IronArcher

Try the “footpath” app Shows elevation along a route. Free app

So a quick update for anyone who finds this in a search. I currently have 2 1/4 wave antennas, the Tram/ Browning 450 5/8 over 5/8 wave, and the above mentioned Tram 1181 dual band(I just got my Tech and General ham lic). Results: 1/4 wave antennas. Very good on tx, not so great on rx. I would score it 9/6 (tx/rx on a 10 point must system) Tram dual band. NOTE, I do need to trim this antenna, SWR is a little high on 467MHz so this score may change. Tx is fair, but disappointing (again, timing may help) rx is a bit better than the 1/4 wave antennas. Rating is a 7/7 Tram/Browning 5/8^5/8. So far, this one is the Mac daddy for GMRS use. Like the 1/4 wave antennas, it is very well tuned. Tx is a bit better than the 1/4 wave antennas. Not a HUGE improvement, but a touch better. Rx is amazing. The repeater we use is noticeably stronger and cleaner. 10/10 score. I have made an NMO mount for my Jeep, and even one for my house. The house has used 1 of the 1/4 wave antennas and the Tram 5/8^5/8. Same results. I believe the rx is strongly tied to the amount of metal there to pick up a signal. Hopefully the 1181 improves a bit with tuning, as the base has my 5/8 antenna. The 1/4 waves are frustrating in that I do get great tx with them, but I can’t rx as well as rx with them. The 1181 is more balanced, but needs tuning (I hope) to get all of its potential. I’m really hoping that does the trick as for a dual band antenna, has some very broad dips in the SWR trace. The 2m band is virtually flat on the floor over a 6MHz sweep! The 70cm sweep is a bit wavier, with a nice extra dip in the GMRS range... not awesome, but the whole 70cm band is 1.5:1 or better, and 2m is 1.1:1 or better... though the frequencies are a touch low. Will post any updates that are worthy of reporting. That said, if you are looking for a GMRS antenna I would suggest the Tram/Browning 5/8^5/8.

I have a few new “ham” radios that tx on GMRS freqs. One of them needed a button pushed while being powered up, but that’s it. 2 just needed to be programmed. I have a 4th radio, that one needed the “Mars mod” but that also wasn’t an issue. Ham radios aren’t licensed. If you can build your own, why can’t you buy one. Seems silly, and I think they addressed that... while still leaving some confusion. The way I read it is. Once modified, they lose certification, thus CAN be used by amateur radio operators, but only on the frequencies they have privileges on based on their level of license. The confusing part is radios “marketed” for GMRS. If you can take a GMRS legal radio, and mid it for use on ham freqs... that might be illegal, but still seems silly. I guess for hams, it takes a different route. Because the radios for ham use are not (theoretically) marketed towards GMRS use, they don’t need to be certified for GMRS use in the first place. They still can’t tx on GMRS freqs, but can clearly listen, and can still use their freqs. Example. A ham can buy an Icom 7100. It is not certified for GMRS use. It can be modded for such use, but was never marketed for GMRS use. A ham can build their own radio that can tx on all sorts of freqs. They just can tx on freqs they don’t have privileges on. Even with all the double backpedaling, most judges would see this is to vague and confusing to be enforceable. I would assume it’s probably as high on the list of things the FCC cares about as how many Baofengs are being used on GMRS.

