mbrun

I must admit I am questioning the quality of the PL259 connection, assuming absolutely nothing else changed besides shorting the cable. That amount of SWR change with removal of just 15 foot of cable strikes me as excessive. Honestly, I would have expected it to go up a tad, maybe .1-.2, but your values nearly doubled. I recommend trying your hand at replacing the connector one more time before trimming an otherwise pre-tuned antenna or investing in a new one. Michael WRHS965 KE8PLM

BTW, someone PM’d me to ask if the radios were both using the same configuration file. They answer is Yes, I can say for certain that they were. Michael WRHS965 KE8PLM

Welcome to the myGRMS forum. Glad to have you here. Enjoy. Michael WRHS965 KE8PLM

Thanks. No, I don’t have either of those to experiment with. Michael WRHS965 KE8PLM

Good Day All, I wanted to do a follow-up and close the loop on this thread. I received an RMA to send the original radio back. I had the radio all packaged up ready return when I was contacted by BTWR who asked if I would considering comparing it against a replacement radio first. I was happy to oblige as that was my original hope anyway. Once in hand I tried to reproduce the conditions that lead to this post in the first place. Sadly, in many attempts, the over-the-air propagation was never consistent enough for me to rely on it like I could the day I performed my original comparisons. In the end, I purchased an RF signal generator and wide assortment of RF pads to have in my radio tool box so that my comparisons would be objective and not skewed by variable environmental conditions. Since I do not have a SINAD meter, the best I could hope for was comparing the radios and how effective they are at opening squelch at their lowest squelch. And since my original point of reference was the existing HT radios, I measured my existing HTs, the original and the replacement 1000G. So what did I find? I found the original 1000G slightly less sensitive than my 805G by an amount of 2dB, consistent with the manufacturer’s specifications. I found the new 1000G nearly the same as the original, to slightly better. I found my KG-UV9P to be 3dB more sensitive than my 805G. I found the meters on all the radios to have different swings, proving that the meters on the radios cannot be relied upon for any meaningful comparisons between models. I kept both 1000Gs in my shack for a while and have switched back and force between them on many occasions when I experienced weak and variable signals. Through lots of patience and switching I did discover that part of the problem I was experiencing with the original 1000G was that it seems to have a harder time decoding PL tones at the lower end of its receive range (when its meter appears with 5 or less bars). I found that when I switched to carrier squelch on these signals that squelch remained open more consistently down down to nearly 1 bar. I also found that the replacement 1000G did a better job of decoding PL down to a lower level. So, in conclusion, based on comparisons against same brand models, the difference in sensitivity between my original 1000G and my 805G appears to be consistent with the manufacturer’s specifications. And by the way, I have been in contact with Gman to discuss the practice of doing environmental effective sensitivity measurements using the ISO-Tee. There will likely be posts on this subject at some future date. Thanks G. Michael WRHS965 KE8PLM

If the antenna you are using requires a ground plane and you do not have a sufficient one then adding one or upgrading to an antenna that does not require one could make a night and day difference for you. On the other hand, a change in cable or decrease in length will be undetectable. I personally have never operated my MXTA26 antenna without one so I have no first hand experience on that front to share. It has always either been dead center on my vehicle roof, sitting on a metal trashcan lid or other metal surface. Michael WRHS965 KE8PLM

Sorry, not familiar with the numbers you reference. Could you clarify? Michael WRHS965 KE8PLM

You will not be able to tell the difference if you shorten the cable. The fraction of a dB you might gain is too small for you to perceive in real world use. Shortening the cable will only benefit you if it is bad/damaged in the portion you cut off, or if that little extra amount is in your way and bothering you. I use the same midland antenna, only I use it in the center of my roof on mag mount. It has proven to be an excellent performer in my area. But again, changing to another with roughly the same gain is probable to lead to undetectable change, assuming again that both antennas are working properly. To top if off you will have less money in your pocket. Now, if the pattern of the antennas is different and you live in an area that is super hilly, maybe an antenna with less gain might yield more noticeable benefit when working certain stations. To often we get hung up on the small differences that by themselves are meaningless. The small differences only become meaningful and beneficial when there are a lot of them that add up to big positive differences. I made a point recently about the use of a larger antenna on my HT. I recently switched back to the use of a shorter antenna on my HT because in reality I found that the extra size provided me no real, practical benefit. While I have concluded it gives me about 5% or so additional range, I seldom every operate within the area represented by the extra 5% range to justify the full-time inconvenience of having that extra length. Michael WRHS965 KE8PLM

You very well could be right. I think it would be a fair comparison if only the mobile rig could be set to the same 1/2 watt output power I am using on the HT. Michael WRHS965 KE8PLM

