Re: What Is The Hands Down Best Long Range Router??

lukev247 <lukev247.2vn57h@no-mx.wirelessforums.org> hath wroth:

>im tryin to get good wireless reception in my office out back of my
>house... i just bought a linksys home router and pci adapter but im only
>averaging about 20 mbps and that just isnt fast enough.... what is the
>best router for long range

You can have speed, or long range, but not both. They're inversely
proportional, all other things being equal.
<http://wireless.wikia.com/wiki/Wi-Fi#Performance_and_Speed>
If you're getting 20Mbits/sec thruput, then you must have a 48Mbit/sec
connection. You're not going to go much faster with 802.11g or
whatever you have for hardware. You can possibly go faster with Pre-N
hardware, but that might be at the expense of range.

Incidentally, the Shift keys seem to be broken on your keyboard. You
might want to get them repaired.



--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

On Aug 20, 9:35 pm, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com> wrote:
> You can have speed, or long range, but not both. They're inversely
> proportional, all other things being equal.
> If you're getting 20Mbits/sec thruput, then you must have a 48Mbit/sec
> connection. You're not going to go much faster with 802.11g or
> whatever you have for hardware. You can possibly go faster with Pre-N
> hardware, but that might be at the expense of range.

I'm running almost ten miles with 802.11g with 100 Mbps equipment and
get about 70% throughput which is plenty for my 30 Mbps internet
connection (50 Mbps by winter)...but I have 70 ft. towers at both ends
and a 1.2 Fresnel clearance and better than 20 dB fade margin.

nevtxjustin@gmail.com hath wroth:

>On Aug 20, 9:35 pm, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com> wrote:
>> You can have speed, or long range, but not both. They're inversely
>> proportional, all other things being equal.
>> If you're getting 20Mbits/sec thruput, then you must have a 48Mbit/sec
>> connection. You're not going to go much faster with 802.11g or
>> whatever you have for hardware. You can possibly go faster with Pre-N
>> hardware, but that might be at the expense of range.

>I'm running almost ten miles with 802.11g with 100 Mbps equipment and
>get about 70% throughput which is plenty for my 30 Mbps internet
>connection (50 Mbps by winter)...but I have 70 ft. towers at both ends
>and a 1.2 Fresnel clearance and better than 20 dB fade margin.

What 2.4GHz 802.11g product are you using that yields 70Mbits/sec
thruput at 16Km? I'm familiar with 100Mbit/sec and faster links, but
they either use either 5.2/5.8GHz or proprietary modulation schemes,
not 802.11g.

--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

On Aug 25, 10:57 pm, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com> wrote:
> nevtxjus...@gmail.com hath wroth:
>
> >On Aug 20, 9:35 pm, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com> wrote:
> >> You can have speed, or long range, but not both. They're inversely
> >> proportional, all other things being equal.
> >> If you're getting 20Mbits/sec thruput, then you must have a 48Mbit/sec
> >> connection. You're not going to go much faster with 802.11g or
> >> whatever you have for hardware. You can possibly go faster with Pre-N
> >> hardware, but that might be at the expense of range.
> >I'm running almost ten miles with 802.11g with 100 Mbps equipment and
> >get about 70% throughput which is plenty for my 30 Mbps internet
> >connection (50 Mbps by winter)...but I have 70 ft. towers at both ends
> >and a 1.2 Fresnel clearance and better than 20 dB fade margin.
>
> What 2.4GHz 802.11g product are you using that yields 70Mbits/sec
> thruput at 16Km? I'm familiar with 100Mbit/sec and faster links, but
> they either use either 5.2/5.8GHz or proprietary modulation schemes,
> not 802.11g.

Sorry, I meant 5.8 GHz, not 802.11g...I wasn't paying attention to
what I was saying.

They aren't cheap. $10,000 per pair.