Oddly, I think I’m right about in the middle of this “debate”. I can understand why a GMRS repeater owner would want to get permission. You can then have a list of people who have permission, so if you need to change your squelch codes, you can e-mail everyone the new codes. GMRS doesn’t require a test, meaning it doesn’t require any significant knowledge of the rules/regulations. Simply put, GMRS lics don’t mean you know any more than that you need one, and how to get one. Hams need to take tests. Meaning they need to at least know the answers to the tests. And will jump through the hoops needed to actually take the test in front of 3 VEs. The people willing to do that, on average, are going to take their privileges a little more seriously than someone who simply paid some money on a website. So I can see why hams are more willing to open up their repeaters. The people using them are more likely to take the rules seriously. At the same time, I would think that GMRS repeater owners would WANT more people to use their repeaters to get a little more use out of the time, money and effort to put up a repeater, and maybe find a few more people that they could get a hold of if they needed help in an emergency... especially if it is a larger repeater. I do use GMRS as a hobby. I will also be looking at ham radio as a hobby as well. I am very grateful to the owner of our one active local repeater. I have met him, and consider him a good friend. Enough that I’ve been to his place to help with his repeater, and he has helped me with my mobile setup. I was a kid of the CB generation, and remember meeting a lot of people that became my friends because of CB. CB seems to have become a wasteland since the dawn of cell phones... maybe still useful for truck drivers, but little more unless talking skip on sidebands. For me, GMRS is like CB on steroids. I can reliably talk 20 miles on an HT to people I know well, and others I only know via GMRS. I’m not really looking to make contacts for the sake of having made a contact. So even though I will be getting at the least, a general lic, I won’t be getting any gear outside of HF, VHF, and UHF. Probably won’t even get into HF. That said, I think, based on some replies here, GMRS could learn some things from hams.

While I don’t necessarily recommend it, at least for HTs I got the cheap tiny little SWR/power meter from Amazon. I think it was like $35. I do NOT trust it to be accurate to the 1/100, but, by way of comparison, it is well within 1/10th. So basically, if it says 1.2:1 I know I’m pretty safe. Maybe it’s 1.3:1 maybe lower, but being I can’t make huge changes to those antennas, it’s ok for them. It DOES read a bit low. I mean like practically impossible to hit numbers, like 1.02:1, when the other meter was reading 1.05:1. Which still seems unlikely, so I don’t crow those numbers, I just know I’m well under 1.5:1

Mbrun: That would be a great resource, I think much of that could be consolidated into 1 spreadsheet, with links to the individual pages/topics you suggest. Hell, one could even color code things like Part 95 certification, or radios that aren’t to “spec”. gman1971. I suppose that’s a part of beauty of having all of the data available, those that care, and are willing to listen, can see for themselves the pros and cons of different radios. If they are willing to look at it, they can make a better decision, if not, too bad for them. I think the “snob” label doesn’t really account for new/used. If you had 20 brand new APX8000s, that would make you a rich snob LOL! Hell, after we turn them on, we are all on used radios. But I get your point. I think many just see the “buy Motorola! CCRs are garbage” and label you as a snob. I cant comment on how they all look at it, just an outside perception. Texts is quite normally a crappy way to convey true feelings and emotional intent. As for features, I want a dual watch radio, and I want to be able to see which channels I am watching. Sometimes I want that because the wife isn’t comfortable talking on the repeater where everyone in a 20 mile radius can hear her. So I watch a separate channel just in case she is trying to get a hold of me via simplex. Other times, I want to be on a repeater channel while scanning other channels, NOAA channels, and emergency services channels. Some radios do this, some don’t. I will pay more for those radios that do. I also have a pair of Baofeng 888s radios. And for what I need them for, they are great! Yes, they are garbage radios, but when I am working up in a tree, and I need to call someone (wife) for something, RIGHT NOW! those 888Ss work fine. If I drop one out of the tree and it breaks, I’m out $10. That said, I did drop one from about 25 feet up, and it is still working. Bonus, with a good antenna, I can hit a repeater with it if I am near a window. They all serve a purpose. For quality, long distance contact, the 888S is indeed crap. You are much better off getting a Motorola, Kenwood, Icom, Vertex etc. the 888s is basically a disposable radio, and sometimes, that’s exactly what you need. I wouldn’t take a Ferrari down a dirt road, and a Range Rover makes a crappy track vehicle. A Jeep Cherokee, and Mazda Miata are better choices, even though they kind of suck. Knowing which radios are the best for ones desired use, and budget will help people make better choices.

