Leaderboard

Are we sure it isn't a third harmonic problem with the Sheriffs transmitter? Well looky here: FRS Channel 11 : 467.6375 / 3 = 155.879 MHz 155.880000 (output) 158.95500 (Input) KNEP918 Sheriff Dispatch Custer County Law Dispatch Looks like either the Sheriff is the violation or the BaoFengShui GMRS V1 cannot tolerate all those powerful signals getting into it from the new base antenna. My money is on the BF GMRS V1 crapping itself.

Just finished my Wouxun KG-1000G install with a Midland 6db antenna. Fabricated the mount from 3/16" aluminum and used an existing attachment for my 100w solar panel. I already had a CB mount from Quadratec,, and so far it passes muster with my co-pilot since this radio is smaller than the CB it is replacing. I had to run new power straight from the battery to supply the 15 amps and a new ground to the chassis. Mic Mount is a $6 workman plastic clip with some VHB tape to a leftover Ram ball mount I already had. I may get a longer arm to get it down out of the way a bit more...

After posting to someone else's thread and realizing I hijacked his thread about scanning, I figured I'd start a new thread with cool "tips and tricks" that people have discovered with their new KG-1000G radios. Perhaps we can also use this thread as a "does anyone know how to..." for the KG-1000G. It will also be an interesting read for anyone considering this radio, since it will hopefully eventually contain a lot of detailed info about how specific features are implemented. I'll start with this one (cross-posted from the other thread - if someone can tell me how do delete that other post, I will be glad to do so!): Quickly adding a "privacy tone" that others are using on blister pack radios My Jeep and I were in a parade over the weekend for a couple of WWII vets that were celebrating birthdays (97 and 100!). The organizers were on GMRS/FRS HTs and I asked what channel they were on. "Channel 7 with privacy channel 35" he told me. Not knowing which brand radios they were using nor remembering off the top of my head which frequency corresponds to "privacy code 35" on most radios, I was able to use the Menu [41] "SC-CTC" option (which I've programmed to Key C) to "grab" their PL frequency and then save it to my radio on channel 7 within about 30 seconds. Super handy if you're needing to inter-operate with people on Motorola, Midland, or Cobra radios and using "privacy channels". Note: If you want to be able to RX and Tx with the tone, you need to also change the default setting for Menu [40] "SC-QT" from DECODER to ALL. Pretty neat feature that saved me the stress of having to manually look up possible tones and then program them via FPP while the parade was starting...

OK I'm jumping in on this bandwagon. I tend to go overboard when I learn new stuff, so technical aspects don't worry me. What does worry me, however are things like: 1. Requires a windows PC to function properly (I'm a Mac guy). PITA drivers to install, com ports to configure with USB emulators with poorly written drivers, etc. 2. Requires 10 hours of study to accomplish a task I will perform once or twice a year, and thus I will have to repeat that 10 hours of study every year because I can't remember the details from the last time. 3. Expensive recurring costs of ownership like annual subscriptions or costly maintenance updates. 4. Spending more than I needed to because of some whiz-bang feature I'll rarely or never actually use 5. Requires babying and constant "re-tuning" or calibration before using (spend as much or more time tweaking as using) (and yes, I regularly do all of these things, but I try now to avoid them!) I had just ordered a Surecom SW-33 Mark II and then came across this thread, so I cancelled the order while I ruminate a bit. I like information, and love data. I love to optimize stuff. But I don't see myself getting to the point where I'm going to have a bench with a bunch of oscilloscopes and soldering irons. (that was my Dad, who built Heathkit radios and TV sets when I was a kid back in the 70's) Given all that, I feel like spending $50 on the Surecom SW-102 or $60-$70 NanoVNA seems like a reasonable step up in price from the $45 Sw-33 given the extra functionality. Though looking at the video tutorials for the NanoVNA, it seems like overkill for me (violates rules 1, 2, 4, & 5 for me) ​I guess the real question is which of those options is most compliant for what I need (which I think is similar to the OP's original question). "Which one is "good enough" in terms of accuracy, usability, and features? There definitely seem to be some strong opinions, and if you spend time on forums, this sort of thing isn't uncommon (nor is it anything but well-meaning usually). It's sorta like the following exchange: ​OP: "Whats the best way to get from LA to NYC on a budget?" Reply 1: "Citation X - it's faster than a Gulfstream G-650 and less than half the cost" ​Then a debate rages about the differences between the Gulfstream and the Citation, with the inevitable person saying "Hey, you guys don't know what you're talking about. The Falcon 7x is a much better aircraft.. blah blah blah" Then the original poster comes back and says "I was wondering if Greyhound was cheaper and faster than taking the train..." Its all about relative perspective... :-) Oh, PS - after some thought and a bit more reading, I went ahead and purchased one of the Surecom 120 units. I'll bet it will do everything I'm likely to need for the couple of VHF/UHF radios I have.

