RCM

If there's some ragchew going on and I want in, I'll just jump right in without identifying if it's people I know or people that I know use PTT-ID. Otherwise, I'll wait for a break and give my call suffix (PSG or two-thirteen); then when I get acknowledged, I'll start with my full call. It all depends on the atmosphere of the repeater/group I'm talking to and what level of structure the roundtable has, so I don't interrupt conversation flow when it isn't necessary to go through procedure or get yelled at for quick-keying a comment where a comment procedure is expected.

With the limited bandwidth allocated to GMRS, and no repeater coordination at all, it would cause all sorts of grief. Analog and any form of digital simply cannot co-exist within the current 8 channel landscape.

I think it wouldn't fly too well to force 1500+ repeater owners to replace their legacy Wideband FM repeaters with a shiny new DMR repeater, no matter the circumstances.

Yep sealant lined tubing is all I buy these days, I still have a lot of the old stuff, I use when appropriate. Definitely check E-bay, several sellers with assortments and or bulk discounts if your stocking up.

I've used the marine heat shrink with sealant in it, and it's great.
When I want a sealed end, whether with or without the sealant I just pinch the end with pliers while the tube is nice and hot. That welds it closed.

I would like to add that it generally takes 2 s-units to hear an appreciable difference in signal strength. So as long as your 1 watt is enough to be heard without dropouts, it will take 16 watts to make any real difference.
If your signal is readable at a 1 watt "low" setting, there is no reason to switch to "high" power as that will only drain your battery faster. The 4 or 5 watt setting only has any relevance in a case where the low setting is strong enough to be heard, but is dropping out.
 
In my experience, there is zero reason to seek out the 40-50 watt "H" version of a particular mobile radio. It really won't do anything noticeably better than the standard 25 watt radio. But it will use more battery power, get hot faster, and find any substandard connections in your wiring faster than the lower power radio. It will also subject you and any bystanders to more RF exposure. And it is more likely to negatively affect the computer and other electronics in your car or home. That's much more prevalent than you might think, too. The manufacturer of your vehicle or home computer couldn't care less about your 2-way radio activities.

Here's some excerpts from the FCC's 2017 rule change discussion:
 
 
 
 
 
 
The only way I see digital voice happening on GMRS is by creating a new service that's like GMRS but not, and digitizing from the start; type-certified equipment from the 1960s is probably still in use today, and there's no reason to fix what ain't broke.
 
 
But since we're speaking purely in hypotheticals here:
On the day pigs fly and there's a NPRM for digital voice (which is probably going to be a easily licensed 6.25 kHz modulation not common in commercial equipment (dPMR)), we suggest this as a rule: 462.675 MHz with a 141.3 Hz subaudible tone is officially recommended as a traveler's information channel, and no digital is allowed in the 25 kHz band centered at 462.675 MHz?
 
In reality, I would expect more digital voice exclusions, since analog repeaters would receive interference from any of four ultra-narrowband channels. It will actually have the effect of further overcrowding already overcrowded channels, since the new equipment will be purely interference to all existing equipment and only unidirectionally interoperable in the best case. To properly monitor the analog side, the ultra-narrowband receivers would need to either switch rapidly between the narrowband channel center on a 12.5 kHz step, and the ultra-narrowband channel center on a 6.25 kHz step, requiring a complicated and fairly expensive receive structure that would introduce additional confusion for the licensed-by-rule family members covered under the licensee's callsign. GMRS is already complicated enough, given the FRS/GMRS combination radio debacle. There's a whole list of reasons why DV, regardless of bandwidth, will never happen.

simple and effective

has any one used the id o matic controlers?
radio dan has them for about 80.00

While you could do this. For example a sectorized array of antennas. However, I think the theoretical diversity gain would be better letting all antennas see the subscriber. A lot would depend on the topography being served and where portable and mobiles are expected to travel.
 
As I said, this is an experimental idea that I have. In fact the parts are in my lab right now, looking for an  appropriate site to test from. I might try three corner reflectors approximating 120 degree sectors to compare. One important thing I want to try is a fourth omni antenna in horizontal polarization.
 
I need some funding and a rooftop!

To replace the lost or broken rubber tip on your portable antenna, go to your local auto parts store, and ask for the appropriate sized "Vacuum line cap" available from carberator parts companies. They're cheap, and do the job of looking nice while keeping the rain out. Silicone sealer makes them rather permanent.