Well, here is where I think a slight change of tactics could help. Instead of telling people their radios are garbage, let them look at ALL of the tests in one place. You don’t need to advocate for any particular brand or radio. I remember, back when I was more into motorcycles than anything, looking at the back pages of a cycle (or cycle world, motorcyclist? I forget. Point is one had the following data) and there you would find a full page with virtually every bike they tested. 1/4 mile times, top speed, breaking distance, weight, price etc. An odd brand (Bimota) had some really good numbers... but cost a small fortune. Like $20k when a good Japanese bike was like $7500. Obviously, those were dream bikes, so we found bikes that fit our budgets and still performed as best they could at that price.... and we always kept an eye out for a used bike we could afford, that gave us performance that was well above our wallets ability to match in a new bike. Same works here. If someone has a budget of $50 to start, let them buy their Baofeng. When they decide they like the hobby enough to upgrade, they can. Yeah, it may well be junk, but it’s also $50. Not a bad way to test the waters. For many, there is going to be an acceptable price/performance ratio. They might look at the Boafengs and want a step up, so they look at the Wouxun... which is a step up, but still not a top end radio. If they could see HOW MUCH of a step up it is, perhaps they would see that for a bit more, they could have a LOT more radio, and maybe it changes their minds by giving them the information to make a well informed purchase. Not everyone is going to want a Motorola off of E-bay, they might want more features, or simply don’t want to gamble on how good the radio still is, sight unseen. But maybe, in time, they decide they do want a top of the line radio, so they buy a brand new Motorola (or Kenwood, or Icom or...). And someday they sell that to someone looking to upgrade from their Wouxun. It doesn’t have to be insults back and forth. Very few will listen to someone telling them they bought garbage, at least compared to someone telling them, that for their next radio, if they want to see some significant improvements to buy the better brands. I’ve heard (or read) it said “Boafeng has done more for amateur radio (and I suggest GMRS as well), than any club, web page, or organization.” And I believe it is true. Had it not been for my ultra cheap Boafengs, I wouldn’t have gotten my, tyt, Anytone, or my new Icom, much less my GMRS license. Putting the data all out there at once takes away the “radio snob” bull$#!t and lays it all out there for all to see. Some will make better choices because of it. If People send me the data, I will organize it and post it for all to see. I don’t have many radios, and nothing to test with beyond an SWR meter. I won’t be able to generate much data, but I can organize it and even add some grading systems that help people make sense of the numbers without being a full on radio nut.

So here would be something useful. Standardized test scores. How much power? How much is only on the frequency vs. harmonics? How does the receiver perform (not sure the test for that)? Stuff like that. Repeatable, measurable tests that show real world metrics. Not only will that show which are better, but also how much better. Pick a few metrics to measure. Similar to car reviews. 0-60, 1/4 mile, skid pad Gs, 60-0 stopping, top speed. Like the ones mentioned above (power, spurious emissions, sensitivity, selectivity etc). Not too many, otherwise it becomes number soup. Chart them, and have people add radios as they test them. In reality, most are only interested in range, and to a lesser extent emissions. I think the hard part would be getting reliable, repeatable numbers for rx. Unless there is a way to measure without an antenna, different antennas would give different numbers. You would need to specify a test antenna, and then fewer would do the tests as they might not have the correct antenna. Is there a test that one can do on the receiver performance that eliminates the variability of antennas? Does the gear needed to run the test cost a fortune? While it may sound like a lot of work, I think it would be easier than it sounds. Tests showing side x side comparisons in “the wild” are too hard to control without having just 1 radio used for a baseline. But unless someone wants to do ALL the work, everyone would need the same bass test radio. This CAN be done. It’s just a matter of having the will to do it.

Thanks for the link! Note that this ground plane I’m making is going to be more of a disk made of drilled steel. I’m not sure if that makes a difference or not.

Mbrun Thanks. I did know that, but I don’t have a large enough dummy load to test it to see it’s actual output. Gman1971 As mentioned, for the money, it’s one of the better HTs available. When they have a sale on new Vertex HTs with 2 3200mah batteries and 2 (admittedly garbage) antennas for under $100, the TYT will not be a good radio for the money ;-) Thanks for the info on VHF and cross band repeat, as I haven’t used the radio in those modes. Again, as a step up, I’m quite happy with the purchase for the money, knowing it isn’t high level gear, I think it was well worth the price paid, at least for UHF.

