EPMP 2.4ghz SM choices

Hi all,
Justa question about SM’s. We are putting together a small site (8houses) in some trees that we dont get good coverage with 5gz. I think the 200-25’s are gonna be overkill so was wondering what you all use for the connectorized radio antenna? is there a certain panel that works well? Basically something in between the basic integrated SM and the 220-25

We typically avoid the connectorized SM’s just because we don’t want the added cost of the panel, and RF jumpers… along with the possibility of water getting into the connectors creating a support nightmare. If the SM’s receive RSSI is too high, we just misalign it a bit.

1 Like

The difference in gain between a F200 and a F130 or Integrated is about 5 dBi - a F200 is 17 dBi, and a F130/Integrated is 12 dBi, so only about 5 difference.

In our experience, there’s not enough space between those two options to start trying to rig something else up.


good info guys thanks! ill stay away from conectorized units

We do use connectorized 2.4ghz 1000’s when we mate them with a larger gain antenna (22dBi) for longer (or more deeply buried) links. But we pretty much use Force 200’s mostly all the time otherwise.

The way I do the math, there’s very little use case for a 2.4Ghz low gain radio, such as the 12 dBi integrated.

I figure that:
a) I want to get EXCELLENT signals whenever possible with all clients (ie -55)
b) If I can achieve a -55 signal with a 12 dBi antenna, then the obstructions probably aren’t too bad, and I’ll bet I can get through them with a Force 300 and it’s higher gain 25dBi antenna.
c) But if I can’t use a Force 300 (even with a much higher gain AP and SM antenna) and if I do have to use 2.4Ghz, then that usually means that the obstructions are usually bad enough that I need to use a Force 200 @ 2.4Ghz (17dBi) anyway.

That’s what it seems to me anyway…


I wouldnt stay away from the connectorized radios, but as pointed out, there is no logical or cost point to using a connectorized sm when tou have the ability to de-tune a site thats receiving a signal thats too hot. If you use ATPC on the AP it will control the SMs to limit their power levels dynamically.

Not sure intentionally misaligning antennas, especially MiMo antennas, is ever a good idea since it can/will adversely effect chain balance (not an issue on the old single stream A,B,G stuff) along with a host of other possible issues.

1 Like

It depends on if you are just de-tuning in both directions or not. It is very important to de-tune both chains as equally as possible to prevent other issues in the radio and to ensure throughput is good despite the de-tune.
Personally, I would take the de-tuned antenna issues over over-driving a RX network any day! The problems that a too hot signal can cause are hard to pin point and will cause throughput issues due to needing more time to bleed off the standing power from the antenna.

There are good arguments for both philosophy’s and neither is truly 100% correct.

This topic was automatically closed 365 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.