Would a Master List of Part 95e Certified Radios along with Pros be helpful?

[mbrun]

It occurs to me that this forum could be even more helpful to new and existing members if we provided a central place to record existing and new radios that are FCC certified for use in the GMRS. A place where prospective purchasers can view all their options.

 

I am thinking more of pinned (sticky) post, where the first post in the message is a living, breathing post that gets edited periodically to include the latest models, perhaps even with a living breathing attachment. Then, what follows in subsequent posts (if it is even open for posts at all) is not a discussion as much as it is a series of posts by owners of a listed models to give their opinion on the pros and cons of a model. One post per model per user.

 

I figure I would start the discussion about this with the members here. If if the discussion is constructive and fruitful, perhaps with the assistance of the moderators we could make it happen.

 

I have a few other ideas as well, but I don’t want to derail this topic.

 

So let’s begin the discussion.

 

Michael

WRHS965

KE8PLM

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[jerrytheyounger]

I'd like to see something like that. I did a similar thing on Reddit. I created a subReddit that's one and only purpose is for producers and creators to list jobs. I was amazed no one had thought of this before. I think you've come up with a great idea. I would recommend you make it as basic and simple as possible. Humans have a tendency to complicate simple things. The less moving parts, the better.

[RDH]

I think it would be an excellent sticky to have at the top of the equipment review section

[berkinet]

Search this forum. You will see that this idea has been proposed, and even started, several times. However, for whatever reason, the effort soon becomes abandoned.  Perhaps if someone was willing to actually take on the task, and approach Rich (WQEJ577) it might work. However, as long as the implementation depends on the efforts of others, it is not likely to be sustained.

[Shadow471]

A list showing low to mid-priced used commercial Part 90 gear vs a same cost CCR, would be greatly beneficial to the service.

If we show the masses that an originally $500-600 radio, used and so much better than a CCR.

You would hope, should help to push more of the Part 90 radio into the hands of the newer enthusiasts and out onto the repeaters.

 

I know it would have helped myself.

 

 

Larry

8-)

[gman1971]

Most people only seem to care about new vs used, it seems that we've been brainwashed to think used == garbage... new == good. So, until that mentality isn't eviscerated, people will keep buying  garbage new CCRs no matter how atrocious the specs are...

 

As a recently rehabilitated CCR addict, I can tell you this: none of those specs tables, spec comparison, etc, none would make a lick of a difference, a) b/c most people don't understand what the specs mean b ) all CCR specs are "made up" to match whatever the radio they are trying to "oust" in the market. are... The best analogy I can think of ATM is cheap flashlights made in China, using China Lumens, using a knock-off CREE leds too... like the infamous CREE XML-T6, which puts about 800 lumens under most realistic scenarios... but the cheap china flashlights manufacturers claim their cheap knockoff magically produces 5000 Lumens now... again... this is the same exact thing. Until you don't try a real CREE led, on a high quality flashlight housing/reflector etc, and see the massive difference in color temperature, CRI level, beam pattern, etc...  you'll keep buying the cheap flashlights.... The same applies to radios, and I can safely state that nothing short of a real world demonstration would've convinced me to believe that the CCRs I was buying were actually crap... 

 

G.

[berkinet]

A list showing low to mid-priced used commercial Part 90 gear vs a same cost CCR, would be greatly beneficial to the service. ...

 

Nothing wrong with that idea. Who do you propose should take on the responsibility of doing that?  A thread was setup for exactly that purpose a few months ago, it went dead after listings for a half-dozen radios or so.  I can't even find that topic now.

[berkinet]

...A thread was setup for exactly that purpose a few months ago, it went dead after listings for a half-dozen radios or so.  I can't even find that topic now.

 

Found it. It was started by @gman1971 on 25 October 2020 and the last post was barely 3 weeks later. A total of 3 people contributed reviews.

 

https://forums.mygmrs.com/topic/2183-brand-name-radios-proscons-thread-usednew/

[gortex2]

As shown above been there already. Also various other sites have lists. My issue with a list is everytime one is created there are tons of posts on why XYZ radio should be or should not be on the list. ITs very rough with the CCR influx of some certified and some not (or fake labels) to put a true list up. Again there is time. I think the only way a list would work is if it was done by an admin and no one would be allowed to comment on the list. 

[IronArcher]

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.

[berkinet]

So here would be something useful.

... ...

This CAN be done. It’s just a matter of having the will to do it.

The problem is not how such a list should be organized. Nor, is it a problem of whether it can be done or not. The issue, as stated previously, is who is going to do this?  As long as that answer to that question remains, “somebody else,“ then it will never get done.

[gman1971]

@IronArcher

 

No, it cannot be done, b/c it doesn't really matter. I've been sharing some ISO-tee tests figures here, and all I get is people arguing personal opinions, swirling personal attacks and sowing doubt, deflecting from the problem at hand, while painting me as someone who is trying mislead people, etc. So, I've decided its just better to silently laugh watching people fumble around with garbage equipment, always wondering why their ranges are only a tenth of a mile, than me getting all worked up, writing long posts trying to explain things that noone cares.

