wayoverthere
-
Posts
1693 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
28
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Gallery
Classifieds
Posts posted by wayoverthere
-
-
On 7/12/2025 at 12:53 PM, WRTC928 said:
Actually, my favorite is a magnetic base with an NMO mount. Then I put a Comet 2x4 or some other quality antenna on it.
the ability to swap out as needed is very helpful, and i have probably 3 or 4 mag mounts around for whatever i feel like messing with
-
Just now, SteveShannon said:
The only other thing I can think of is the transmit frequency. The repeater channels receive on the same frequencies as 15-22, but transmit on 467.xxx MHz channels.
that's the direction i was thinking as well, just trying to turn the train of thought into something coherent.
i suspect the base programming on those uv5g will be similar what shipped on my Btech gmrs50x1, channels 1-22 were the 7 low power simplex frequencies (1-7), the 0.5 watt FRS frequencies (8-14receive only on mine), and then the 8 high power simplex channels (15-22). Slots 23-30 were set up for repeater use, with the +5.0mhz transmit offset baked in, though they used the same receive frequencies as 15-22.
if i have a local repeater that the output is 462.575, i'll be able to hear it whether i'm on channel 16 or channel 24, because both receive on 462.575. However, on transmit, channel 16 is transmitting on 462.575 as well, while 24 will incorporate the offset and have me transmitting on 467.575 (which is where the repeater is listening).
-
2 hours ago, WRCR724 said:
https://zello.com/downloads/desktop/
I can't download it right now on the work PC but I don't know if that download is for the free version or a paid version.
Will have to look at that when I can get on a PC. It may be the version that only works with a paid account, or they may have put the free one back since I last looked (been some months). not that it matters much with them killing the pc version off later this month.
-
5 hours ago, CentralFloridaGMRS said:
Zello is shutting down the PC version and older versions on June 25th.
- Android app versions older than 6.0.2 (Note: newer versions no longer support Android OS versions earlier than 7)
- iOS app versions older than 6.1 (Note: newer versions no longer support iOS versions earlier than 14)
- Legacy PC app – all versions
AFAIK, they'd hidden/removed the install file for either the PC version or the free version for PC awhile ago, so not entirely surprising. I still had a copy installed and working, but it looks like they're shrinking access to the free side of things....not that I had access to much anymore anyway.
-
-
On 4/24/2025 at 10:32 AM, gortex2 said:
This happens in the US all the time. Tons of radios get bought on governemtn sites or other markets that are still full of stuff. Granted your correct it should get wiped but doesn't alwasy happen.
A couple of mine were from a radio shop, and came preloaded with a bunch of school district stuff back east, both analog and digital. Another with a bunch of fire stuff preprogrammed.
A couple have come completely blank, but that was expected given they were advertised as (and the packaging/appearance was considered with) NOS.
-
14 hours ago, tcp2525 said:
One should keep in mind with that pic on whether or not the vehicle would be moving in any random direction as we all do when traveling. What frequency? Too many variable to take it with even a half grain of salt. You could have -2.8db and a split second later you would have +2.8db to the receiving station.. Now if the car was stationary in an anechoic chamber there's a better chance of those numbers be acceptable. But when we get back to the real world you wouldn't be able to tell where the antenna is placed on the car.
Yeah, with the shape of the ground plane of the trunk (dependent on vehicle and frequency), I'd expect some directionality, given most will have more ground plane to the sides than front to back. id also expect the greenhouse to be blocking/shading the signal in some directions too.
It just struck me as a little odd that permanent mounting in that location would mean more loss than a mag mount in the same place, where on the roof it's the other way around.
-
On 4/16/2025 at 6:20 AM, SteveShannon said:
This picture, which I believe originated from Laird, shows how much or how little placing an antenna base off center, or even at the corner of the roof actually makes: 0.02 dB less when moved to a corner of the roof. I don’t believe any of us would even notice that. Moving it from the roof makes more difference of course.
You know, having seen that graphic many times, I just noticed a couple things I hadn't before. First, there's no rating for a hood lip or fender mount, just a mag mount. Second, the permanent trunk mount is actually rated more loss (-2.8db) compared to a mag mount on the trunk (-2.1db).
-
38 minutes ago, SteveShannon said:
I got a chuckle out of the rating of the Diamond SRH805S. You might have noticed that they rate the antenna gain as -2dB. That means a loss of RF radiation. Diamond says:
So, basically, Diamond says the SRH805S will perform 2dB worse than the OEM antenna
I mean, not really a surprise at that size, but I appreciate that they rate it honestly.
