Leaderboard

First: WELCOME! Welcome to the forum, welcome to the hobby. Second: The Midland magmount is disposable. The environmental sealing around the magnet lasts about a year, then the magnet rusts and the thing falls apart. Third: What kind of car do you have? Fourth: What do you mean by "clean install"? Do you want it in-dash, or just screwed to it with a bracket? Me, for example, I went for the MXT275 and a passthrough mount. When done, it'll look utterly factory and stealth. Other options I've considered was ripping out the stock head unit for a single-DIN unit with CarPlay, and a single-DIN two-way radio below it. (None of the links constitute an endorsement, just an example.) Fifth: Nagoya now makes an antenna specifically tuned for GMRS. This may be your best bet. (This is an endorsement)

Update 2: Wrote a review of the 76 and 76P. TL;DR: 76 is recommended, 76P is not.

Not sure of the connector type or antenna that comes with it. If it is a standard pl259 style connector. You could always go with a better mag mount and antenna or drill a hole for NMO mount. Personally, with what I have experienced I would look into a nice 5/8th antenna where any coils are going to above roof racks or other obstructions. You will get a much better ground plane with a properly installed drill type nmo. Which can lead to better reception and transmit range and quality of signal. 90% of this type of mount is getting over the worries of the install Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

Sorry to beat a dead horse, but the subject of Midland radios being not dual PL tone capable has already been addressed. The MXT400 is split tone capable if programmed to do so. Out of respect for the experts on here who have posted about this several times, and so they won't have to post yet again, please view this thread: https://forums.mygmrs.com/topic/1837-midland-gmrs-product-updates/page-3 I have not tried it myself (yet), but to be fair, this option is out there. ...

Maybe I am the only one, but I am confused about the purpose of this ongoing rant. Complaints on an online forum are not going to change anything. If you want change, file a Petition for Rulemaking with the FCC. Then get people to support your petition. But, to the points you raise. First, about GMRS radios themselves: Some of your facts are wrong or off target, there is no need for a -5 MHz (not KHz) offset on a GMRS radio. There are only 8 repeater input frequencies defined and those are all 5MHz higher than the 8 defined repeater input frequencies. And, the number of internal memory locations (aka "channels) that a given user needs is very difficult to determine. Probably more than 22, but 180? Zello? Zello works just fine without a GMRS radio at all. But, Zello is an Internet (IP) based app, which means anything that connects to Zello needs an Internet connection. But, you also suggest GMRS should work when away from any cellular infrastructure. So, how is your Zello equipped GMRS radio supposed to connect to Zello when you are in the middle of nowhere? And you complaint about morse code, I really don't know what that is about? We live in a free market economic system. Manufacturers are free to offer products they feel will meet customer and investor needs. You have a choice. And, if you don't like the certified GMRS products you can choose from, there are plenty of other options, from super-cheap CCRs to super-high end Part-90 commercial equipment. Technical questions aside, your major complaint seems to be about licensing fees. Here again I think you are off base. Many services, especially commercial, marine, aviation, LMR, broadcast, common carrier, cellular, etc. have licensing fees and they are often quite expensive. At $7 a year, GMRS is cheap by comparison. Yes, it is more than Amateur. But, Amateur radio is also considered a public service, with a long history and International agreements. And, what difference does it make who you pay a licensing fee to the FCC, the ARRL, a local radio club or whatever? But, even here you are not current. There is now a proposal in the FCC to lower GMRS licensing fees to $50 and add a fee for Amateur radio. The reason? It appears federal law requires fees be set to recover costs. The GMRS fee was bringing in too much money, ham radio was bringing in nothing. You also object to being taxed on your GMRS radio, but have no issue with the FCC requiring a cell phone company to offer a GMRS repeater service on every tower for free. When you consider the equipment and installation costs, plus administration and maintenance costs, are you willing to pay for that every month when Verizon and AT&T raise your bill to cover their costs? There is no free lunch. Ok, you obviously feel strongly about something, otherwise you wouldn't have started this topic and posted 7 follow-up comments. But, it is really hard to understand just what it is you are complaining about and what you think should be done about it. Can you succinctly state the top 5 high level problems you see with GMRS today, the reasons you think those are problems, and 5 proposed solutions.

Well, it would appear you didn’t scroll down as far as 15-May and 20-May of this year? May I suggest that next time you ask for help, you trying being a bit more polite and avoid sarcasm and snarky comments. Nobody is paid to participate here, we do it freely because we want to be helpful and enjoy the community.

A tip on reading the advice regarding radio suggestions. There is a tendency for ham operators to be more willing to use commercial and/or used equipment. On the other hand, those who started with GMRS or came from CB tend to prefer turn-key purpose made gear. Neither is better or worse than the other. But, depending on your needs and abilities, there might be a difference to you. You check under the avatar to see if a member lists a ham license. Most, but not all, hams do. Personally, I like Motorola equipment and the M1225 is a fine radio. But, consider the info under my avatar. YMMV And, +1 on bluemax49ers for your programming cable needs.