Leaderboard

I found this new gmrs radio the other day and i think the retivis ra-25 might be a clone of this radio. I looked at both of the fcc id's and i couldn't find retivis but i did find the anytone fcc id. It's part 15B and part 95E. looks like a pretty good radio. At least its a lot cheaper than midlands. what do you think? https://www.amazon.com/Transceiver-AT-779UV-Cigarette-Connector-Programming/dp/B08PF9QTLH/ref=sr_1_5?dchild=1&keywords=anytone+gmrs&qid=1608113683&sr=8-5 https://fccid.io/T4K-779UV

Hi All, This is an addendum to the antenna tests, with a not too unexpected twist, with new information for the twist not being available for the tests I performed and posted previously. A point to make is that I designed the test for worst case conditions and in retrospect, that is not the case most of the time when going mobile. In subsequent posts on this thread, I made a response to another post within the thread which I will repeat here. This had to do with the performance of the Midland MXTA25 “ghost”. It went like this: “……It's not that the MTXA25 is that bad. It's just that in a worse case test the difference between the antenna that came with the radio and the ghost is not enough to justify the cost of the new cable and the cost of the antenna itself. And as I mentioned, in best conditions the ghost might outperform the 1/4 wave factory antenna. I don't have that information…..” Based on my tests I decided to order a Laird ¼ wave antenna to use as a primary. This way I could switch antennas between it and my 6dB MXTA26 antenna. At first it seemed to work fine. But that changed. Over the course of a month and a few hundred miles in all conditions, during which I switched antennas multiple times for testing, I’ve come to the conclusion that in normal mobile usage the MXTA25 “Ghost” antenna is much superior to the ¼ wave Laird. It vastly outperforms the ¼ wave antenna in reception (I don’t know why just yet) but also does on transmissions. This is under normal everyday driving in all sorts of situations, and of note, with distant repeaters. The transmission side is easier to understand if the 3dB gain claim for the MXT25 is to be believed. At this point it sure seems to be a true claim. The Midland mag mount comes with a 6 meter (long!) RG58/a/u cable. If using the 0dB gain ¼ wave antenna, the math says that in that setup the MXT275 radio is putting out just 7 watts or so. With a 3dB gain on the Ghost that becomes 14 watts (theoretically). It sure seems to be playing out that way. Only on worst case (my original test) did it not. So, off came the ¼ wave Laird. I am now using the MXTA25 as my standard antenna. I still have not figured out why the reception would be so much better with the MXTA25 but I’m working on that. Thanks all! Best, JAS WRKP245

Whew. Done deal. Works as advertised. Programmed for area repeaters and simplex 'wheelin' channels + ham repeaters scan.- 3 zones. Clears the seat slide & I don't ford rivers so should be good. Kenwood TK-8180 with remote kit. Sent from my Pixel 4a using Tapatalk

Some googling puts the btech and the mxt400 pretty close in size, 7.5"x5.7"x1.85" for the btech, vs 7.3"x5.5"x1.6" for the mxt400. There's other posts around the forum on programming the mxt400, software sources, and what cable is needed. On the btech, I want to say I paid a little extra for the cable, but it isn't needed absolutely needed if all you're changing is tones. it's straightforward to do from the menu/front panel, and it will do split tones out of the box.

MXT400 (will upgrade to MXT500 when released). Mounted with a JCR Off-road overhead Molle panel in my 2021 Jeep Wrangler Unlimited Rubicon. 6db antenna mounted at the bolt forward of the radio antenna. I also have a Kenwood D710GA with the antenna mounted on the opposite side (but likely moving to rear tailgate when I upgrade the Midland).

That's a pretty good summation. FRS/GMRS might be all you need. Some get a taste, and move on to Amateur radio. I've been an Amateur since 1992, but I was/am excited to see the popularity of GMRS taking off. Once you're used to VHF/UFH FM, it's hard to accept crappy AM (CB) radio communications. Like I said, a wide spectrum of society likes "Jeeping" and off-roading. Midland's marketing to that niche group will expand the use of the band as they discover uses for GMRS off the trail. It's all good. I have the abilty to transmit and receive across the VHF/UHF spectrum here at home. I don't really mind hearing the kids playing around on there (except for that non-stop call "ring"). That's what the bubble packs are for. It's a good way to spark an interest in electronics and communications.

And Ham license is also now $35. Historical move. Ham license, aside of the testing costs, was always free in US, right?

Sound like you want a radio that has group scan where you put the channels into a group you want to scan or scan some other group even all... The two radios I know who can do group scan is KG-1000g mobile or base config or HT KG-905G which I have and works so well. If anyone knows of other radios that allows you to do grouping to add channels into a group to scan, I would like to know for knowledge. Jack

Sorry for the delayed response. I have several repeaters in my area and a simplex channel the family uses that I like to monitor. Rather than scan through all the channels I wanted to only scan CH 18, and the 3 or 4 repeater channels. That way I could leave my radio in scan mode and not have it stop on other channels I have no interest in monitoring.

Honestly, for as much as I hate to say it, I think this is where we need the FCC to step in, flex its muscle and start making some public noise and examples out of folks using illegal and non-performant product on FRS and GMRS frequencies as well as unlicensed folks using amateur frequencies. It does not help the future of GMRS when anyone in this community condones use of illegal equipment in any way, including, but not limited to, lending assistance to someone asking questions about use of equipment that is known to be illegal in the service. Yes, I am all about freedom, but freedom balanced with due respect of our laws. Just one man’s opinion. YMMV. Michael WRHS965 KE8PLM

I'm definitely interested in seeing what the MXT500 and 575 will have to offer.

It will be interesting to see if either the MXT500 or MXT575 will allow configuration via external software. The problem with Midland is that are just really just resellers of other manufacturers products. So, these two new radios could be based on the previous 275 & 400 (which were unlike each other), or some totally different platform(s).

That is great news! I'll be all over that 575!

I also just talked with Midland tech support about the new 50W mobile. They said there will be an MXT500 (regular mobile version) and an MXT575 version with all controls on the microphone, like the MXT275. Tech Support (Sara) could not provide a release date but said it would definitely be in 2021.

The SW-33 I've got is a garbage. Not sure if every one of them like this or I got a lemon, but mine does not work correctly on UHF. Shows grandma's birthday instead of forward and reflected power. VHF measurements are close to reality.

Do not buy Surecom SW-33 for GMRS. It's a miles off on these frequencies.