- WRUU653 and SteveShannon
-
2
-
I guess I've been lucky product wise, but both times I've ordered from Radioddity, I've gotten solid gear (a DMR handheld, and an HF transceiver), but shipping was the issue.
One order got hung up because they shipped DHL to my PO box, the latter was like $50 cheaper for a bundle with some good extras, and said they had us stock, but it shipped from China anyway and took like 3 weeks to get here.
The couple anytone at779uv I've bought (from Amazon, twin to the db20g) have been solid also
-
17 hours ago, gortex2 said:
You should be able to go to mygmrs.com and register to login. Forum and main site are different logins so you need credentials in both.
IIRC, they used to be separate, but Rich got them standardized a year or so back, and they SHOULD now be the same login. However, the login doesn't carry over between the main site (where the map and repeater list live) and the forum.
-
2 hours ago, WRYS709 said:
So you’re effectively saying: “if you desire to pay higher prices for limited features, these are the radios for you!”
Maybe years ago…
There are just too many cheaper, more efficient alternatives available to continue to follow this practice any more!
I'm not saying they're the BEST choice, but hey, if someone wants to pay that price for simplicity, that's on them. they're low on the list of what i'd be likely to suggest.
that said, i have owned a couple, because it was what was easy to find on the shelf at the time. (handhelds, and a mxt115)...gave them away to a coworker with a jeep to use with her daughter.
-
8 minutes ago, WRYS709 said:
Negative experiences with Midland Radios seems to be a popular tooic on this Forum; and they are so expensive, too!
They seem popular with the “Jeep Crowd” here!
They market to the Jeep crowd, including via event sponsorship.
Excluding some quality issues with a couple of the recently introduced models, it seems like more of the complaints boil down to the limitations of the radios than something actually being "wrong" with the radios. Some of this may be attributable to their marketing, or just unmet expectations.
Midland has their marketing down pat, and they do the simple "plug in and go" pretty well, and while they've improved on it with some recent models, they're still somewhat limited feature wise, especially for the price point....if they work for you as they are (and you're okay with the price), they aren't a bad choice.
- marcspaz, PRadio, AdmiralCochrane and 1 other
-
4
-
3 hours ago, nokones said:
Isn't there one of those emoji things for that expression?
A facepalm, or banging head on the desk comes to mind, especially when I'm failing especially badly at the touch keyboard
- SteveShannon and amaff
-
2
-
6 hours ago, WRUE951 said:
. I mean really, how many of you went to the prom without sneaking a beer.. If you said 'Not me" you're boring as hell.
Honestly? I straight up skipped mine and did my own thing, and that's pretty much still my MO almost 30 years later.
Still don't use my ham gear on GMRS though.
-
19 minutes ago, SteveShannon said:
?
I suspect some touch typing difficulties, honestly. I've made similar typos posting from my phone, but usually fix them before posting.
-
28 minutes ago, AdmiralCochrane said:
He was asked multiple times what the output was on 70cm and always answered "fine" You can ask the Count on Sesame Street, he will tell you "fine" is not a number, just like twenty-something LOL It would have been a lot better if he understood that "comparison" requires comparison
As we have seen here multiple times, advertised power output often varies from real world
Fair point...I didn't dig through the whole thread, as the attitudes kind of put me off most of the radio subs on reddit awhile ago. I agree that "fine" isn't very specific....comparison is about solid numbers. One of my Anytones is rated "20 watts", but the real world numbers are more like 18 on VHF, and 14-15 on UHF.
-
3 hours ago, Lscott said:
Thanks for the link. That's the very first radio I've seen that covers the full Ham band, 400-470 MHz split, with a Part 95 certification. Now that's way cool.
I have a collection of various Kenwood HT's, with the same split, but NONE have Part 95. The exact same model with the typical commercial frequency split, 450-490/520 MHz, do have it. I had always assumed if the radio covered 400-470 the FCC would not grant Part 95 certification. I guess my assumption was wrong.
Yeah the MARS/CAP mod at times isn't all that great if you can't get crap for power out. I ran across some power tests done on a Icom IC-706MKIIG with similar results, sort of sucked on GMRS.
IC-706MKIIG Freqequency Mod Power Output.pdf 6.1 MB · 0 downloads
You bet.
