Shriekmau

ROFL! CB is good for what it is, but I tend to prefer a more structured (monitored) environment. I don't prefer to turn on my radio and hear obscenities which is what CB has become in this area.

LOL, been busy all weekend and just had a chance to check out the new posts. Yeah, sorry about the derailment... carry on.

My wife actually does have a fear of clowns. I tease her about it sometimes, all in fun of course.

Super envious. I am trying to overcome some slight acrophobia. It is not too bad, but I do get a little nervous when on an 8ft ladder. When on a roof my heart starts to beat pretty quick and my hands get sweaty. Funny enough, I am fine on a plane.

I can say that I have not had any issues with mine but all of this talk makes me worried. After owning a Yaesu and now an ICOM, I can say there is a noticeable difference in build quality. I must apologize for speaking so highly of Wouxun in the beginning, had I known the type of build quality I was working with versus the build quality of the other competing radio companies I would have never recommended these units. I am right there with you Dan, I will not be buying any more of these units either.

Wow, so sad. Sorry you are having the issues that you are. All I can say is maybe get a refund if they don't work out (directly from Wouxun, unlikely but good luck). You could always try to get your money back and buy fewer of another brand. You aren't technically supposed to use part 90 on 95, many people do though and not much is said, but if someone raised a complaint and you were investigated then fines may be incurred from the FCC (Wouxun is part 90, not 95). Now that the formality/disclaimer is out of the way (as you know I use a couple Wouxun for different applications), look up any part 90 certified radios and provided they can Tx on 460-470 you are in business. I think Kenwood makes some, Motorola, Uniden, and you might be able to find a couple Ritron floating around. Used is sometimes better than new, especially in the case of a used from the big 3 and a new chinese unit.

I totally agree. After owning my Yaesu FT-8900R and a Yaesu VX-7R, I can say there is a HUGE difference in quality. As a side note: I am returning the VX-7R due to muffled audio caused by the waterproof membrane over the mic. I can be a QT (quiet talker) sometimes and this caused difficulty in hearing my Tx by some. I have ordered an ICOM IC-80AD which should be here tomorrow.

Ah, I have a KG-UV6D. I am not sure if it is V1 or V2. I will check it and see. I can say the UV6D seems lower quality than my UVD1P.

captdan, Are you already having issues with your Wouxun? Which model did you receive? I have the KG-920P-A, when you power up the unit the left side will say "Wouxun" and the right will say the model number. Make sure they didn't send you the KG-920P (without the "A"). I have heard of people having issues with these units, their symptoms are identical to William's. I do not remember reading about these issues associated with the "A" variant. William, Check yours as well please, I am interested to see which version you have. I am starting to think I should expect future failures based on your report and captdan mentioning having to contact Wouxun. One other thing, I know William's background and proficiency in Amateur, but how is the radio grounded (if a mobile install)? If it is not grounded to the battery or engine ground, try that first and see if your issues resolve. This radio seems to be very particular about it's ground point.

Ah, then as Logan said, it is not a big deal and does not break any rules on GMRS.

I don't know the exact distance, but I do know that RJ45 cable can effectively pass signals/information approximately 150ft without a repeater. Whether or not the radio pushes enough power to go that far and the head unit can pick it up are two different stories. I wish I could have stayed longer as well. Without the ground on that extension cord and your antenna/radio not being grounded, that could have been causing the SWR we saw. I would check all connections, remove moisture, make sure you don't have any shorts in the ground on your LMR400 (not grounded to the shielding by accident), and try hooking the baofeng to the antenna line through the SWR meter bypassing the duplexer. If the issue goes away then your duplexer is not tuned right, if the issue remains then you have an issue with your cabling/antenna. Easy way to rule out the duplexer.

I noticed you mentioned your small business. Keep in mind that ham is amateur radio and under no circumstances should be used for business purposes. To do so would inevitably get a nice fine. GMRS is not for use by businesses either, anyone doing so could wind up in the same boat as someone using ham improperly, but GMRS is far less policed by the community. If you want something for short range (1-2 miles) without the need for a license, look into MURS channels 4 and 5. They are not to be used with more than 0.5 watts but they are in the VHF range and have good propagation in most geographic locations. If you want for personal use, then GMRS or ham are great services to use. I really enjoy the use of both services.

Definitely agree. I helped Logan perform some tests over the weekend and earlier this week. I had experienced the difference elevation made to transmissions in the past, but I think Logan had less first hand experience with the results of elevating the antenna. I have to admit, the results of our tests even surprised me. The elevation of the transmission/receiving locations made a DRASTIC difference even in flat terrain.

Luckily I have not had any real issues with mine. I will eventually retire it and put my Yaesu in the car, but that is after I get the ICOM IC-7100 I have been drooling over. That of course is about 4-6 years down the road.

I might add, while I did provide the grounding method which seems to work well, I do not have my antenna grounded. When I am not at home my Astron SS-30M is disconnected from AC and my LMR400 is disconnected from the radio with the N connector in a glass mason jar. I do not wish to attract lightning to my residence. I am up to about 24ft or so and there are other object at higher elevations, but I still don't chance it by leaving everything connected. With my luck I would get hit and burn my whole house down.