 

And why it doesn't matter to have any spec chart, of any sort? Well, its very simple: Because we are cheap. Lets just say we had a chart with a bunch of radios, so, you see that fancy XPR7550e, and everything looks great, a +18dBm better effective sens, tight selectivity, and better everything... so you quickly realize this is the radio you want, but then, finally, when you look a the last column, the pricetag... you have a heart attack.... so in your mind you quickly disqualify the XPR7550e, b/c none of things can be that much better than the 59 dollar garbage CCR special... so without having any sense of what a 18dBm difference truly means, or any of the other spec chart parameters mean, all of the sudden, that 59 dollar CCR garbage special becomes the best radio, the same radio Jesus used to call Home before ascending back to Heaven... 

 

Seriously, it doesn't matter.

 

Only way to guarantee learning is making mistakes over time, and if it has to be an expensive mistake over a long period of time, so be it. The more expensive the mistake, and the longer you've made it, the better you learn the lesson, and I can certainly attest to heart to that... until then I'll be laughing... yeah, I am a cruel person, I am gMan the heartless, the troublemaker, the troll... etc etc.

 

G.

[IronArcher]

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.

[gman1971]

I agree with your comments, IronArcher. I am in agreement about a thread about radio spec comparison, with real world examples. But I still think it won't matter much, if anything, at all. People have to make the mistakes on their own to learn.

 

There is one thing I want to clarify, tho: I am far from a snob, all I own is used XPR/SL radios... keyword: USED, all 2nd hand. Now, I would've been a real snob if I had 20+ brand new APX8000 radios and was calling everything else garbage.... With he cost of those used XPR radios being around the same than what most CCR radios go for, new, then I don't think there is any snob bull on it. A 100 dollar XPR6550 is a phenomenal bargain, that beats, hands down, all CCR radios I've ran an ISO-tee on them. Yes, you need the cable and the legacy CPS... I know... so, we are back to the other statement: Being cheap. I was cheap, I own more than a dozen of BF-888s, thinking I could build a floor intercom with those... haha.. the ultimate CCR intercom... they are all collecting dust on the basement now...

 

Anyhow, the point is that anyone here, who has measuring equipment can run the tests I've run and make data comparisons, but instead, all we (I) get in those threads is people turning them into a "gman is too rude" "gman is a snob, he can't be trusted" "gman has no heart" etc. I get it, it sucks to be told your decision wasn't as sound as you originally were led to believe it was... and yes, perhaps people skills aren't my thing, and written form doesn't help the cause either.. but the truth is that I would love for others not to make the same mistakes I've made... but... it is what it is.

 

Now, if you need a ham radio, then we might have a discussion about LMR gear being worthwhile (or not) on ham bands, etc... but for GMRS?, given the fact that its a fixed 22 channel radio service?, (not a whole band) things like VFO, or the ability to TX out of band, etc.. I find those absolutely unnecessary, (and unlawful) for a GMRS radio. None of my XPR radios have VFO, and while the gen2 XPR/SL radios have a limited FPP on them (can change color codes, PLs... etc, just not Frequency, only the Asian version of the XPR radios has full FPP, where you can change freqs too... etc) I've yet have to use the FPP option. My radios have all frequencies programmed on them already. I have about 600 channels with all kinds of itinerant freqs, EMS, fire, hospitals, NOAA, ham, GMRS, Marine...etc... Yes, it took several days of work to make those Codeplugs, but like buying those radios, buy once, cry once.

 

In the decade or so I've been into radios, I've recently come to the realization that data without understanding doesn't make a lick of a difference. Why? b/c most people, generally newcomers to the hobby (but not always), don't always know how to read the data, and they don't know how to put it perspective. Its like trying to explain the math involved in PID control theory to someone who is just learning how to add. But the fact remains, that If you need/want to control something, successfully, you still need to not just know, but understand control theory...   Now, there is, however, one data point that anyone can read and understand: Pricetag.

 

I get it, there is lure on these BF-888s, the UV-5R, the Wouxus... et. all... but then, when you see all the TX spurious stuff, on a RIGOL spectrum analyzer, that should be a revelation, send chills through your spine, (just like unknowingly buying a car that burns oil, but when you're told it burns oil, really bad, your answer instead of being: "oh dang it, this sucks, I got conned and I didn't know, what car do you recommend?" its a resounding "meh, my car just pollutes more, its fine, who cares, it was cheap..." and then go on the offensive, stating others should also own one of these too... ) 

 

 

G.

 

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.

[mbrun]

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

[gman1971]

You got my vote. One thing I've found to be a real eye opener was the numeric RSSI display on the Motorola XPR radios... You get to see the actual reading of the RSSI of your signals, not just a little segment bar, an actual figure. So you can evaluate how much your antenna affects, feedline, location, etc.... and you can measure desense too... etc.

