does an amazing job. N connectors on input and output (and I assume throughout, but I'm not checking because I might throw the tune off).

[nokones]

On 9/11/2025 at 5:11 PM, WSEL330 said:

FYI, the Duplexer I am/was using which gave me 24W from a 47W input is the DP-GMRS-100 by XLT.

Over time, your output signal level from that particular duplexer will severely degrade because the plastic inserts in the cavity ports will burn out from the RF.

What is that time spand, it will depend on when the plastic wants to give up based on the use.

[nokones]

On 9/11/2025 at 9:25 PM, TerriKennedy said:

That's either a very mis-tuned duplexer or a broken one.

I'm using an EMR 526-4 on my repeater, tuned to .700 by a dealer. Other than being huge, heavy, and looking like an out-of-control party at a steamfitter's convention it does an amazing job. N connectors on input and output (and I assume throughout, but I'm not checking because I might throw the tune off).

Excellent duplexer. You won't have any problems like the XLT duplexers have.

[LeoG]

4 minutes ago, nokones said:

Over time, your output signal level from that particular duplexer will severely degrade because the plastic inserts in the cavity ports will burn out from the RF.

What is that time stand, it will depend on when the plastic wants to give up based on the use.

That should only happen if you are putting to much power into your duplexer or near the limit.  This is one reason why I upped my duplexer to a 100 watt unit from a 50 watt.  The RPT50 pushes about 65 watts into the duplexer so it can get a full 50 watts out.  I knew eventually the teflon inserts would degrade so I just got a more robust duplexer so I wouldn't have to deal with that situation.

[LeoG]

3 minutes ago, nokones said:

Excellent duplexer. You won't have any problems like the XLT duplexers have.

Considering it's 10x the cost I hope not.

[TerriKennedy]

14 hours ago, LeoG said:

Considering it's 10x the cost I hope not.

More like 2.5x (used) with an appropriate tune. Definitely scary expensive if purchased new.

[GreggInFL]

On 9/11/2025 at 8:20 PM, LeoG said:

I think the difference is it's in a rack case and has N connectors instead of 239s.

The Ns are that much better?

[SteveShannon]

30 minutes ago, GreggInFL said:

The Ns are that much better?

N connectors are more appropriate for UHF than the PL259/SO239 connectors and they form a water tight seal. Given the choice I would choose N connectors for GMRS.

[LeoG]

5 hours ago, TerriKennedy said:

More like 2.5x (used) with an appropriate tune. Definitely scary expensive if purchased new.

All the places I looked on line said ask for a quote.  That's always scary.  I found one with a price of 2300.  The XLT he has goes for 249 currently with a tune.

It's what I was able to find online, your mileage may vary

[nokones]

5 hours ago, TerriKennedy said:

More like 2.5x (used) with an appropriate tune. Definitely scary expensive if purchased new.

If the station is going to live in a RF Hell environment, you'll be glad you went that route. If the station is in an environment by itself, the EMR Corp. mobile six-cavity duplexer would have been efficient.

[LeoG]

1 hour ago, GreggInFL said:

The Ns are that much better?

 

1 hour ago, SteveShannon said:

N connectors are more appropriate for UHF than the PL259/SO239 connectors and they form a water tight seal. Given the choice I would choose N connectors for GMRS.

The only thing I'm not sure about is if they just stuck the SO239 version inside a rack case and cabled it to N connectors outside the rack box.  Or if it's N's fully integrated.

[GreggInFL]

2 hours ago, SteveShannon said:

N connectors are more appropriate for UHF than the PL259/SO239 connectors and they form a water tight seal. Given the choice I would choose N connectors for GMRS.

I'm looking at a new antenna with an "N" connector, but I have some LMR-400 with PL259s on both ends. I know adapters are not good, but how bad would one be for this application?

[LeoG]

Or you can change out one of the fittings. 

[GreggInFL]

9 minutes ago, LeoG said:

Or you can change out one of the fittings. 

LOL. I have skills, but that's not one of them. My buddy is Mr. Magic when it comes to things like that, but if an adapter is okay to use I'd rather go that route than bother him.

[LeoG]

If it's going to be somewhat of a permanent setup bother your friend.  If you are just doing some testing use the adapter.

[SteveShannon]

31 minutes ago, GreggInFL said:

I'm looking at a new antenna with an "N" connector, but I have some LMR-400 with PL259s on both ends. I know adapters are not good, but how bad would one be for this application?

I would change one end to a high quality N connector.  The compression ones from Messi & Paoloni require nothing more than a soldering iron and two wrenches.