What kind of connector would you prefer on a next-gen miniPCI card
- uFl
- mmcx
- RP-SMA
0
voters
Please vote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SMA_connector
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hirose_U.FL
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MMCX
My dilemma is between SMA and U.Fl. Below are my thoughts.
SMA:
- threaded, so cannot just be pulled off by cable movement or vibrations
- consumer grade antennas+cables availble off the shelf.
- slightly thicker coax possible on pigtails
- new pigtails
- big connector, might be a problem with card placement on existing routerboards.
U.Fl
- existing pigtails
- mechanically tried and tested in MT (better the devil you know
)
- easy to break
- easy to get disconnected
- thin coax only
MMCX
- slightly larger cable than U.Fl possible…
- … but not as thick as SMA
- new pigtails, new trials, new everything
why not U.Fl for ant-a, and SMA for ant-b?.. unless you plan to finally introduce antenna diversity, that is
I say SMA as the less losses the better(bigger plug). It is also screw-on so more securely fixed. Might be a problem for those tight-fit installations though.
As thick as SMA would have to be I think it is too big for a mini-pci card.
u.fl is much smaller, perhaps too small for someone with fat fingers, I’m always worried about bending something when installing a u.fl pigtail.
MMCX to me is a great solution for a mini-pci card, it’s a well fitting connector, you can hear the click when it snaps in fully and it will swivel 360 degrees.
We currently use both u.fl and MMCX, we’ve had a few u.fl pigtails come loose but never the MMCX. A solution similar to what andreacoppini suggested would be to put both the u.fl and MMCX instead of the u.fl and SMA. The SR5’s from Ubiquiti already do this.
I’d like to see MMCX connectors sticking right out the top of the card like the Ubiquiti SR71 cards are.
-Gerard
Hi,
we’ve no problems with U.FL. So why change.
Most cards use it and our CPE-antennas have integrated Pigtails with U.FL.
Of course if you can increase signal-quality noticable with other Connectors/Pigtails
it’s the way to go.
We’ve more problems with Ethernetconnectors…
Stefan
I like MMCX
+1 for MMCX.
I prefer SMA for loss reasons and because the anntenas I can get here are SMA.
So for me:
1 x Ufl for posterities sake and 1 x SMA.
For next card (orr topic)
I would like between xr2 and r52h
so
power of R52h
Robust or xr2
connectores of xr2
Price between r52h and xr2
Slim like r52h
Really really good sensitivity (so it would hang on at -92
Anything but u.fl. We had so many issues with u.fl from installers, tower crews to testers. We replaced so many pigtails!!
MMCX seem to be better fit for the small form factor of the card but if you ask me, if I don’t have to climb the 600-foot tower to change out the pigtail, I will surely vote for SMA. SMA FTW!!
We actually stop buying wireless boards from MT 
because of the U.FL issues. We bought from a maker that uses the same chipset but different connector type (!u.fl 
) So, if you start making boards that use SMA or even MMCX, we will start buying from MT again.
rgd,
San.
Definately MMCX
It is small enough to fit on the mini-pci cards but much more secure than u-fl and is already commonly used by other vendors.
You can also solder the plug to the socket with a dab of solder to make it completely secure (this is what Proxim do on their 5054-R products)
MMCX + U.Fl combination is best for versatility.
But much more important: unless you plan to introduce diversity, please get rid of the weakest part, the diversity switch (small 12-pin square chip between A and B antenna connectors).
One connector is enough for 99% cases.
I don’t want to know who much attentuation we have got with the u.fl plug. We saw phenomens if we turn the u.fl plug the signal increases up to 4 db. The was happen with different u.fl pigtails.
I would to see mmcx.
Now let’s be practical. Most, maybe all, embedded antenna+enclosures available on the market (including Mikrotik’s own RIC range) use the U.Fl connector for the antenna. I can see the advantage of an SMA connector since it’s screw-on and bigger, but what are the real, practical advantages of MMCX over U.Fl?
With MMCX, besides the mounting posts of RBs now we will also have to deal with stocking various pigtails or even having to cut & re-solder a RIC’s antenna connector, when it’s much easier to crimp an SMA connector if we really have to change them.
Finally, for all those who still insist on MMCX who would not want to reterminate into an SMA, there are loads of SMA Male > MMCX female adapters out on the market already…
I still believe U.Fl + SMA connectors (as antenna A and antenna B) is the way to go. This way we can still keep using pigtails and enclosures already deployed and have an upgrade path to a good, solid, screwable connector…
MMCX as they are much more robust and allow a higher grade pigtail to be used inside the case.
With u.fl we have heaps of problems. Our manufacturers have taken to using hot glue to hold the pigtails in place, which means if a card goes (damn those R52H) we have to replace the pigtail too.
I am not concerned with paying $10 extra for a better connector.
ufl + mmcx.
I’ve only had one ufl failure so far, and it was before I knew how fragile they were. MMCX is pretty tough.
After some consideration, I feel confident:
MMCX
- and only one connector is enough!
You will have U.Fl cards available from multiple sources, there remains choice for replacements etc
But we need something reliable for tower installations etc. Without this diversity switch chip which is so easily fried!
SMA seems bulky and expensive for miniPCI. Mechanically this will create problems when the low-loss too-fat SMA pigtail will stress the miniPCI slot.
I don’t agree. Next-gen cards will probably be (should be?) mPCI-Express, which have two holes for screws near the antenna connectors. I believe this is by specification (not sure). That would reduce the stress on the slot connector.
As for the expense, I’d rather spend $10 more for a reliable connector which won’t come off with a few vibrations.
Thats why I like the MMCX. Solid, but not so tough that I think some of my tower climbers might break the card.
Both will be tough to fit in smaller cases. That is why I’d like to keep ufl as well.