Leaderboard

This was a great thread for a beginner like me, I feel I got so much good information from reading all the comments here. As I begin putting together my own base station soon, I will be back here to revisit these nuggets of knowledge. Treading lightly and barely leaving a trace ?

There isn't one planned just yet, but it's a good idea. For now, I recommend the Chrome plugin called Dark Reader which will work on all websites, and you can choose to allow the light or dark mode for certain sites if they look bad in dark mode. I know it saves my eyes when I'm working late at night with two monitors. You can also change the contrast to suit your vision needs in case the default doesn't offer enough.

Or, read this: http://w6nbc.com/articles/2016-03QSTdishslot.pdf You would need to do some calculations to adapt the design to the 462MHz. And NanoVNA to properly tune the contraption. I will try this myself one day, too damn clever.

Remove the entire dish, and use the tubular bracket to mount a lightweight GMRS antenna.

Just got mine yesterday, checked out at 21.5 watts transmiting, installed in the Rv replacing the handheld I was using there, so far so good, looking forward to using it as mobile base station out in the wilds, talking to the KG1000g in the Jeep or one of the handhelds being used on a hike by people in the family when camping, Since first posting this I have cleaned up the wiring with split wire loom tubing

I have both the Nagoya 771 and the Smiley super stick (and the stock 805G rubber duck). The Nagoya 771 and the Smiley (fully extended) seem to perform about the same and both are significantly better than the stock antenna. I think the Smiley retracted is at least as good as the rubber duck. As for the range of your 905G... There are lots of metal foils (on insulation and foil backed drywall) and "see through" metal coatings on glass used in commercial buildings and high rise apartments. Texas has a lot of intense sun and hot weather so many windows will have the metal coatings. These will just eliminate your GMRS signal. So I would not judge the radio by that. Take the radios outside and test them. Even our cheap FRS radios will do a mile... and that was inside the car with no external antenna. Terrain and metal surfaces are your two worse enemies. Vince

They sent my RMA# last night, shipping it out today to exchange for the DB25-G ?

Yep, definitely order ASAP and get on the backorder queue. I put my order in last month and it actually shipped a bit early than the estimated restock date, and I got it yesterday. Ended up buying the parent amateur model KG-UV8H, since a lot of the features I think will be much more useful on ham radio. May or may not keep the 935 if I can get the 8H to go up to GMRS frequencies. Either way, it's a fantastic little device. I also picked up the 805 for a family member that finds the others a bit bulky and while that's a great radio too, the 935 blows it out of the water on features. There's someone currently working on porting the KG-UV8D CHIRP driver to the 8H, and I tested it out with the 935. It's still a work in progress and likely won't be able to edit things specific to the 935 (different programmable keys, WX radio, etc) but it did let me add GMRS, 2m and 60cm channels. Also agreed on the accessory port trapdoor. It's also very easy to misplace. I wish they'd gone with something similar to Motorola's like Baofeng did with their waterproof models, but I suspect there's probably some intellectual property issues there. I intend to use mine out of doors while hiking or MTBing with an earpiece (so as not to disturb other trail users) and it's a shame the water rating goes out the window in that setup.

Yes, thanks; after I returned from a trip that interrupted my new radio play time, I explored the Wouxun software and programmed my local FM broadcast stations. I also programmed some local 2m/70cm ham repeaters, and reception on the ham bands is more sensitive and clearer than my Baofeng BF-F8HP. I also added my local NOAA channel, and again, the Wouxun's receive sensitivity on that frequency is better than both my Retevis RT76P and Baofeng radios. The included antenna is excellent. I don't expect that changing antennas would be worth it.

That's exactly why SWR meter is not providing any useful info about HT antennas. Measuring SWR of HT antenna is a totally meaningless exercise.

I’d also point out the CB SWR meters are built for a single, very narrow frequency range and 5 watts of rf power. SWR Meters that work on GMRS usually cover a much wider band. My Diamond SX400 covers 140 to 525 MHz and up to 200 watts. There’s more sophisticated components necessary to do that.

We have a Uniden VHF with FRS. Maybe they still make these since FRS does not require a license. The VHF in ours works pretty well but we've never tried the FRS band on them. Vince

Lots of people like the Surecom SW-33 SWR Mk2 meter avail on Amazon. It's about $40. It certainly can be used with an HT (Walkie Talkie) as long as you have the correct cables. I use my MFJ meter with HT's all the time and it works fine. Just make sure the power range is appropriate for whatever radio you intend to use in your test. You do not have to test the antenna with the same radio you want to use it with either. Testing a portable antenna (like a rubber duck) is a little tricky because the ground is not well defined and the meter itself can impact that. But usually portable ants aren't tunable anyway so why bother. With HT's and portable (radio mounted) antennas your body is actually part of the ground system. The main reason CB meters are so cheap is that they make so many of them. They're a commodity. Some day GMRS meters may also be that cheap but I suspect most GMRS users do not test their antennas and just use it out of the box. Vince

They are more expensive because UHF is more challenging from technical standpoint than 27MHz. There is a thread here where we were discussing getting SWR meter vs NanoVNA. NanoVNA is much more advanced, and costs less than a good SWR meter, but it much less newbie-friendly. SWR meter worth getting (together with quality UHF-capable dummy load!) if you are doing home or car installs. For HTs, you cannot really use SWR meter to obtain meaningful data.

Yea, you aren't going to find one new. One of them to track down is the Vertex Standard HX470s, you might get lucky and find one used. It did FRS (0.5W), MURS (2W) and VHF Marine.

Turn the radio over (smirk). But seriously, yes. That's what you do - but then you unscrew the front control head - turn the display right side up, and screw it back on. It was designed to do that. Alternatively, you can hook up an external speaker & put that anywhere that's convenient.

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.

See my post here because I had the same issue not knowing which antenna is best. I have no hard data on the results, but I got a 5/8 wave and a 1/4 wave antenna (I don't even know what that really means) from SmileyAntenna and they put every other antenna I've tried to shame in every terrain I've used them in.