Posted 28 November 2019 - 06:41 PM
You can search on the FCC ID Search web page.
However, it is, unfortunately, not that simple. First you need the FCCID. To get that you can usually look at the radio's label (often located under the battery or on the back of the radio) or do a Google search something like:
icom IC-F4001 "fccid"
and look through the results. If you see something from fccid.io it might contain not only the fccid, but all the related information you are seeking. Usually the requested compliance is in the Test Report. Then you can scroll down to the Grants section to see what certification was actually granted.
In the case of the IC-F4001, the FCCID is AFJ and the Product Code is 328601
If you use the FCC ID Search page, then choose the radio you want from the list that is returned and click on the checkmark in the Grant column to see what, if any, certification was granted. For further information click Detail in the Display Exhibits column. From the resulting list you can select the document Test Results to see which certification was requested. In the case off the IC-F4001, it was submitted for 47 CFR, Parts 2 and 90 (Subpart I)
So, the IC-F4001 is not Part95 compliant.
- RCM likes this
Everything we hear is an opinion, not a fact. Everything we see is a perspective, not the truth.
-- Marcus Aurelius
Posted 29 November 2019 - 05:41 PM
Wow, That thing just SCREAMS of being a re-packaged BF-888s at 10 times the price. Since it carries the Icom name, I would assume that these are the cream of the 888's original design that go through some additional quality controls, and don't have the filtering components omitted.
Posted 02 December 2019 - 01:49 PM
No, they're built better than that. Look inside the radio and you'll see a well-built double conversion receiver architecture. These perform much better than the RF-frontend-on-a-chip Baofengs. Don't jump to the Baofeng conclusion without looking at internal photos.
A radio with a frequency range below 450 MHz cannot receive Part 95 type acceptance due to 95.1761(c ).
- Logan5 and berkinet like this
Reply to this topic
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users