IronArcher

Newer guy here.
I’ve done tower climbing before (for a wireless internet company).
If there was anyone around me that needed a climber for a fraction of the claimed cost (not debating that price, I just have no idea what climbers charge. I got $100 per climb (yes, it was for a friend)) I would consider getting certified.
Never knew they charged that much

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 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.

So, not bring a lawyer, and just reading the citation/s
It sounds like they simply have to stop what they are doing to avoid most, if not all fines...

So, not bring a lawyer, and just reading the citation/s
It sounds like they simply have to stop what they are doing to avoid most, if not all fines...

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.

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.

Here are some of my thoughts regarding what I believe would be useful to forum members. It is not perfect, but it is a positive start.
 
Item 1: Master List of Approved Radios
 
A single master, living, breathing post (not open to discussion) that contains a list of all radios that are FCC approved for use on the GMRS radio service.
 
Only moderators/administrators would be permitted to add/edit this post.
 
The contents of the post would be organized by station type (Mobile, Base, Handheld, Repeater etc...)
 
The post would include the following simple information. Manufacturer, Model, Validated FCC ID.
 
When a radio goes out of production, the radio gets designated EoL (End of Life)
 
A single link for each model to another master post on this forum containing moderator-managed information for that model. See Item 2 below.
 
A single link to each model’s official Pros/Cons thread. See Item 3 below.
 
Item 2: Master Model Thread, One Thread per Model
 
Post created by and edited only by moderator(s).
 
Containing only information pertaining to one model.
 
An attachment containing the official manufacturer’s data sheet (not a link, the file needs to live with the post).
 
A link to the manufacturer’s website where users can obtain updated information. Redirected by moderator if manufacture changes it.
 
A convenience link to the FCC certification information for the model.
 
An embedded image of the Radio, no links to be broken.
 
An abbreviated list of the most common and important set of radio specifications.
 
Convenience Link to the Official Pros/Cons thread for the model (see Item 3 below).
 
Optional Convenience Link(s) to various technical validations or comparison posts (Item 4 below).
 
Item 3: Pros/Cons thread, One Official Thread per Model.
 
First post in the thread containing a consistent message as every other official Pros/Cons thread. Message should describe the purpose of and expectations of posts in that thread.
 
First post containing a link back to the master list of approved radios (Item 1 above).
 
First post containing a link back to the Master Thread for that model (Item 2 above).
 
First post created by moderator/administrator. All subsequent posts provided by the MyGRMS membership.
 
Moderators intervene, redirect or delete messages when they run off topic and dilute the purpose and usefulness of the thread.
 
Item 4: Technical Validations or Comparisons Threads (optional)
 
Created by the membership.
 
As time goes on and we have members willing and capable of conducting actual measurements and/or side-by-side field comparisons between two or more radios, that information would live here. When it appears high quality work has been submitted, the moderator would edit the master thread for the models compared to this comparison information.
 
Summary
 
All in all I believe this methodology would be useful to new and existing members.
 
I think this effort is doable and manageable, but it does require a commitment. The hardest part I believe is reaching agreement on the structure (organization) and contents of the moderator managed portions of the information. Then we need to agree on how the moderators receive new information to include on the posts they would be responsible for managing. Then we need to find a way to make sure the the Master list of Approved radios is always one of the first things a new member sees when joining. Some modification to the naming and organization of the equipment discussion area may be needed.
 
I also accept that this may not be doable because of forum software limitations. That I cannot speak to.
 
I hope this input is useful in furthering this discussion. Perhaps we can get this done.
 
Michael
WRHS965
KE8PLM
 
 
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

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.

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.

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, I was planning on mounting my mobile rando in the center console.
Opening it up, I find this very close to where the coax, and likely power would run.
It’s the passenger restraint system.
I don’t want to fire my airbags the first time I key up on high power (45 watts)

My mobile has a recommended input of 13.8 +/- 15% so it would be good up to 15.9v
And as low as 11.73.
Just adding this for a reference.
This radio is 45w out (claimed) so I went with a 30amp power supply.
I would think 450w should be fine for most.
In the manual, the radio asked for less than 15a (207 watts?). I figured it would be safer to just double that.

My mobile has a recommended input of 13.8 +/- 15% so it would be good up to 15.9v
And as low as 11.73.
Just adding this for a reference.
This radio is 45w out (claimed) so I went with a 30amp power supply.
I would think 450w should be fine for most.
In the manual, the radio asked for less than 15a (207 watts?). I figured it would be safer to just double that.

Good Day IronArcher.
 
I will let those that no better than I to do the explanation.
 
Here is a link that provides a reasonably concise explanation.
 
https://www.electronics-notes.com/articles/antennas-propagation/vertical-antennas/five-eighths-wavelength-vertical.php
 
Now, as far a 1/2 dB goes that is absolutely insignificant. In real-world practical distance testing you will never, I say never, be able to tell the detect the difference, all else remaining equal.
 
BTW, I own and use the Midland. I have zero complaints about it. and I was fortunate I did not need to tune it. It was perfectly tuned from the factory. I would buy it again.
 
Hope that helps.
 
Michael
WRHS965
KE8PLM
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

"Wouxun says the KG-1000G is built using a "classic radio circuit", but what they mean to do is differentiate their products from many lower quality radios being built today. Often radios are built using "radio-on-a-chip" technology that makes them inexpensive to produce, but often inferior in sound quality and receive sensitivity. The KG-1000G is a "real" radio, with a superheterodyne receiver, built in the same way as expensive professional radios made by large manufacturers."