I agree with PG. LMR400 is what I use for GMRS and Amateur. N-Type connectors are best suited for frequencies above 400MHz, so that is what I recommend terminating those lines with. LMR400 is a semi-rigid cable which means it has some girth, but also has good shielding. Avoid sharp angles at all costs, they will cause more loss. Make sure the LMR400 has a UV resistant outer layer. UV rays from the sun will cause the outer insulation (rubber) to crack allowing moisture to penetrate the cable causing all sorts of fun issues. Through the research I have done, this is the best way to prevent damage to your equipment: Use a flat strap for the antenna ground connected to a strike plate (grounding bus bar) Lightning arrestor connected between the flat strap and the strike plate Make sure AC line has ground connected to lightning arrestor then to the same strike plate Run flat strap from strike plate to 8ft grounding rod at least 10ft from house or other structuresEveryone has their own way, but this seems to be pretty good.

And it looks like Logan beat me to it.

In my experience with a whopping 3 different brands (Wouxun, Baofeng, and Yaesu), all of these have a reverse setting. One person works in normal mode and the other in reverse. This allows for "simplex" operations with offsets. This is commonly done in the GMRS world as well when 2 parties do not want their conversation easily monitored.

I found some information on the ARRL website. This is a ham site but it has a chart 2/3 of the way down which can help you determine the MPE or Maximum Permissible Exposure. http://www.arrl.org/the-fcc-s-new-rf-exposure-regulations

Gary, Keep in mind, the lower the frequency the more penetration it has. For instance, a 50MHz wavelength has a much shorter maximum exposure limit than a 460MHz wavelength. The way I read your post seems to indicate the shorter the wavelength the more dangerous it is. Thanks, Jeremy

When it comes to mobile units keep in mind that nearly all mobile units need a 50ohm feed line between the unit and the antenna. Connecting an antenna directly to the mobile unit is never advisable due to the power output. As spd mentioned earlier, you are dealing with RF and EMF. This is and produces radiation. There are RF exposure limits and it is very important to adhere to those limits. Not doing so can result in immediate damage such as an RF burn, or cell damage which is not noticeable immediate but turns into cancer later down the road. Best to read up on those limits so you know what they are and can prevent future health issues.

Dan, I did not foresee how my message might be interpreted before posting but now I do. I apologize and did not mean to insinuate that you specifically were ready to pick up the torch or pitchfork. I was speaking in general terms in the second paragraph and should have specified. That was my fault. I also did not mean to offend in any way. I was not familiar with your particular interest or uses of the service. I merely assumed (which was in error) that since you were on the forum you were interested as a hobbyist. JLeikhim, I understand what you are saying in terms of the CTCSS and DPL (DCS) not being a resolution. I did not mean to indicate that they were a resolution, only a damage mitigation step to try and prevent interference. I know and understand that it will not completely fix the issue and some negative impact in varying degrees will be experienced by users of wideband equipment. However, I did indicate further down in my post that it would walk on GMRS frequencies used by wideband equipment and I did not support the proposal for that reason. I feel the portion of my post that was quoted might have been taken slightly out of context (partially because of my lack of clarity).

OK so this is where I am from my research: The difference between each suggested frequency and the nearest GMRS frequency is exactly 12.5K steps When a center frequency is set at 462.5375 it can have a spectrum spread of up to 6K above and 6K below the center frequency with 0.25K as a buffer between channels on each side Assuming narrowbanding is being used This proposal is for commercial use so we must assume they will be forced to adhere to narrowbanding requirements The current proposal will leave an additional 4K of headroom between these channel's spectrum spread and the neighboring GMRS frequencies Now we must take into account GMRS equipment is not narrowband required meaning its steps are 25K steps unless using a narrowband compliant device A center frequency of 462.550 on wideband will have a spectrum spread of 12K above and 12K below the center frequency with 0.5K as a buffer between channels on each side This wider spectrum spread eats up that extra 4K of headroom and then some between the narrowband channels below it This will result in the proposed frequencies being received at the edge of wideband equipment listening range on the 550 and 725 and will also result in some wideband equipment transmissions leaking into the listening range of the 5375 proposed frequency In the end this will not affect the 5375 or 7375 channels as they will be running digital, but it will affect analog wideband users on GMRS. This will not likely affect users who are using narrowband equipment.In conclusion: Will this affect GMRS services who use 550 and 725? YES, if they are wideband and trying to use simplex or duplex on 550 and 725 without CTCSS or DPL codes. However, one thing I would like to note: How many users of GMRS use these channels without CTCSS or DPL codes? I am thinking very few. This definitely walks on those GMRS channels and does not allow them to have free use as intended and outlined in part 95. I do not agree with, nor do I support this proposal, but I do not think it would be the end of GMRS if it happened. It will only impact wideband users. I think we should definitely oppose this, but I don't think its a call for torches and pitchforks.

Dan, while the need to take action if you so see fit is better done sooner than later, there is plenty of time to research and ask questions. Blindly sending off an email with someone else's opinion only helps the cause. It does not serve to help you understand what this means or why it may negatively impact you. Someone who wishes to take action for a cause deserves a lot of respect, but not more than one who understands the cause and why they should take action. I think a lot of us need to read this proposal (myself included), what it really states, and how it will affect our current services. We need to fully understand the gravity of these changes before we pick up the torches and pitchforks. Once we have a full understanding of the impact we can then pick up our torches if so necessary.

My condolences. I lost my best friend to a car accident several years ago. I know how bad it hurts. You, your family, and his are in our prayers.