Router needed but...
June 20, 2013 11:47 AM Subscribe
Wife has trouble getting wi fi on cell in bedroom and router/modem downstairs...Router is pretty old and not I think a good one. Would like one that I simply take the two wires from old and put into new, strong one. No messing with it beyond that...is this possible and what should I get ?
Too old to have tech know -how and want simple install. I have been told that routers wear with time so thought a new, better one might help wife get wi fi all over the house.
My present router has one tiny antenna, two wires to modem. I want better, stronger router but one I simply put the same two wires into it with no configuration needed. Possible?
Too old to have tech know -how and want simple install. I have been told that routers wear with time so thought a new, better one might help wife get wi fi all over the house.
My present router has one tiny antenna, two wires to modem. I want better, stronger router but one I simply put the same two wires into it with no configuration needed. Possible?
Routers do not "wear with time," although the addition of other routers nearby may affect how well yours works. Newer routers do support better antenna arrangements, newer standards, additional frequencies, etc. which can improve reception compared to your existing router, if your client devices support these features.
Getting a router that is a plug-in replacement for the one you already have is not likely. There will need to be some configuration done. This should, however, take about 10 minutes for anyone reasonably savvy.
If your router has an external antenna, and this antenna can be unscrewed (some do, some don't), then an easy upgrade is to simply put a bigger antenna on it.
posted by kindall at 11:54 AM on June 20, 2013
Getting a router that is a plug-in replacement for the one you already have is not likely. There will need to be some configuration done. This should, however, take about 10 minutes for anyone reasonably savvy.
If your router has an external antenna, and this antenna can be unscrewed (some do, some don't), then an easy upgrade is to simply put a bigger antenna on it.
posted by kindall at 11:54 AM on June 20, 2013
Routers do not "wear down" with time, but simply fail. You can't just plug a bigger antenna in — the wireless router needs to issue a stronger signal. This is a configuration issue, if it is even possible with your particular model of router.
If you want the simplest installation and strong signal everywhere, get a couple AirPort base stations. Set up the first to connect to your modem. Place the second on upstairs floor, within range of the first station, and configure it to extend the wireless network with the configuration tool (available for Windows and Mac computers and iOS devices). It is about a five- to ten-minute dead-simple job to set up.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 11:59 AM on June 20, 2013
If you want the simplest installation and strong signal everywhere, get a couple AirPort base stations. Set up the first to connect to your modem. Place the second on upstairs floor, within range of the first station, and configure it to extend the wireless network with the configuration tool (available for Windows and Mac computers and iOS devices). It is about a five- to ten-minute dead-simple job to set up.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 11:59 AM on June 20, 2013
Routers generally don't degrade over time BUT they often need to be rebooted at times. Some have a setting where you can have it reboot itself at designated times. More than once I've been unable to get an android device new to the router I'm working with to connect until after rebooting the router. On many routers rebooting is just unplug for 10-15 seconds, plug back in.
posted by logonym at 12:00 PM on June 20, 2013
posted by logonym at 12:00 PM on June 20, 2013
I don't think it's so much "wear down with time" but more that individual components develop issues which degrades performance. I just replaced a fantastic netgear router after it developed a loud hum and consistent dropping of signal which I was able to trace to an individual failed component. It still "worked" but not as well as when it was new.
Any new router is going to need some kind of configuration just to secure it. The asus model I just bought is far more than you would need, but I found their basic configuration guide and GUI really easy to follow versus some other manufacturers. So my basic suggestion would be to find manufacturers with good ratings on ease of setup.
You should figure out what the old router was speed wise - A,B,G, and N are the most common speeds with N being the newest/fastest. If the old router was A/B and your wife's phone is relatively new (capable of G or even N) she might benefit greatly with a newer, faster model.
posted by Big_B at 12:11 PM on June 20, 2013
Any new router is going to need some kind of configuration just to secure it. The asus model I just bought is far more than you would need, but I found their basic configuration guide and GUI really easy to follow versus some other manufacturers. So my basic suggestion would be to find manufacturers with good ratings on ease of setup.
You should figure out what the old router was speed wise - A,B,G, and N are the most common speeds with N being the newest/fastest. If the old router was A/B and your wife's phone is relatively new (capable of G or even N) she might benefit greatly with a newer, faster model.
posted by Big_B at 12:11 PM on June 20, 2013
You can't just plug a bigger antenna in
Yes, you can (assuming the antenna on your router is removable). I've done this and it makes a substantial difference.
The broadcast power is still the same, but the longer antenna puts more of it into the horizontal plane perpendicular to the antenna, and wastes less of it going vertical. The longer the antenna, in other words, the flatter it radiates.
posted by kindall at 12:55 PM on June 20, 2013
Yes, you can (assuming the antenna on your router is removable). I've done this and it makes a substantial difference.
The broadcast power is still the same, but the longer antenna puts more of it into the horizontal plane perpendicular to the antenna, and wastes less of it going vertical. The longer the antenna, in other words, the flatter it radiates.
posted by kindall at 12:55 PM on June 20, 2013
The ideal antenna is half a wavelength. If it's smaller (quarter) then you get less effective signal. If it's bigger (i.e. three quarters) then you get less signal. At one wavelength it effectively isn't there, and the efficiency rises as you reach 1.5 wavelengths, which is exactly the same as 0.5 wavelength.
