Leaderboard

Got the radio today, and got it programmed using the CPS. It wasn't nearly as bad as some of the reviews I had come across mentioned. Getting 12V to it to get it to turn on was another story, since I don't have a power supply for something like a base. I ended up modifying an old computer power supply that I had laying around that I've used for other things, and cut the lighter plug off the radio. A lot of the reviews of the programming software mentioned having to type in everything by hand, but what I found was a little different. On the farthest right column, there is a box with 2 arrow symbols pointing right (like this >>). Double clicking that brings up a box that allowed me to name the repeaters and select the tones from drop-down lists. All in all, I think it took me about 15 minutes. The next step is going to be running a wire from the battery, through a fuse, then to a relay behind the dash of the truck. From there, I'll use either the stereo turn on wire or the accessory wire off the ignition switch to trigger the relay to turn the radio on and off with the key. After that, it's going to be antenna wiring and then testing. I'm still trying to decide how I'm going to run the antenna cable, since it is only going to be a mostly temporary installation. Once the weather cools down, I'm planning to put an NMO mount in the roof and adding the MXTA26.

Ebay is not always the most honorable place. My guess is that these folks are saying anything they can to sell radios. If that means claiming UV5Rs are approved for GMRS, then they'll say it. Maybe they are, maybe they're not, depending on how we like to interpret FCC regulations to fit our opinions. I don't care if UV5Rs are approved for GMRS or not, because as has been discussed endlessly here, no one in authority cares what radios we use unless we do something stupid and/or illegal and interfere with other services.

There’s a conversation about that from maybe eight or nine months ago. Technically you might be able to do something like that but you tie up more channels. Done incorrectly you end up with an infinite loop. But the regulations don’t allow repeaters to transmit on the 467 MHz frequencies so it’s not really possible.

Wishing you a quick recovery. If you anything, please ask. Eric

I only keep Windows 7 around because I still tend to game on the computer. Though I don't have much time for that any more. I actually prefer Linux, and it seems that gaming support has been getting better for it over the last few years, but it does look like I'll still have a reason to keep Windows around. The radio and antenna should be here today. I grabbed the Nagoya UT-72G for the time being, because it's been hot here for the last couple of weeks. I don't suspect that I'll be seeing any cooler temperatures until somewhere between late September and mid October, and working at the roof of a truck when it's over 110 out isn't fun. Especially when work happens to be garage door service, so I'm out in the heat all day, 5 days a week.

I'll set this up and test it out tomorrow morning. Let you know what happens.

Yes. When I remember its Wednesday, I've been doing the weekly NET check-in using the 935. I figured getting the 1000 (a 50watt radio) I should be able to hit the Ridge no problem.

Have you double/triple checked the TX tone and frequency?

DMR/P25 can sound excellent when using proper subscribers and infrastructure. When DMR came to the ham world the only player was Motorola. It was a XPR repeater and XPR subscribers. All was good. Then in came CCR, Hotspots and other poorly designed equipment interfaced to DMARC. Same with the P25 world in HAM. Those that run standalone true P25 repeaters have great audio. When folks build them with analog radios and a raspberry pie things dont go so well.

People started telling me about this a few months ago and I thought they were full of it, but I finally saw the listing on Amazon... My biggest issue I see is the confusion it will cause when telling "some people" that you're using a UV-5R on GMRS - "some people" wont know if they should report you to the FCC or not. Rumor has it that a very popular and beloved YouTuber will be making a video about this in the coming days.

The point is that it will happen. My question is why Ham operators and others who want Ham radio without taking a test cant just stay on their own bands and stop trying to turn GMRS into another Ham band that they can destroy. From my experience, DMR is not a digital voice mode that will cause an influx of users. You should hear the Hams who have a nuclear meltdown because they cant write a code plug. How many of them have floated off to Yaesu Fusion because its as simple as hitting a button and talking digital? DMR came easy to me. First time ever, I wrote a code plug like it was nothing. Not everyone is like that. Most people get confused when it comes to DMR. The point is, GMRS is just fine the way it is. Either GMRS would need to be all digital or all analog, not a mix. If mixing digital and analog worked, I would have many more repeaters programmed in my radio, but it doesn't.

And that is the problem. You're going to have a bunch of guys with digital radios who are going to get on there and chat up a storm and I will tell you that it is horribly annoying to listen to digital coming over your radio. We have this problem with yaesu fusion where I live. They need to keep the digital out of gmrs. If you want digital go to ham radio, there's a huge world of it to play with. Ham radio has already been destroyed by the digital voice modes because there's so many different forms and repeaters and not everybody can afford the equipment. And then how many forms of digital are we going to introduce into gmrs? Is it going to be like ham radio where I'm going to have to have a p25 radio and a nxdn radio and a DMR radio and a fusion radio? and the list goes on. That's a ham radio thing and it needs to be left where it is. If gmrs-ham operators want digital then they need to stay on ham or create their own gmrs band with digital only. Having digital and analog segregates the population of people who are on the radio. I see it already in ham radio. You have us DMR operators and then you have the fusion operators and I can't talk to one unless I have what they have and they can't talk to me unless they have what I have and neither of us will budge and get the other radio. The radio is not what's the blame, it's the radio operators and unfortunately none of them will change. I know from experience living right near very good wide coverage repeaters that are digital that I can't afford the equipment for and it limits me. If things went digital that means I have to buy two brand new radios, possibly 4, just to use whatever form of digital it runs on. It brings up a good question, when is this all going to stop? When are people just going to get on the radio and use it and stop trying to have the latest and the greatest? I thought that was ham radio? I thought that wasn't going to filter into gmrs.