Good Luck! Michael WRHS965 KE8PLM

It is not fair to say that I ‘prefer GRMS’ to ham. They are two radio services that exist for different purposes. GMRS is primary for me because of family. So as far as giving the GMRS antenna top position on the mast, it is because I want to give GMRS the best possible range for communicating simplex mobile/portable to home. In doing this, I know that I also achieve the best I can with local repeaters. Win-Win. Amateur radio on the other hand is truly a hobby that fuels my interest in radio. It provides an avenue for experimentation and it connects me with other radio enthusiasts and the community. Hope that answers your question. Michael WRHS965 KE8PLM

Welcome to myGMRS Dave. Glad to have you here. Enjoy! Michael WRHS965 KE8PLM

Alright, so I eliminated the 3’ cable and connected the radio to the dummy load using just an SMA to UHF adapter. I performed another test. This time I experienced full quieting reception out to about 300’, reliable reception with variable noise out to about 600’ and the complete loss of reception at about 975’. So it would seem the cable is definitely a contributor (perhaps 6dB more), but not the only one. That leaves us only two components. The radio itself and the dummy load. It would seem therefore it would take a faraday cage around one and then the other to determine which of these two ends up being the bigger radiator. One significant take away from this exercise is the knowledge that just because one is using a dummy load it should not be assumed that one is not transmitting a signal, but instead only that ones transmission range is being substantially reduced compared to a purposeful antenna. So, if a dummy load were being used say in a large apartment building or condo complex, the radio signal may still very well permeate the entire complex or even beyond. Also, as has been reported by me in other testing I have done, I experience very high propagation loss around me. Those without the dense stands of trees and other obstacles I have may very well see their signal travel much further. Thanks for all your input. Michael WRHS965 KE8PLM

Here is the Dummy Load that was used. https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07MKSVCYX/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_search_asin_title?ie=UTF8&psc=1 Here is the radio that was used. Here is the cable that was used. http://www.randl.com/shop/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=67753&osCsid=dkuldi6ak5c9bciv42djjoui56 One thing that occurs to me is that I could/can eliminate the cable from the equation all together by merely attaching the radio directly to the dummy load. I have all the necessary adapters. Just need to make sure zero stress is placed on the radio and connector, which is why the cable was used in the first place. Michael WRHS965 KE8PLM Edit - Add two photos

I ordered a 60 piece sample pack containing a wide variety sizes to use in the shack. I will report back my findings. Michael WRHS965 KE8PLM

Nothing wrong with a J-Pole if it connects you to whom you want to communicate with. I have two of them that I use indoors regularly with my HTs. The higher placed outdoor antenna definitely does better though. Michael WRHS965 KE8PLM

See Duplicate Thread here: https://r.tapatalk.com/shareLink/topic?share_fid=112680&share_tid=2650&url=https%3A%2F%2Fforums%2Emygmrs%2Ecom%2Findex%2Ephp%3F%2Ftopic%2F2650-Midland-MXT-115-help&share_type=t&link_source=app Michael WRHS965 KE8PLM

Yes, the Midland radios set both TX and Rx codes at the same time. That is one of the features that makes Midland radios easier to use IMO that some others. In some rare cases this may be limiting. Once you know the correct code to use, if you do not have immediate success, consider getting close to the repeater (1/2 mile or so) and confirming you can get in there. That will eliminate range as a issue. Once connected, trying driving back towards home to confirm useful range. Michael WRHS965 KE8PLM

While the 805G is a very capable radio, it requires nearly the same level of effort to use out of the box as the Midland GXT1000. The only extra thing you must do on the 805G that you do not have to do on the midland is set the Tx and Rx tones separately. But, you DO NOT need to have software to take advantage of every GMRS frequency and standard repeater pair available. They are programmed in from the factory. Now, as far as kids go, durability and replacement cost when damaged are valid considerations. Perhaps then you should stay FRS. You will have compatibility with GMRS, and call-signs will not be necessary. Also check out the DeWalt branded radios at Home Depot. They are super simple and appear to be built very tough. Michael WRHS965 KE8PLM

The GXT radios are just above the legal power limit for FRS radios and thus are classified a GMRS. I own many. Looking at the LXT radios, they appear to be FRS radios, meaning they are 2-watts or less of effective radiating power. Michael WRHS965 KE8PLM

Welcome to myGMRS. You will find a lot of good information and friend folks here. Enjoy! Michael WRHS965 KE8PLM

Which menu setting on the radio does this? Michael WRHS965 KE8PLM

Understood. Since I like to experiment I sense a number of different scenarios in my future. Thanks again for input. Michael WRHS965 KE8PLM

Good point. Thanks. I could also use a slightly longer length of coax and coil it. I think also I could use quad shielded cable. Michael WRHS965 KE8PLM

There is no speaker mic involved in this condition, correct? What happens when you press and hold the Monitor button? Michael WRHS965 KE8PLM