 

So, having something to measure goes a long way in making the right decisions. I guess it goes without saying: its like trying to build a house without taking any measurements, eyeballing it, or going by feel, etc, might not yield a favorable outcome.

 

G.

 

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

[IronArcher]

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.

[gman1971]

IronArcher.

 

Well, what can I tell you. I guess I am way past that phase of tinkering with cheap radios, only to realize I couldn't achieve what my original goal was: I wanted my radios to be like my phone, so if the phone ever goes out, the radio still works. Most people here can relate to that; I think that is the dream most beginners have when they start. At first you think its easily achievable, b/c your UV5R is able to kerchunk Ham repeaters at 50 miles away.... so you're even more convinced that your CCR range should be at least 35 miles, easy!!... so you quickly go and buy $199 50W CCRs, some China RG-58 (more like unshielded 26AWG copper plated aluminum), with all CCR chrome plated connectors, and when you crank that CCR mobile to 50W, hoping to talk to the ISS on the other side of the planet, you quickly realize that the range is < 2 miles, at best! And now you'are several hundred dollars in the hole, with nothing to show for. You set your expectations to reach Ham VHF repeater level of performance using the lowest quality gear, which btw, its neatly wrapped in the nicest package form, sugarcoated with the lowest price tag to make it palatable eating the poo... so after the disappointing results, you think that perhaps you haven't spent enough money, so fall into the you need more antenna gain... and you need to invest in more power too, a PA, or a more expensive CCR with fancier features, b/c you know, seeing the channel number is going to add some extra 10 miles to the CCR range... and 1 million contacts? that is another 15 miles, at least!!... so off you go, getting more 50W mobiles, throw some PA, pump 200W, melt a few things,... yet range still <3 miles, at best. so, after you've spent a thousand or so dollars, and at this most people just call it quits. Not realizing that the repeater you can hit from 50 miles away has an 8 bay folded dipole, running 7/8 heliax, with a 1000 dollar cavity duplexer and a 500 dollar preselector, with a 500 dollar old Motorola repeater... on a 500 foot tower that costs an arm and a leg to rent every month...

 

Scanning was cool, but CCRs are dog slow at scanning, not sure why the CCRs are even used as scanners. Personally, I only need to monitor a few frequencies, so my XPR radios have a few scan lists setup for that. with EMS fire, Hospital, etc.

 

"The range curse cannot be destroyed by any CCR craft that we here possess, only with a Motorolian blade can it be unmade."

 

G.

[mbrun]

IronArcher,

 

Behind the scenes I imagine that the information would live in a spreadsheet or some form of database, but mainly as a means for the admin/moderator to keep all the information and facts organized. Part of me wants to keep the look and feel of the forum with users connected to, reading and interacting with the forum posts. I certainly would not rule out a hardcopy download at some time. Advanced formatting with the body of the message could be a nice touch so long as it carries through to all forum reader apps people use.

 

I agree with your sentiment regarding wanting to flag items that aren’t to ‘spec’ so to speak. That type of designation would not likely be prudent from a risk-management perspective at the forum moderator/admin level, but would probably be better off left for members to assert. The main two levels (Items) of this information as I suggested in my previous post should be nothing more that facts that can be substantiated from first-part sources such as the FCC and the Manufacturer. No opinions there. Levels (Items) 3 and 4 in my suggestion are where the public gets to jump in and offer their opinions and independent findings.

 

I am glad to hear you like the concept.

 

Michael

WHRS965

KE8PLM

 

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”...

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[n4gix]

Here is a list of currently certified GMRS radios, courtesy of the North Shore Emergency Association:

 

https://nsea.com/index_files/New-Radios.pdf

 

Seven wide-band radios that are Part 95e certified, and 100% GMRS compatible

 

Twenty-two that are narrow-band only, Part 95e certified but not really compatible with most GMRS repeaters.

[gman1971]

Man, that is the land of CCRs right there... 

[n4gix]

Man, that is the land of CCRs right there... 

 

While that is certainly true; it's a real pity that none of the "name brands" are offering any new Part 95e equipment for sale.

[gman1971]

Yep, I agree.... and it seems like the laws are put forth to accomplish this, too... a race to the bottom of the barrel... just instill fear to make people buy CCRs, really...  but, I am just sitting back and enjoying the show, from high above, that is, from my Super-Snob Class Motorolian XPR battlecruiser ...  

 

G.

[gortex2]

The perception that narrow band are not compatible with ALL GMRS repeaters is false. I know of many, including my own repeaters that run narrowband. I know the normal is wideband but they are out there and more than folks think. 

[n4gix]

The perception that narrow band are not compatible with ALL GMRS repeaters is false. I know of many, including my own repeaters that run narrowband. I know the normal is wideband but they are out there and more than folks think. 

 

Okay, I changed one word: "really" to "fully". I also stated "most GMRS repeaters." Nowhere did I state "ALL GMRS repeaters." 

 

 

 

but not fully compatible with most GMRS repeaters.