I've used the marine heat shrink with sealant in it, and it's great.
When I want a sealed end, whether with or without the sealant I just pinch the end with pliers while the tube is nice and hot. That welds it closed.

I have also had great luck using this method. I also found that in the cases where the metal spring core of the antenna has become visible, squirting some silicon glue into the tube first can be quite helpful. One advantage of using shrink tubing is you can change the color of the antenna, should you so desire.
 
BTW, I have never used them, but there is now shrink tubing available with an adhesive sealant .  There are also some types with one sealed end, so they cover the entire antenna.

No need for apology.  Like an epic novel, you have us hooked.  We are waiting for the next installment of this series. Please continue this experiment, and keep us posted using charts, walls of text, epic novels, whatever.  Thanks.  Which radios work well? Which don't play nice with others? Where are the weak-links in antennas? You are getting down to what works best for your application, which may apply to others of us as well. This is interesting stuff.

So curiosity got the better of me while I was doing some shopping online for Black Friday and I found a Kenwood TK-360G for $40 on eBay with a new battery and extra antenna. I know the TK-360G is older, but I hoped it would give me that third data point to see which radio has issues. I also wanted to try setting up a crosslink to Zello to include some non-radio friends/family so I needed another radio 
 
As an aside the Zello crosslink is amazing and super helpful for testing. Since I can leave one radio linked to Zello at home and take the other radios with me, I can do all of this testing solo using Zello as an echo device back to my phone (bonus, it records everything for later review).
 
 
Testing was at low power/narrow since I was only in my neighborhood.
 
With the GMRS-V1 at home connected to Zello, I started walking with the UV-5R and TK-360G. Initially both sounded just fine, but as I reached my normal neighborhood limit where the UV-5R starts to hiss a bit, the TK-360G still sounded fine. Farther out the UV-5R dropped out completely, but the TK-360G went another 1/4 mile before it became unintelligible.
 
Returned home, connected the UV-5R to Zello and did the same test. This time both the GMRS-V1 and TK-360G went about to the point where the UV-5R dropped out before. Seems like the UV-5R was the limiting factor on this test.
 
Third time I connected the TK-360G to Zello, UV-5R went as far as last time before dropping out, GMRS-V1 went 1/4 mile farther. Again, UV-5R seems to have reduced range.
 
 
I wasn't sure if that was enough data to draw any conclusions, so I set up the GMRS-V1 at Point A (from the original test) on high power/wide with Zello crosslink, then drove over to Point B with the other two radios. With the UV-5R I couldn't hit Point A, but the TK-360G was clear (though a bit choppy at times). Talking through Zello (so GMRS-V1 at Point A was transmitting) I could hear pretty well on the TK-360G with a little static, couldn't hear anything at all on the UV-5R.
 
I drove back to Point A and put the UV-5R on Zello, drove back to Point B and tried again. I couldn't hear either the GMRS-V1 or the TK-360G, nor could either of them hear the UV-5R when I transmitted through Zello.
 
Based on that I think its fair to say the UV-5R is the "issue" here, why specifically I don't know.
 
 
Some other odd issues I noticed with the TK-360G was that it emits a high-pitched whine (almost like feedback, but it's a constant tone and volume) whenever the UV-5R is transmitting, but not when the GMRS-V1 transmits. Likewise the reception on the UV-5R sounds noisy, almost choppy when the TK-360G is transmitting while the GMRS-V1 receives just fine. Reception on the GMRS-V1 sounds fine when either the UV-5R or the TK-360G are transmitting. I'm not sure what's causing that, but as of right now the UV-5R and TK-360G don't like each other. I'll have to test with my friend's UV-5R to see if it's just my UV-5R.
 
Anyway, sorry about the massive wall of text. It's about as long as my Baofeng wild goose chase 

Yes Mark, the TK-880 is my preferred mobile.

Maybe this was my nickname when I first cobbled together two Jobcomm portables with duct tape to make a repeater without using those pesky and expensive filter thingy's back in the 80's....

Do any of you use the TK-880 Radios?  I am also considering one.  RCM, Are the TK-880's what you talk GMRS on? I am going to go with one of the Kenwoods, as I like their ruggedness.  My main activities are Local Emergency Agency (Law Enforcement, Fire Dept, EMS) monitoring & GMRS.
Thanks for the comments and help. KipandLee I did reach out to the link you shared.
 
thank you.

I am going to throw out some ideas for those who are repeater operators. It is an area I am exploring.
 
