gortex2

I think you articulated the problem.
By having several repeaters in an area linked each one requires it's own pair of frequencies. Sticking to the usual standard of a 5MHz offset that leaves just 8 pairs. So, by linking several repeaters together when any one of them goes active all are now on the air. This effectively ties up several valuable repeater pair frequencies whereas one might have been sufficient.
The argument for this practice is now a much wider area is covered. However one forgets that another user may wish to setup their own repeater, and has NO desire to share it with anyone outside their family or group. The multiple linked repeaters now consumes the limited repeater frequency pairs, and possibility leaving none available for somebody to use on a limited basis. 
For example here in the metro Detroit area we have, I think, three linked repeaters, and one wide area standalone repeater. Since we are past the FCC's "Line A" two of the official repeater frequency pairs are not available. With four of the remaining pairs consumed by the linked system that leaves just 2 frequency pairs open for somebody else to use.

All of this is just my opinion, but since you asked... I don't like or use linked repeaters. Not on GMRS, not on amateur radio. I have three stand-alone repeaters on a 6,000 foot peak and one out in the desert near Barstow. None of them are linked to anything and never will be. There is an amateur radio system called the Winsystem with linked repeaters all over the U.S. as well as nodes linked in internationally. Not only do you have to hear conversations possibly taking place in other states or countries taking up valuable local repeater bandwidth, the entire system is a target for jammers. Many of the nodes sound like crap. I find little value in linked repeaters.

I think networked repeaters have their place, but I agree with you for the most part. I want at least a few unlinked repeaters so I can contact people who use the same repeater. 
I don’t understand hams making QSOs on networked repeaters. 
I do understand enjoying the challenge of “conquering the airwaves” to make distant contacts, not for the joy of talking to strangers (nothing wrong with that, just not my thing), but for the technical challenge it represents. 
 

Not likely. This has been discussed ad-nauseum in a different thread. There are some for and some against but it seams the majority are against. The FCC isn't likely to give the issue any attention.

This is a commonly talked about topic here and on other radio related forums. Do a search on this forum.
The majority are against any type of digital mode on GMRS.

There is one radio service that encrypts conversations, doesn’t require users to ID, and doesn’t require users to own a license.
It even has a worldwide network of repeaters.
What’s more, it fits in a person’s pocket. In fact most adults and a lot of kids already have these wondrous radios. 
 

LMR 400 for 35' feet. 
 
RG58 - Loss per 100 - 10.6db
LMR400 - Loss per 100 - 2.7
So at 35' of RG58 you are loosing almost 4db which is over 50% of signal loss and power. 

Sounds like FRS, CB or MURS is better suited for you and not a licensed service. 
 

Sounds like FRS, CB or MURS is better suited for you and not a licensed service. 
 

It's simply a requirement of getting the license. Technically, its also required on Business &  Public Safety licenses as well.

Sounds like FRS, CB or MURS is better suited for you and not a licensed service. 
 

So if your just hiking or biking use low power and dont worry about call signs. Toss them a FRS radio and be done. 

If you’re using a radio that requires a license to use, you’re required to identify the license you’re using. It’s a very simple concept. 
If you’re authorizing someone to use your license, they are required to identify your license. Equally simple concept. 
If you are the license holder, you are responsible to ensure that they do. Still simple. 
Inconvenience or the opinion that a rule is stupid has never been recognized as a justification for violating regulations. 
However, the FCC almost certainly won’t enforce it. 

So if your just hiking or biking use low power and dont worry about call signs. Toss them a FRS radio and be done. 

Yup. Biggest issue with the 300 and 500 is the display. Kinda small for APRS in a vehicle. If you only want a tracker I guess its fine. 

So if your just hiking or biking use low power and dont worry about call signs. Toss them a FRS radio and be done. 

Wife knows I can find something birthday wise in many larger thrift stores...so she encouraged it and we went for my last birthday to an area with a lot of them. Bought an old Hallicrafters SX-24 with matching speaker. Doesn't look like much but still works (most of my "gifts" were radios from several stores). Not going to hide my purchases, last was re-casing kits for some well used Motorola XPR-6550 handhelds (right after getting the SX-24 and some other older radios). 

LMR 400 for 35' feet. 
 
RG58 - Loss per 100 - 10.6db
LMR400 - Loss per 100 - 2.7
So at 35' of RG58 you are loosing almost 4db which is over 50% of signal loss and power. 

You need the radials. Id swap out the coax for a better cable. I did very similar on our campers for years and do the same for SAR on VHF every summer. A fiberglass painters pole works so much better and is lighter. We have a 30' aluminum mast for our SAR repeater but most of the check points use the fiberglass poles. They go up about 15' (ones we have) and work excellent for the antenna. I'd go to lowes or home depot and check out the poles they have. For our motorhome we had a 25' fiberglass flag pole that went in a mount. I tried our GMRS antenna (FG4600) once on it and while it worked it din't gain me any range so went back to the ladder mount. The ladder put it at 12' high already and in the environment the loss in cable didn't help with the height I gained. 
 

Rich doesn't remove listings from the site. After 1 year of no updates it gets "hidden" on the map unless you click on stale and offline repeaters. It would be great if they dropped after 1 year completely from the site with no interaction as I'm sure many would disappear. Folks don't use repeater book as that's primarily a ham site. Most hams keep stuff up to date but I can tell you many are not valid there either. I'm sure both sites have good info for certain areas but none are perfect. Even LMR licensed stuff may or may not be on the air for a particular license. 

Correct. This is the issue. This service doesn't do what you want but you don't want to use another service for a multitude of reasons. That's not a reason to change this service. There are services that do what you want, either amateur, LMR or broadband. All of which can be done if you want to. 
As far as the radio issue you seem to have the radio posted is ham radio and not GMRS so why is that ultimately the perfect radio ? You plan to use ham now after saying you can't use ham ? Are you planning others in your caravan to also get ham license so you can use APRS ? 
In the end HAM will do what you want but everyone needs to be a ham to take advantage of it. 

I think that’s exactly what they’re targeted towards. 

As said the rules limit MURS to 2 watts. For SAR use we run VHF and UHF stuff. VHF is better in the woods and same power level on commercial LMR radios will work better on VHF vs UHF. 

MURS is limited by regulation to 2 watts.
The answer to your hypothetical question is “it depends.”  There’s not a simple yes/no answer. It depends on what’s limiting your range.  Terrain can limit both.  Both are line of sight, but UHF is slightly more so.  UHF is also less capable of passing through moisture.

To bad many of them are not in existence.