A few things to consider when installing you transceiver. One the plug in for the programming cable is on the side of the radio not using the same port as the hand held microphone which needs to be considered especially for under seat installations. Two is which faceplate to use will depend on where you install the radio, default is the face plate looking slightly up. If you want a flat face plate, change it on your work bench not in your vehicle (it is a tight fit for the patch cord on the flat face plate). Three the supplied mounting bracket is the way all brackets should be made start the four screws and slide them into the precut groves (no dropped screws), I really like this feature especially in a jeep!!!!

That was me on the mic extension, but as you noted the cable for the face plate is different. Great idea for a thread!

I have one of these radios and in my testing I have found that the mic is very sensitive to distance. If you hold it more than an inch away from your mouth there will be virtually no audible transmission. The other person will hear the mic key up but then just silence. I like everything else about this radio given it’s price point, but the dullness of the mic may be a deal killer for me to put it into regular use or to have it as a spare to hand out to people. It’s almost as if they have a noise cancelling algorithm that is not properly calibrated. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

great idea! only ones i can think about right now are. mic extension cable a standard cat5 cable works (don't remember who originally found this but thank you) for a remote head mount cable u can make your own for that perfect install, just make sure what ever standard u use, that you reverse pins 2 and 4 on one end

Neither. The set screws should pierce the paint and get ground on the hood.

I do not think that is quite true. Most if not all modern GMRS radios are frequency locked and will not transmit on anything but GMRS frequencies. There are some older part 95 radios that are grandfathered and have dual type acceptance available on the used market. I own a modern commercial type 90 (business band) digital radio that can be programmed for GMRS but its still not legal for GMRS use even though its far better than anything I have seen available specifically for GMRS Part 95e use. I personaly do not buy the argument that modern ham radios are inferior to cheap GMRS radios. Only the Cheap Chinese Radios like the uv-5r are a real problem and even at that I just do not buy that a 5 watt HT radio can cause much interference or could cause much spurious interference. The idea that Hams build there own radios is a real stretch too. Maybe back in the day it was a thing but not anymore especially for UHF use. Truth is that many Hams just don't like GMRS and many GMRS users don't like Hams. Many Hams want it all to be special for them only and think GMRS is just for people to lazy to take a test and use radios responsibly. Many GMRS users think of Hams as cranky old Men who want to feel elite I am a Ham and now a GMRS user and just want to have friendly conversations on the radio. I don't care what license you have as long as you are respectful and not causing problems. I am an advocate for using any radio that works and doesn't cause interference. Most Ham radios would be just fine for GMRS and should be allowed. But what do I know I am just an old not so cranky Ham operator who likes to talk on the radio GMRS too.

If you really hate FRS then use your CTCSS/DCS and the bubble pack traffic vanishes. It looks like everyone wants to add DMR and NXDN, some even P25, but no one uses the PL codes we already have. We only have a few frequencies (30) but with PL codes we have several thousand "channels".

I'm happy GMRS overlaps with FRS. It opens things up to a lot of people that would otherwise never consider it, myself included. If I want to sit by a radio and anxiously await for somebody to talk to using only correct phraseology and not hear any kids, I'll get in to ham. I think some of you might be trying to think GMRS is something it isn't. It's test free, cheap, and overlaps with FRS for a reason.

heres my install on my jeep https://drive.google.com/file/d/1OCo-kTqks-DXwjCmhmMgn2eruM0fEF0F/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/1O52S2yl8rKX0OoaisNHeNHPzJNGr9-CR/view?usp=sharing https://drive.google.com/file/d/1N8DFM3ifyRxexGI9Qh7eCNPjvgGNCgrT/view?usp=sharing

A dummy load is required when you want to get accurate power measurements from your power meter. A dummy load can help confirm your SWR meter is (at least partially) calibrated. A good dummy load connected to the output of the SWR meter (in place of the antenna) should cause the SWR meter to always read 1:1. If it does not, you either have a defect meter or a defective dummy load. No question is a dumb question if you don’t know the answer to it. Michael WRHS965 KE8PLM

Hi Guys, My GMRS licence was just granted but I've been benefiting from your expertise for some time now. This looks like the place to be for information and like minds. My thanks to the creators of this web site. I've been playing with radios since the days of the superheterodyne walki talkies and once held the WN9MTA