Leaderboard

Mine's been up on my roof tripod for almost 10 years now and still working just great!

I need adapters so often that I broke down and bought a "universal" set of adapters. With these I can quickly create nearly any type of "adapter" I need. The center row are 'barrel connectors' to which you couple the end connectors you need: https://www.amazon.com/ConnectoRF-Coaxial-Connector-Universal-Mini-UHF/dp/B079K65LHK/ref=pd_lpo_23_t_0/140-4570640-4443552?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_i=B079K65LHK&pd_rd_r=db665e20-f51b-49f8-b7d6-a9267569d48f&pd_rd_w=KxI8P&pd_rd_wg=qaIOK&pf_rd_p=a0d6e967-6561-454c-84f8-2ce2c92b79a6&pf_rd_r=SAZWX4YT39N8BF8JRSFB&psc=1&refRID=SAZWX4YT39N8BF8JRSFB

All good stuff, especially the adjacent channel.. I know better. Will be a lot easier with the vehicle here to play with instead of over the phone or DM, and with other radios available and the repeaters known to work from my place. Thanks.

First, for repeater use, you want the channels with the RP suffix, on those the offset should be preset. If the channel is just XX, you're on the simplex channel. You do have to enable them in the menu, then the channels will count up to 22, then 15rp through 22rp. Second, good catch WyoJoe....625 and .675 should be channels 18 and 20. Third, it sounds like you got the codes set successfully before, it sets the tone for both tx and RX (as you mentioned, no separate setting means no split tones.), And you get the game of cross referencing the tone to midland's corresponding code. If .625 and .675 are the frequencies in use, set the tones on channels 18rp and 20rp and check again.

Good Day Ken. I have all three antennas and extensive practical simplex and repeater experience with them. My conclusion is that if you are at the absolute fringe of being able to make out a transmission from another party, the 771 might make the difference between whether you will barely understand or not understand them at all. If you are not on the fringe it will make no practical difference. I have previously reported I believe I receive perhaps 5% more range with the 771. I used to use the 771 daily, but ultimately took if off because the inconvenience of the extra long antenna outweighed my limited need to squeeze out that extra few feet of distance. I am back to using the more convenient length stock antenna. Michael WRHS965 KE8PLM

My first thought was ensuring you entered the repeater codes on the transmit side of the radio. If entered on the receive side, they will not open the squelch on the repeater. On the Midland, I'm not sure what the menu settings are called, but it would be something along the lines of TXCTS vs. RXCTS. That would be the first thing I would check. The second thing that caught my attention is that you mention CH20 and CH21, which are sequential, and frequencies of .625 and .675, which are not. .650 is between them, so are you sure you're using the correct channels?

Samlex makes some decent 24 to 12 volt step down converters for around $100. No matter what, pay attention to the Amp rating, the cheaper ones are often limited to just 10 or 15 amps advertised, which might be under what your 50 watt radio will pull under transmit. (Note that the actual ratings are often less for continuous draw - as compared to the "advertised" max instantaneous rating.) I wouldn't get too worried about DC noise getting into your radio from the converter. More noise comes from bad grounding and alternator whine. If you're planning to use a 1/2 wave antenna, then no ground plane should be necessary. Fender mounts are not ideal, but they work. Fender mounts will far exceed the range of any portable you're talking simplex with. You're asking good questions - but don't let perfection become the enemy of good. Your setup will be good enough.

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.