Initial review of theTYT TH-UV8000D This is an inexpensive (read CCR) HT, higher in price the the cheapest CCRs, less expensive than Commercial radios. This unit can be had for less than $90 with 2 high capacity batteries, programming cable, software and 2 antennas. The good: High power output. With a full battery, on UHF and a decent antenna, you can expect to see an honest 8w out of a quality antenna. 9 to 12 watts with the stock antennas....with poor SWR numbers. Amazing battery life. Healthy duty cycle. I’m still running the first of the 2 included batteries. I believe these are 3200mah batteries. Even having more than long conversations (way higher than the implied duty cycle! I would estimate 35/50/15% over an hour, this battery has lasted about 5 days (not running all day... a few hours each day, lots of standby time) and is still at 7.2vdc and while talking a lot can get the unit warm, it never approached uncomfortable levels. 2 batteries plus charger and 2 antennas Charger allows for stand up charging with or without removing the battery from the radio Dual watch, listens to 2 channels at once without scanning, or listen to 1 channel, and scan the rest at the same time. Better than expected receiver. While not top end gear by any means, it is significantly better than my brand B HTs. Repeater ready. Dual band repeat capable (though not a GMRS feature) Lots of channel storage. VFO or channel mode with names. Solid feeling, though light PTT button Wide range rx (can add MOAA radio freqs) Lots of information on screen with you choice of backlit colors Battery volt meter in addition to customary status indicator bars Lots of options like dual band repeat The bad: Too much power on high, and only 2 power levels to choose from Still a CCR. While better rx than many CCRs, it isn’t in the same league as some higher end radios Both of the included antennas are very poor choices for GMRS use With all that information on such a small screen, there need to be lots of tiny icons, freqs and channel names are OK, everything else is quite small. Manual isn’t all that informative Lots of the options are not for GMRS use (dual band repeat, scrambler, remote stun/kill etc). Not part 95 certified All in all, not a bad radio for the money. I noticed a decent performance increase in the receiver over many other CCRs The extra power helps get into full quieting in areas that were often too much to cut through with 2-3 watts This is a great step up from most Baofeng radios, but not quite able to compete with quality commercial radios. For the money, I think it’s one of the better HTs avalible So far, no issues of any kind.

I would think you could drive out of the area to get fuel, and charge your batteries using an inverter on the trip.

I would echo what some others have said in suggestion a small mobile radio would afford a much cleaner install. Who likes holding on to an HT connected to an external antenna? It also allows for virtually unlimited use without swapping batteries, or worse, holding on to your HT connected to the coax and power cable. Yes, you could use a speaker/mike combo but you are still going to have power and coax running to your HT wherever you put it, now add in the wiring, and additional coax and connectors, and it is going to be a lot more hassle than just dropping in a small mobile unit. Try a cheap 15w head if price is a limiting factor. If/when you are ready to upgrade to a better radio, the connections are right their waiting for you. Take some of the extra time and effort you would have thrown at installing an amp to run w/your HT, and either run power wires directly to the battery, or at least to a 20a circuit that isn’t being used. Then you can drop in most any mobile you want to upgrade to with no additional work

So, I want to rig up a temporary base antenna from one of my mobile antennas. I have an odd roof over a small front porch. This roof has concave sides that terminate to a flat beam at the peak. I have a few sections of drilled steel. I am planning on mounting an 18-24” diameter section of this drilled steel (maybe 1/16” at best thickness). I would use an NMO mount attached to the ground plane, then screw the GP to that flat beam at the peak on the roof. What would be the smallest I could make the ground plane (7” radius?) and does the fact that it is drilled factor into the dimensions needed? Again, this is a temporary setup, getting too cold to put up my tripod now.

I see em now