A lot of the experience people have suggesting "more is better" comes from their experience with AM radio. But the wavelength for AM radio is about 300 meters, give or take. Half a wavelength for the ideal antenna is considerably longer than a soccer field. So if your antenna is a couple meters long, making it 25 meters long really will increase your signal.
The antennas that come on most wifi routers are usually already at the ideal length. For 2.4 GHz wifi, that's 6.25 centimeters, about 2.5 inches.
posted by Chocolate Pickle at 1:36 PM on June 20, 2013
A lot of the experience people have suggesting "more is better" comes from their experience with AM radio. But the wavelength for AM radio is about 300 meters, give or take. Half a wavelength for the ideal antenna is considerably longer than a soccer field. So if your antenna is a couple meters long, making it 25 meters long really will increase your signal.
The antennas that come on most wifi routers are usually already at the ideal length. For 2.4 GHz wifi, that's 6.25 centimeters, about 2.5 inches.
posted by Chocolate Pickle at 1:36 PM on June 20, 2013
Another thing that's critical is that the transmitting antenna be oriented the same as the receiving antenna. If they're 90 degrees apart, then polarization causes considerable attenuation in the signal. (It's like polaroid sun glasses.)
The reason why a longer antenna doesn't help is that the speed of light isn't infinite. The impinging RF induces a minute electric current in the antenna. If the antenna is one wavelength, then the signal in the far half of the antenna is out of phase with the near half, and they destructively interfere. At half a wavelength you maximize the signal. If it's shorter, less signal is induced. If it's longer, you lose to destructive interference.
posted by Chocolate Pickle at 2:14 PM on June 20, 2013
The reason why a longer antenna doesn't help is that the speed of light isn't infinite. The impinging RF induces a minute electric current in the antenna. If the antenna is one wavelength, then the signal in the far half of the antenna is out of phase with the near half, and they destructively interfere. At half a wavelength you maximize the signal. If it's shorter, less signal is induced. If it's longer, you lose to destructive interference.
posted by Chocolate Pickle at 2:14 PM on June 20, 2013
By the way, if you're thinking "Well, then, I'll buy a hub with more transmit power", well, you can't. They all already transmit at the highest power level that the law (or FCC regulations) allow.
posted by Chocolate Pickle at 2:16 PM on June 20, 2013
posted by Chocolate Pickle at 2:16 PM on June 20, 2013
It is moderately techy but you might be able to install custom firmware that can boost your wireless signal.
posted by brilliantmistake at 4:36 AM on June 21, 2013
posted by brilliantmistake at 4:36 AM on June 21, 2013
Custom firmware would definitely make configuration much more complex. If the existing router is really old (like a b-only router) then buying a newer one might actually be a good thing to do. With G and N bands on newer routers, you get much better range.
Outside of that, a repeater like MoonOrb linked would do the trick.
What would be nice to have from Postroad, is some more information about the existing setup. Could you take a picture of how it is currently wired up and post it online somewhere? Or could you provide the make/model of the existing router and describe the wires and their locations relative to each other?
posted by samsara at 5:52 AM on June 24, 2013
Outside of that, a repeater like MoonOrb linked would do the trick.
What would be nice to have from Postroad, is some more information about the existing setup. Could you take a picture of how it is currently wired up and post it online somewhere? Or could you provide the make/model of the existing router and describe the wires and their locations relative to each other?
posted by samsara at 5:52 AM on June 24, 2013
While Chocolate Pickle has an excellent point that bigger antennas cannot possibly help, his very astute message fails to explain why, in fact, they do help.
And they do work, as I said, by flattening the radiation pattern so that more signal is broadcast in the horizontal plane. Overall power is the same, but there is more of it where you need it. They are not as good for tall structures, for obvious reasons, but they work great in single-story homes. Source: experience.
There are also directional antennas. If your router is in a corner room of your house, for example, an antenna designed for a corner will keep nearly all of the signal in the house instead of wasting three quarters of it outside the house. This effectively gives you four times the signal inside the house.
Some newer routers have beam-shaping technology. An array of directional antennas is used, and the power is sent in the direction of clients, which are actively tracked as they move around the service area. The D-Link DIR-645 is one such router. In my experience, this works pretty well (I have one of their access points, basically the same device except it's designed to be chained off another router).
The FCC limit is on a given radio's total power output, by the way, so you can shape where that power is sent (i.e. sending it all in one direction instead of radiating omnidirectionally) without violating any regulations.
posted by kindall at 10:54 AM on June 24, 2013
And they do work, as I said, by flattening the radiation pattern so that more signal is broadcast in the horizontal plane. Overall power is the same, but there is more of it where you need it. They are not as good for tall structures, for obvious reasons, but they work great in single-story homes. Source: experience.
There are also directional antennas. If your router is in a corner room of your house, for example, an antenna designed for a corner will keep nearly all of the signal in the house instead of wasting three quarters of it outside the house. This effectively gives you four times the signal inside the house.
Some newer routers have beam-shaping technology. An array of directional antennas is used, and the power is sent in the direction of clients, which are actively tracked as they move around the service area. The D-Link DIR-645 is one such router. In my experience, this works pretty well (I have one of their access points, basically the same device except it's designed to be chained off another router).
The FCC limit is on a given radio's total power output, by the way, so you can shape where that power is sent (i.e. sending it all in one direction instead of radiating omnidirectionally) without violating any regulations.
posted by kindall at 10:54 AM on June 24, 2013
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by davejay at 11:50 AM on June 20, 2013