By now everybody realizes that a 5 watt portable talking through a 50 watt repeater will have its range limited to the ability of that 5 watt portable to "make" the repeater, lets say 8 miles. If that 5 watt portable is talking through the repeater with another user with a 50 watt mobile some 20 miles further distant, that is an inherent accomplishment of the technology.
 
In the public safety arena, UHF 5 watt portables are the critical users. Users want that portable to work everywhere. Public safety seeks to design systems to 97% reliability within a jurisdiction (town/country/statewide). Reliability is the name of the game. A TIA document TSB-88 describes how such systems are designed and tested.
 
For example, if you wish portable coverage throughout a large city or county, the use of satellite voting receivers has long been the solution. Each of these voting receivers has a reliable footprint where a 5 watt portable can be received.  Lets say that a small city has three satellite receivers at various locations and where the city boundary is reached, the coverage from any single receiver is 97% reliable. However in other areas within the city, the coverage drops to 70% reliable , if the other two receivers in the system overlap those areas and are also 70% reliable or greater, then > 97.3% "Joint Probability" is attained when the voter switches between strongest signals.
 
 
For the typical GMRS repeater operator, constructing such a system would require having antenna towers at various locations and a means to bring the signals back to a voter by phone line or other circuit. The towers alone would be costly to build, rent or maintain.
 
However, the hardware, satellite receivers and Voters are readily available on the surplus market and can be pressed into use in a much different way on one site, preferably a rooftop..
 
All three receivers can be co located on the same tower or rooftop and be used to facilitate multiple receiver diversity reception.  Diversity reception can work with two repeaters, but we will use three in this example.
 
If your repeater had 70% reliability out at 8 miles, you could improve the reliability to 97.3% in theory by adding two more receiver antenna branches.
 
To get maximum return, there is a need for the antennas to each receive uncorrelated signals from that distant portable. In a hilly or urban area that may easily be the case. The antennas will have to be physically separated many wavelengths from each other on the tower or rooftop to yield diversity gain. A caveat is that the additional two receivers will need bandpass / notch filters to filter out the transmitter, just as a duplexer would do for a singe receiver station..
 
I will provide an excel file "Joint probability example" to anyone interested.  I was unable to attach it.

I would like to add that it generally takes 2 s-units to hear an appreciable difference in signal strength. So as long as your 1 watt is enough to be heard without dropouts, it will take 16 watts to make any real difference.
If your signal is readable at a 1 watt "low" setting, there is no reason to switch to "high" power as that will only drain your battery faster. The 4 or 5 watt setting only has any relevance in a case where the low setting is strong enough to be heard, but is dropping out.
 
In my experience, there is zero reason to seek out the 40-50 watt "H" version of a particular mobile radio. It really won't do anything noticeably better than the standard 25 watt radio. But it will use more battery power, get hot faster, and find any substandard connections in your wiring faster than the lower power radio. It will also subject you and any bystanders to more RF exposure. And it is more likely to negatively affect the computer and other electronics in your car or home. That's much more prevalent than you might think, too. The manufacturer of your vehicle or home computer couldn't care less about your 2-way radio activities.

I would like to add that it generally takes 2 s-units to hear an appreciable difference in signal strength. So as long as your 1 watt is enough to be heard without dropouts, it will take 16 watts to make any real difference.
If your signal is readable at a 1 watt "low" setting, there is no reason to switch to "high" power as that will only drain your battery faster. The 4 or 5 watt setting only has any relevance in a case where the low setting is strong enough to be heard, but is dropping out.
 
In my experience, there is zero reason to seek out the 40-50 watt "H" version of a particular mobile radio. It really won't do anything noticeably better than the standard 25 watt radio. But it will use more battery power, get hot faster, and find any substandard connections in your wiring faster than the lower power radio. It will also subject you and any bystanders to more RF exposure. And it is more likely to negatively affect the computer and other electronics in your car or home. That's much more prevalent than you might think, too. The manufacturer of your vehicle or home computer couldn't care less about your 2-way radio activities.

I would like to add that it generally takes 2 s-units to hear an appreciable difference in signal strength. So as long as your 1 watt is enough to be heard without dropouts, it will take 16 watts to make any real difference.
If your signal is readable at a 1 watt "low" setting, there is no reason to switch to "high" power as that will only drain your battery faster. The 4 or 5 watt setting only has any relevance in a case where the low setting is strong enough to be heard, but is dropping out.
 
