tweiss3

Not without knowing how YOU define the word "good", and/or what is important to you in an antenna and radio.. My "good" is probably very different from your "good".

For an all in one deck radio, the 100M is hard to beat. I can now test VHF Lo, but I haven't had the time or equipment to mess with it, as I only have the 1 100M. I still love my NX5700/5800 dual deck setup, but it also helps that I have scanners also installed next to the Kenwood.

221-229 is way off from the bottom end of UHF 380, no it won't go that far. I still love mine.

@WSCF738 In my limited experience, the biggest benefit to more power is when trying to transmit through a bunch of thick trees. Now don't get me wrong, if you want more power, go for it. But if you are having trouble with perfect line of sight, there is likely another issue you need to be looking at besides more power.

Yes all. He would looove to hear about all the illegal stuff every one does.  He would love you to speak of all the things that may (if the fcc ever does anything) get you in trouble with the fccs police.  He would also like you to tell all of us about all the things that will make sad ham heads explode and threaten to turn you in for.   
 
this thread is going to be great. 

I don't listen to SW too much, but occasionally I will tune around SW on my IC7300. I have an old 1934 RCA Victor C7-6 (6 tube) "wideband" (540kHz-18.0MHz) receiver that I collected from my grandfathers estate that I need to have someone put on a varriac to see if I need a to recap the whole thing or not. I'd love to have it as a centerpiece in the shack one day. 

If your radio's manufacturer publishes detailed specifications to include sensitivity, selectivity and spurious response/emissions then you can view exactly how dirty/clean the transmitter is. Here is a hint, if they don't publish that information, you probably don't want that radio. 

I have to disagree with using a mobile radio being dangerous when driving. I am unaware of a single study that supports the claim. There are plenty of studies that show drivers adjusting their AM/FM/Sat radios are in the top 3 causes of distracted driving, but nothing about 2-way radio. 
 
I would think it's no different then talking to a passenger. The next step from laws like this is no entertainment radio, no navigation, no talking to passengers. It's stupid and tyrannical. Just hold people accountable for distracted driving instead of naming and outlaw every possible distraction. 

Simulcast is not cheap. You can "roll your own", still about $1000+/site with https://allstarsimulcast.com/. Note, you cannot link into Allstar/Echolink.
Second option, which is widely commercially available is JPS: https://jps.com/products/snv-12/
I would also suggest you reach out to your Motorola vendor and discuss if there is a Moto solution to simulcast on analog for your chosen hardware.

Simulcast is not cheap. You can "roll your own", still about $1000+/site with https://allstarsimulcast.com/. Note, you cannot link into Allstar/Echolink.
Second option, which is widely commercially available is JPS: https://jps.com/products/snv-12/
I would also suggest you reach out to your Motorola vendor and discuss if there is a Moto solution to simulcast on analog for your chosen hardware.

Voice scramblers (inversion scrambling) won't prevent the tones from being scanned. Audio will just noise, but the tone still gets transmitted in the same place. 

Yea, I know of one analog smart net system still being used today. 
Anyways, if you have eligibility 90.35 (a), then it's only time & money at that point. 

The coordination thing is pretty big. The same Line A & Line C that cause issues with GMRS cause more issues with business band licensing. This should be discussed with the coordinator. If you have to coordinate with Canada, that can take months to clear, and if there is a conflict, you pay for coordination again.
If you want to go down this path, I would recommend reading all of eCFR Part 90 top to bottom, then read it again in 2 days after you had time to process it the first time. 
The number one thing you will hear from your consultants is to not buy the equipment BEFORE you get licensed, and I agree with that.
Lastly, there are fees you pay to the coordinator, then there are fees paid to the FCC. If I remember correctly, initial filing was $205, and a major modification is $105. Also don't be surprised if your license pops up with conditions of approval noted.
It's not necessarily hard, but time consuming, and the actual application on the FCC website is not well designed.

I rarely hear much when driving during the day. I do hear the brunswick and lakewood repeaters identify on schedule, but never heard another user. 
My repeater is down due to a broken antenna, but never reaches that far either.
 
We really only use GMRS for family events and trips, being we can often be out of cell phone coverage, and its a ton easier to hit PTT and get their attention rather than pull the phone out and attempt a call.
I know some neighborhood groups use GMRS to keep track of each other, especially during long power outages.

Voice scramblers (inversion scrambling) won't prevent the tones from being scanned. Audio will just noise, but the tone still gets transmitted in the same place. 

With the EFHW, you can pick to either cover the digital/cw portion of 80, or the phone portion. I chose digital. The 7510 is phone portion of 80, and the 8010 is digital portion of 80. I've used it on phone, SWR is something like 5:1, was only used for quick checkins to an 80 meter net.

The FCC website timing out is nothing new. It did that when I applied for my FRN, GMRS license, and amateur license last fall. The FCC site is like radio propagation, sometimes its great and other times its not. 

I have a MyAntennas EFHW for 10 through 80. I have mine between two trees, but the feed side is only 25' up, and the far side is up about 40. It's no where near as tall as recommended, but it's logged nearly 5000 contacts. You don't have to have the far tree right at 160', it could be 200+, just use paracord to finish the bridging. 

Voice scramblers (inversion scrambling) won't prevent the tones from being scanned. Audio will just noise, but the tone still gets transmitted in the same place. 

Voice scramblers (inversion scrambling) won't prevent the tones from being scanned. Audio will just noise, but the tone still gets transmitted in the same place. 

Voice scramblers (inversion scrambling) won't prevent the tones from being scanned. Audio will just noise, but the tone still gets transmitted in the same place. 

In this interpretation (if correct), only linking via IP is prohibited. It is still possible to link repeaters via RF using GMRS frequencies, and remain completely legal. Thus, the "opinion" that linking is illegal is not a true statement.
If there is any enforcement action taken, it would have to be based on the eCFR, not the "summary" posted by the FCC. I'm still not certain the "linking is illegal" crowd has any leg to stand on. I'm not a lawyer though, and I have no intention on getting into that fight.

This x100

I have a $18 WiFi electric switch connected to my repeater so I can shut it down from my phone from anywhere (with internet connection).

You need to stack a few Yagis up and dump that wimpy dish.