This is the only case I see as a way to do this if it’s done. I don’t have any concerns with how existing analog affects digital. I’m concerned with the idea digital affecting existing analog and I don’t think CTCSS is a reasonable solution. That’s like building a stadium next door and telling people if they don’t like the lights at night they should build a bigger fence (sorry about not being able to see out of your windows). You mention the the rule change FRS/GMRS. I don’t think GMRS was a problem with new FRS/GMRS radio back when this happened it was the new radios impacting the existing GMRS. Have we learned nothing from this blunder? I do appreciate the exchange of ideas discussed here. I think if this were to happen it needs to be solution that works for everyone.

All of your statements seem to focus on your idea that this won’t interfere with analog repeaters. Not all communications are through repeaters. Why should people be forced to use CTCSS in simplex?

It seems someone always wants to change GMRS. Other ideas I don’t think would work… painting two lanes for cars but trucks get there own overlapping lane to drive down the middle… yeah but it’s more lanes and cars can fit there, doesn’t it sound great??

I don't know about the rest of you, but here in SoCal, we have a repeater at almost 6,000 feet that sits unused the vast majority of the time, in addition to others that are not used a lot. The traffic I hear even on simplex as I drive 50 miles a day commuting is pretty sparse, mostly preschools, restaurants, Covid shot clinics, that kind of thing, on FRS. I'm not sure why we would want to introduce digital to GMRS. All it would do is run up the price of radios and overcomplicate things. In my humble opinion, people get into GMRS because it's cheap, reliable, and doesn't require a test.

I hate everything about DMR. I particularly hate the way it's taking up frequencies in HAM. I would file for a refund of my GMRS fee if the FCC implemented your proposal. Digital should get its own bands and not take over our analog frequencies.

DMR channels do not use 7.6 kHz of spectrum; they each use 12.5 kHz but they use time division multiplexing to share that portion of spectrum. In other words each current GMRS channel would only represent two DMR channels. Gil is correct that this would impact everyone who has an analog GMRS radio. Use of such a radio requires the entire channel, making it unavailable for DMR. Conversely, to those who have analog radios, every DMR transmission sounds like an impact wrench. “Here in California, CERT, neighborhood or fire watch, militia groups, etc. have implemented GMRS because 80-90% of their members have no direct interest in the technical aspects of amateur radio.” I don’t know how true that statistic is, but ruining GMRS for the rest of us isn’t the answer. P.S. People who have no direct interest in the technical aspects of amateur radio might have a tough go when they have to program a codeplug. DMR codeplugs are extremely technical. I guess you could sell the radio with a basic codeplug that’s simplex DMR on 1-22 and duplex on 23-30, but what do you use for talk groups, time slots, and color codes?

Why not just take the test for amateur radio if you want to do as there are plenty of dmr repeaters. I'll stick to my p25 radios. Sent from my SM-S918U using Tapatalk

The Midland MXTA 26 Phantom Antenna is surprisingly "Not Too Shabby" in performance. Also, the Midland Mag-Mount NMO Base is not-too-shabby either except for the PL259 which is a "POS". Just replace it and it will be a great mag-mount base. Mr. Randy NotaRubicon did a You Tube review comparing the performance between the Midland MXTA 26 Phantom Antenna and another antenna which, I can't remember now, and the Phantom Antenna was equally to a Tad better in the "Farz" category. I use the Phantom Antenna while I am in the Greater Phoenix Area but, when I venture out I'll either use the Laird B4502N 2.5 dB 1/2 wave no springs antenna in the foothills and when I am in the mountains I'll throw on the B4505CN 5 dB no spring center load 1/2 wave antenna.

On my truck I have a Laird BB4503 (NMO) on a mag mount. It is a 5/8λ ground plane required. Each time I use it I am impressed with its quality and performance. It does need to be cut for proper tuning, and they provide the center frequency and length, so you're not guessing. I'm only running 14-18w into it, and for repeaters with a 250-300' AGL receive antenna I can hold the repeater, and talk out to 50 miles or so, as long as I have a good line-of-sight. For the car I am considering getting the Laird BB4502 (1/2λ) which is a no-ground plane required, since I don't have a good mounting location. It won't perform as well as the BB4503, but should be pretty close, and probably not enough of a difference for me to notice. Only difference between the "B" and the "BB" models is that the base is black, instead of stainless.

I use a 20 watt mobile right now for GMRS. The Radioddity DB-20G. It works great! I can get into repeaters 20-30 miles away depending on terrain. My base is the same radio with an antenna on the roof at 20 feet. Base to mobile I can talk 20 miles reliably. So 15 watts should be fine. I've also experimented base to base with a friend at 5 watts that was about 10 miles. Antenna setup is far more important than wattage fpr line of sight comms. Antenna height specifically.

Are you thinking we want to implement DMR because we want to use digital? The San Francisco/Sacramento region is heavily congested and interference among repeaters is increasing. There is no practical solution using the same amount of spectrum unless you move to digital technologies. You are also trying to compare apples to oranges. GMRS is a more attractive solution to the majority of people because their priority is communication as opposed to technical pursuits. Here in California, CERT, neighborhood or fire watch, militia groups, etc. have implemented GMRS because 80-90% of their members have no direct interest in the technical aspects of amateur radio.