The current wording of 47 CFR 95.1761 does disallow gear usable in amateur radio service from being certified, so I agree it follows that 400-470 would be disqualified under the current state of affairs, though it appears the door is still open for the 450-490 or 450-512 radios to be dual certified (90/95E). Whether the manufacturers see it as worth spending the money on is the question, though based on what's available it seems like mostly not.
Quoteunless such transmitter is also certified for use in another radio service for which the frequency is authorized and for which certification is also required. No GMRS transmitter will be certified for use in the GMRS if it is equipped with the capabilities to operate in services that do not require equipment certification, such as the Amateur Radio Service.
I did a little digging in the prior version of the CFR (prior to the sections being shuffled in 2017 and GMRS was under 95a), and I'm not finding any similar wording disallowing overlapping between services. Really the only thing I found regarding certification pointed to the OET page, and referenced a list of certified transmitters that doesn't seem to exist anymore.
-
55 minutes ago, Lscott said:
If the G6, 400-470 split, has Part 95, it will be the first one I’ve seen.
The Part 95 certification combined with having the range to fully cover 70cm (as I had my eye toward my ham license at the time) was one of the big factors in choosing it
And found the ID, it's K6610354640
6 hours ago, AdmiralCochrane said:I would be curious to see hard data on this, particularly 65cm vs 70cm performance.
It's not fully side by side, but there's a thread on reddit where a user tested power outputs of a few popular MARS-modded ham handhelds on GMRS; the FT5D was one that was noticeably down on power on GMRS.
-
2 hours ago, Lscott said:
The commercial grade radios with the 400-470 MHz band split are not Part 95 certified from my experience, just Part 90, at least I've never seen one that was.
I'll have to find the FCC ID for it, but IIRC the Vertex Standard VX-4207 carried both 90 and 95 certification for both the 400-470 (g6) and 450-512 (g7) versions.
No luck with searches, so I'll have to find the ID for my g6 (aka dig one of them out). The g7 is FCC id K6610354740
-
5 hours ago, WRUU653 said:
The system goes all the way north to San Luis Obispo County, up to Paso Robles now with the addition of PAPA 34 repeater. Congratulations, it's great to hear you had such a positive experience.
They're also well into the San Joaquin valley as well, with the Joaquin Ridge machine; I can hear that one in Fresno area, and if the range is anything like the CARLA machine, it's likely got some coverage to parts of the Sierras.
-
I have the prior version (GMRS 50x1) and after a year or two of use, mostly monitoring with minimal transmit time, it no longer holds power on high. It'll start at 44-45 watts, and start dropping almost immediately, leveling off at 25 or so after around a minute.
It's currently living on the shelf.
-
while there's been lots of valid points raised already, I'll mention something I noticed looking at the specs for that glass mount...wouldn't 1.5dBi effectively be negative gain antenna in the real world? (dBi vs dBd and all)
that aside, I've absolutely run into auto glass on newer cars impeding the signal, which would be an issue with that glass mount inside as well. aside from the mentioned "hatpin" (uhf 1/4 wave, which are quite inexpensive), Midland's "ghost" (MXTA25) antennas seem to get decent reviews, and that would be fairly unnoticeable hard mounted on the roof without compromising ground clearance (they're less than 4" tall).
-
Did some digging on the repeaters, and I see a couple possibilities; I suspect the reality is a combination of more than one. My half educated guesses would be:
First, you may be hearing linked repeaters. Less likely for the GMRS side now that the rules have been clarified to disallow connections via the internet, but not impossible. More likely on the ham side; i didn't see any notes or common call signs that would solidify it digging a little on repeaterbook, but there are a few repeaters west and north with matching frequencies.
Second, an unhappy transmitter/amplifier throwing harmonics. that 446 frequency is a bit, but not horribly far off of 3x the 147 frequency.
Third, you have a repeater (or a ham) transmitting close by with a fair bit of power, and it's simply overloading the front end of your radios, so it seems to be bleeding through on other channels it isn't actually on. While it sounds like they've improved somewhat (varying between models and even examples of the same model), it's still a definite possibility. (one of my UV5R's will go completely deaf (desense) with as little as 1/2 watt in close proximity, even on a different frequency).
New to GMRS and looking for a better antenna..
in General Discussion
Posted
if they are the same as my uv5r, it will show a "+/-" symbol at the top of the display when the current channel is programmed with an offset. the "OFFSET" option in the menu (as @hxpx noted) should show what it's set to.
If you have the programming cable, reading the programming from the radio with software (such as CHIRP) is also a possibility.