Testing the Titanium C140 and C240 5G Filtered BLUE LNBFs

N6BY

Geek
Original poster
Lifetime Supporter
Mar 1, 2006
3,307
3,283
Roseville, CA 121W
I recently received the new C140 and C240 5G filtered BLUE LNBFs from Titanium Satellite https://titaniumsatellite.com/products.php

The C140 has one output and the C240 has two. The pass band for both LNBFs is from 4,000 to 4,200 MHz. Most North American satellites have moved all of their transponders to this 200 MHz frequency range, with the exception of 115W and 117W which are intended for Mexico.

This first signal graph is from an older LNBF that has a pass band of 3,800 to 4,200 MHz. As you can see, the 5G signal spikes at my QTH are quite strong!
c138.jpg


The signal graph below is from the new Titanium C140 LNBF, taken from the same dish and the same satellite as above. It filters 5G very well below 4,000 MHz.
c140.jpg


Graphs are useful, but the most important consideration is how well do these LNBFs perform with actual FTA TV viewing? I scanned each satellite from 103W to 139W and I didn't see any reception glitches.

When mounting these LNBFs, the "0" mark on the back should be adjusted so that it is horizontal (parallel to the horizon).
ZeroMark.jpg


The LNBF package includes a scalar ring, 7 mounting screws, an allen wrench, a dielectric slab for circular polarity reception, and an installation guide with specifications.

The photo below compares the size of the C140 (in front) with the older C138. You can see that the C140 has a larger circuit board container, which is very well sealed to prevent moisture intrusion.
c138andc140.jpg


In summary, I am very pleased with the performance of these 2 new LNBFs. If you are experiencing any 5G interference in your C-Band reception, I highly recommend the Titanium C140 and C240 LNBFs.
 
Aside from differences in frequency filtering, how does the signal strength from 4000-4200 MHz compare between the C138 and C140? If I'm understanding the graphs correct, the C140 looks like it has better signal?
 
Aside from differences in frequency filtering, how does the signal strength from 4000-4200 MHz compare between the C138 and C140? If I'm understanding the graphs correct, the C140 looks like it has better signal?
They are about the same signal strength. But I can see how you would think the C140 has higher peaks --- the vertical scale of the graphs are different (5 dB vs 10 dB on the left side).
 
  • Like
Reactions: FTA4PA
Brian's blue lnbf came today. It works great. The 3.8 to 4.2 lnbf in the last few months became unwatchable on several feeds as the last of the 5g got turned on in September. The new 4.0 to 4.2 dual is fantastic. Hope it works great for everyone.
I hope it works Eutelsat 117 West freq 3947 as my Wife can't watch the Honduras Channels anymore. Will give a try in January
 
  • Like
Reactions: FTA4PA and MikeI
I hope it works Eutelsat 117 West freq 3947 as my Wife can't watch the Honduras Channels anymore. Will give a try in January
A transponder at 3947 MHz is far below the band pass frequency range of 4000 - 4200 MHz and will not be received. The C140 and C240 BLUE filter LNBFs attenuate all signals outside the band pass. Simply put: you cannot filter out the frequency that you wish to receive. Save your money, aggrevation, dissappointment and a pending bad product review! 😯

Your best chance of receiving the 3947 transponder is to locate a 3900 - 4200 BPF LNBF.

AND

Block the 5G terrestrial signals from reaching your dish. You might have to move the dish behind a structure or build a rf wall out of chicken wire / hardware cloth, etc.

It is extremely helpful to use a 3700 or 3800 - 4200 BPF LNBF with a spectrum display, to view the 5G interfering signal spikes that would be present below 3980 MHz. You will then see if attempts to block the terrestrial 5G signals are attenuating the spikes. An inexpensive tinySA Ultra purchased on Amaxon or Ebay along wthe a 2GHz splitter is all you need to identify the signals you wish to receive vs those you don't. Otherwise, your just playing an expensive game of "Pin the Tail on the Donkey" with labor and buying / trying various filters.
 
...It is extremely helpful to use a 3700 or 3800 - 4200 BPF LNBF with a spectrum display, to view the 5G interfering signal spikes that would be present below 3980 MHz. You will then see if attempts to block the terrestrial 5G signals are attenuating the spikes. An inexpensive tinySA Ultra purchased on Amaxon or Ebay along wthe a 2GHz splitter is all you need to identify the signals you wish to receive vs those you don't. Otherwise, your just playing an expensive game of "Pin the Tail on the Donkey" with labor and buying / trying various filters.
I hope it works Eutelsat 117 West freq 3947 as my Wife can't watch the Honduras Channels anymore. Will give a try in January
My first signal graph in post #1 is 117W with a 3800-4200 C138. 3947 is not receivable here with either the C138 or C140 -- there is simply too much 5G at my location. However, with the C140 I was able to receive as low as 3972 on 117W.

... If you don't want to buy a TinySA, there is currently a TBS6983 on eBay for only $49 !! (It's not mine, but it is a great deal). The seller lists it as a "Quad Tuner", but it is actually a dual tuner. Still, for the price it is well worth it. I use my TBS6983 with EBSPro and the EBSPro mobile app to fine tune my satellite dishes. Also used it, of course, to make the signal graphs in this thread.

Anyway, yupidixie, if you are somehow able to get 3947 I will be interested to know how you did it. Before I got a C138 I tried blocking 5G with wire mesh, but it turned out to be a futile effort and a waste of $100.
 
  • Like
Reactions: madmadworld
Top