I complained about the addition of the cable glands because of the way it was implemented. The glands are part of the removable part of the box, not the stationary part. As a result to remove that cover on the box you had to loosen the cable glands, push enough slack through to allot you to swivel out the cover, and then let the cover hang with the cables going through it. Hated it. I talked to Shane about it and he said an engineer threw that feature in at the last minute and they have since removed them from the design. I said just redesign so that the cable glands are stationary at the bottom of the box and let the lid close around them. We'll see.
I am using the dual-5Ghzsectors and have had great results with them. I am swapping out 120 that are full with these dual 60s using the same mounts and getting more capacity. -Ty -Ty On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 2:14 PM, Jeremy <jeremysmi...@gmail.com> wrote: > If you have used KP antennas before they have made some marked > improvements over their old hardware designs. The bracket is stronger, but > also sticks out much further, removing the need to disconnect the sector to > get the rear cover off. If you are not using UBNT or EPMP, then the cover > never needs to come off (except to connect the Type-N jumpers initially), > and the 450 sectors can be mounted to the cover. Having not done that, I > am guessing it will be a fairly tight fit. The grooves are the correct > size this time, and Rockets fit without modifications (after a slip up in > manufacturing and testing that we received on our last order). The EPMP > adapter also appears to work, although I haven't tried it personally. > > Also, the shielded boxes used to fill up with Wasps, but now they have > cable glands leading into the AP case. My only complaint with this new > improvement was that the shielded connectors do not fit through the gland. > It's a lesson that I should have learned long ago, but I didn't....so I had > to cut the ends off, push them through, and then re-terminate them. > > We are only using the 2.4GHz/5GHz combos, and have been happy with their > performance. They are a huge antenna, but not as big as two antennas. > > On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 12:07 PM, Tyson Burris @ Internet Communications > Inc <t...@franklinisp.net> wrote: > >> Good afternoon, >> >> >> >> If you have deployed the KP Performance 3.65/5Ghz Dual Sectors, I am >> curious how they are working for you. >> >> Also, if you are, did you have to modify any part of the equipment for >> proper mounting/installations? >> >> >> >> To save tower space, I am considering deploying several but don’t won’t >> to have performance problems. >> >> >> >> *Tyson Burris, President* >> *Internet Communications Inc.* >> *739 Commerce Dr.* >> *Franklin, IN 46131* >> >> *317-738-0320 <317-738-0320> Daytime #* >> *317-412-1540 <317-412-1540> Cell/Direct #* >> *Online: **www.surfici.net* <http://www.surfici.net> >> >> >> >> [image: ICI] >> >> *What can ICI do for you?* >> >> >> *Broadband Wireless - PtP/PtMP Solutions - WiMax - Mesh Wifi/Hotzones - >> IP Security - Fiber - Tower - Infrastructure.* >> >> *CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail is intended for the* >> *addressee shown. It contains information that is* >> *confidential and protected from disclosure. Any review,* >> *dissemination or use of this transmission or its contents by* >> *unauthorized organizations or individuals is strictly* >> *prohibited.* >> >> >> > >