In my experience, there is zero reason to seek out the 40-50 watt "H" version of a particular mobile radio. It really won't do anything noticeably better than the standard 25 watt radio. But it will use more battery power, get hot faster, and find any substandard connections in your wiring faster than the lower power radio. It will also subject you and any bystanders to more RF exposure. And it is more likely to negatively affect the computer and other electronics in your car or home. That's much more prevalent than you might think, too. The manufacturer of your vehicle or home computer couldn't care less about your 2-way radio activities.

That's true on vhf and below, and with miniature radios on uhf. But a TK-380 for example is 5-1/4 inches long with an aluminum chassis, so that's very close to a full quarterwave counterpoise. In fact since it has a large cross-sectional area, it probably has enough bandwidth to actually be a full quarterwave electrically.

I would like to add that it generally takes 2 s-units to hear an appreciable difference in signal strength. So as long as your 1 watt is enough to be heard without dropouts, it will take 16 watts to make any real difference.
If your signal is readable at a 1 watt "low" setting, there is no reason to switch to "high" power as that will only drain your battery faster. The 4 or 5 watt setting only has any relevance in a case where the low setting is strong enough to be heard, but is dropping out.
 
In my experience, there is zero reason to seek out the 40-50 watt "H" version of a particular mobile radio. It really won't do anything noticeably better than the standard 25 watt radio. But it will use more battery power, get hot faster, and find any substandard connections in your wiring faster than the lower power radio. It will also subject you and any bystanders to more RF exposure. And it is more likely to negatively affect the computer and other electronics in your car or home. That's much more prevalent than you might think, too. The manufacturer of your vehicle or home computer couldn't care less about your 2-way radio activities.

I have seen a few posts talking about getting more distance out of UHF gear, such as the GMRS equipment we use. It looks like the common theme is, many immediately want to go for more power, assuming they can brute-force their way through issues. I am hoping myself and some of the other people who have some training and practical experience can use this thread to help new users understand how to make life better without more power.
 
I want to start with handheld transceivers. HT antennas use your body as a counterpoise. Depending on how you are dressed, how tall you are, how you are holding the radio, the radio position, the distance of the radio from your body, what direction you are facing, all impact performance. Even how much fat, salt and water your body is retaining at the moment impacts how an HT antenna works, because those things vary the conductivity of the human body. In all seriousness, forget about more power... or even more range from a typical HT.
 
If you want more range out of your HT, your best bet is to find higher ground, figure out where the best place to stand is, and what general direction to be facing when compared to the receiving station provides the best communications path.
 
 
Mobile antennas are often several wavelengths+ in overall height and the body of the vehicle is typically a much better reflective counterpoise. There is a lot that can be done in the mobile and base antenna world that can help, but for now, lets continue to focus on why 'more power' likely isn't the right answer.
 
 
 
There is a standard in radio communications about intelligibility of radio communications. It is called the 5/9 scale. 0 to 5 for voice clarity and 0 to 9+ for signal strength in s-units. It is said that while a 2/1 signal provides partially usable comms, the lowest "reliable" communications happens at a 3/2 (or 32) and the best is a 5/9+ (often called 599, 59+20, 59+40).
 
With that in mind, you have to quadruple your power to impact a receiver 1 s-unit. So, if the other party is receiving a signal at 1/2 s-unit while you are using 4 watts, you need 16 watts to go to 1 s-unit. You then need to jump to 64 watts for 2 s-units. Finally a third jump in power of 256 watts to get to 3 s-units and possibly getting a reliable communications signal (a 2/3 or 3/3). Depending on the modulation of the carrier signal and bandwidth, you may need to jump to 4 s-units, requiring well over 1,000 watts.
 
Now, lets say the same receive condition exists, but now you are already using 20 watts for that 1/2 s-unit. Now your power jumps are 80 watts, 320 watts, 1,280 watts for 3 s-units and possibly needing 5,120 watts for 4 s-units. Well, the first bump you made already seriously violates power restrictions in GMRS.
 
AND, this is under hypothetical perfect conditions, assuming nothing else changed in the environment. Which almost never exists.
 
Chasing better performance by boosting power typically doesn't give you any truly desirable results. The top 3 items that will help improve comms in almost every band is elevation, elevation, and elevation. From there its antenna tuning (and beams) filters to reduce interference and lowering the noise floor, as some examples.
 
 
 
So, for our technically skill folks... Would anyone like to contribute some general advice for new users to benefit from?
 
General advice on what to do or not to do?