Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 58
  1. Collapse Details
    #11
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Atlanta, Ga.
    Posts
    8,191
    Post Thanks / Like
    Contribute If you enjoy reading the
    content here, click the below
    image to support our site.
    Click Here To Contribute To Our Site
    I also noticed that there are no FCC certifications for this C2PLL lnb even though it is required to have certification. In the past, Brian Gohl, owner of Titanium Satellite has made a big deal about satellite products Not Having FCC certifications attached to the product. I have looked at his current inventory and do not see a single product that has FCC certification marks. I guess some people will do anything to bash the competition.

    I have selected satellites at 116.8 and 55.5 West for testing the C2PLL lnb. Professional lnb manufacturers tell us that a PLL type lnb will not have much if any advantage over a DRO type lnb for most of the satellite signals that we receive. Titanium satellite claims huge advantages for the PLL lnb. We will see who is right.

    Attached are some test scans that were done on 116.8 and at 55.5 West today. I have been able to spend the time needed to optimize the C2PLL to my 7.5 ft. or 2.3 meter dish. My plan for tomorrow will be to scan the same two satellites in the morning and in the evening. Then continue this routine for a few days. Next, change lnbs and repeat the process. Doing this should give me some idea as to how these two lnbs compare.
    Attached Files Attached Files
    Reply With Quote
     

  2. Collapse Details
    #12
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Calgary, AB
    Posts
    13,910
    Post Thanks / Like
    Interesting thread EB,

    Looking forward to more results..The FCC thing shows the integrity of a persons character while preaching about lack of certificates on other sites about other products.

    I guess the dollar is the evil in this case.

    click click b00m
    Reply With Quote
     

  3. Collapse Details
    #13
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    7,247
    Post Thanks / Like
    "I also noticed that there are no FCC certifications for this C2PLL lnb" The FCC probably hasn't followed the money trail to warrant the enforcement of their own Part 15 rule. But then again, the certification may be pending.... LOL!!
    Reply With Quote
     

  4. Collapse Details
    #14
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Atlanta, Ga.
    Posts
    8,191
    Post Thanks / Like
    Transponder signal width for the C2PLL lnb is about identical to the Pauxis DRO lnb, which was identical to the 242 lnb that e Pauxis replaced.

    The C2PLL shows the 3968 transponder to be about 8 MHz wide at 116.8 West
    [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

    The C2PLL shows the 3920 transponder to be about 20 MHz wide at 105 West.
    [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
    Reply With Quote
     

  5. Collapse Details
    #15
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Atlanta, Ga.
    Posts
    8,191
    Post Thanks / Like
    I finished my last blindscan of the C2PLL lnb tonight. The results have been logged using a TBS5925 device and its supporting software.

    C2PLL blindscans using my Duo2 fta receiver have not been real impressive, but they have not been bad either. They closely resemble or are equal to blindscans that have been done using the Pauxis lnb.

    The Duo2 and some of my other receivers will find and log weak transponders during a blindscan but you will not have a signal on them when they are scanned. This is normal and it does not reflect an extra sensitive receiver tuner or lnb. A blind scan is looking for satellite signals that are not known to the receiver. The receiver may exhibit some extra sensitivity during a blindscan and log transponders that are below the value needed to display a picture.

    On the other hand, the TBS5925 will log any transponder that has a signal the TBS5925 can recognize. This is the main reason I prefer to use the TBS5925 when testing signal strength.

    Hopefully sometime tomorrow I can swap the C2PLL for the Pauxis and start repeating the three days of scans that were done using the C2PLL lnb.
    .
    .
    .
    Meine Dreambox One ist ein Stück Scheiße!.
    Reply With Quote
     

  6. Collapse Details
    #16
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Atlanta, Ga.
    Posts
    8,191
    Post Thanks / Like
    I should be finished with the Pauxis scans in two more days. Looking at the information I have already is enough to make my eyes bleed.

    Attached are screenshots of a couple of XML scan logs. You can decide who the winner is between these two or if there is a winner at all.

    I will post all xml scan logs when finished.
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Reply With Quote
     

  7. Collapse Details
    #17
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Atlanta, Ga.
    Posts
    8,191
    Post Thanks / Like
    The 3 Days of scanning each lnb is complete.
    I see no clear winner, but the files are attached for you to decide.
    The Pauxis will stay on my C band dish, and the C2PLL will be returned to its rightful owner.

    My impression of the Titanium C2PLL lnb is nothing above average. I feel that it should have done better when compared with a two year old DRO lnb.
    The C2PLL is more about Hype and Sales Pitch than performance.
    The C2PLL heatsink is useless and it makes no sense at all for it to be installed the way it is. The C2PLL would be better with just a normal cover because the heavy heatsink upsets the balance of the lnb. EB
    Attached Files Attached Files
    Reply With Quote
     

  8. Collapse Details
    #18
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Atlanta, Ga.
    Posts
    8,191
    Post Thanks / Like
    Interesting to see Geosat have a C2PLL lnb. It costs less money than the Titanium C2PLL, and the Geosat C2PLL has more realistic specs.
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Last edited by el bandido; 11-09-2014 at 09:13 PM.
    Reply With Quote
     

  9. Collapse Details
    #19
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Atlanta, Ga.
    Posts
    8,191
    Post Thanks / Like
    Saw an ad in Telesat where The Titanium Pll lnb was tested against another lnb. I do not see this test as being anything close to fair because (1) The reference lnb was a dual lnb where the Titanium was a single, and (2) The reference lnb did not have the same feed horn as the Titanium lnb. Looks like the only way the Titanium lnb can win big in a test is to cheat or to be tested by Brian or somebody else that is selling them.

    [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
    Reply With Quote
     

  10. Collapse Details
    #20
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    9,278
    Post Thanks / Like
    Will start adding to this thread as I bit the bullet and ordered the dual to test on my 10' bud and will further test the single on my 8' solid.
    Reply With Quote
     

Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •