What can I expect from a 50 watt radio over and above an HT for base station?

[WRWE456]

Hello radiophiles.

I'm relatively new here, been into radio about a year now and GMRS about 4 months only.

So my situation is that I live on top of a 500' mountain/hill using a GMRS specific copper tube J pole from KB9VBR six feet above the roof on a two story house. Cable is 50' of LMR400 with type N connectors. Radio is a KG-935G Plus using the battery eliminator plugged into a Alinco DM-330MV power supply at 13.8 v. I also use a speaker mike. This is my base station setup at the moment. Now I must say this is working very well. I can reach out twenty miles or more so far. Most of my use is within ten miles. There is some hilly terrain in the area with forests but I am above most of it. Town is only about 5 miles away where most of my contacts are. I use this for simplex only so far.

My question is what improvements can I expect from more power? (Looking at the KG-1000G Plus) Of course there are areas where hills and wood are reducing coverage. Am wondering if more power would improve things much if at all. I mean line of sight is line of sight right?

I know the J pole is a unity gain antenna. I chose it for its excellent vertical angle. I can reach a mobile unit at the base of my hill behind a cliff that is at least 200 feet high a 1/4 mile from my house. HT to HT can not do that. (there is no way that is line of sight and yet it works) However I am guessing that a higher gain antenna such as a 5 db gain would reach farther but would it penetrate forests as well and reach down into low areas as well? I have the same radio's as mobile setups as well using 5 db gain mag mount whips and they work great.

Really liking the KG-935G Plus HT's. They are exceeding my expectations but can't help but wonder if much improvement could be had with more power or maybe a different antenna would be a smarter move?

Thanks for any insights.

 

 

 

[SteveShannon]

1 hour ago, WRWE456 said:

Hello radiophiles.

I'm relatively new here, been into radio about a year now and GMRS about 4 months only.

So my situation is that I live on top of a 500' mountain/hill using a GMRS specific copper tube J pole from KB9VBR six feet above the roof on a two story house. Cable is 50' of LMR400 with type N connectors. Radio is a KG-935G Plus using the battery eliminator plugged into a Alinco DM-330MV power supply at 13.8 v. I also use a speaker mike. This is my base station setup at the moment. Now I must say this is working very well. I can reach out twenty miles or more so far. Most of my use is within ten miles. There is some hilly terrain in the area with forests but I am above most of it. Town is only about 5 miles away where most of my contacts are. I use this for simplex only so far.

My question is what improvements can I expect from more power? (Looking at the KG-1000G Plus) Of course there are areas where hills and wood are reducing coverage. Am wondering if more power would improve things much if at all. I mean line of sight is line of sight right?

I know the J pole is a unity gain antenna. I chose it for its excellent vertical angle. I can reach a mobile unit at the base of my hill behind a cliff that is at least 200 feet high a 1/4 mile from my house. HT to HT can not do that. (there is no way that is line of sight and yet it works) However I am guessing that a higher gain antenna such as a 5 db gain would reach farther but would it penetrate forests as well and reach down into low areas as well? I have the same radio's as mobile setups as well using 5 db gain mag mount whips and they work great.

Really liking the KG-935G Plus HT's. They are exceeding my expectations but can't help but wonder if much improvement could be had with more power or maybe a different antenna would be a smarter move?

Thanks for any insights.

 

 

 

From you location you probably wouldn’t get much more range, but your transmissions will sound clearer with less background noise.. You might be able to get into the forests better and the receivers in the mobile radio might be better.  

On the other hand, a better antenna is always better.  Gain works in both directions.  Having more gain means your transmitted signals and received signals are both amplified.

[marcspaz]

The only thing I would add to what Steve mentioned is that 50 watts will help overcome antenna cable losses while transmitting. If you are barely receiving a signal from someone using 20w and you're feeding a coax that reduces your 4w-5w handheld signal down to 1.5w or less into the antenna... that other station isn't going to hear you. So, more power and a good antenna would be a good choice. 

[WRWE456]

Thanks for the thoughtful reply's guys. You both make good points. I tend to like efficiency over brute force. I have heard reports that HT's are capable of reaching over 100 miles from elevated positions with line of sight conditions so it would seem that antenna's and having line of sight are more important than having more power. I'm sure they both have their place and use. More power to get through forest's and overcome line loss etc.

That leads me to believe that I should have both. To have the option to be able to crank up the power for times when it will help.

I want to get another radio and have been trying to decide between and other KG-935G or a more powerful mobile/base unit. I now think it makes sense to have the option of more power. Thanks for helping me think this through.

 

[BoxCar]

Power is always nice, but in the ham world the mantra is to use the least amount of power required. The key piece is always the antenna with the higher the better as height is more important than gain. I will state the 3 things to weigh in deciding the next step is always antenna height, antenna gain and then transmitter power. The antenna points are always affected by SWR and losses in the feed line.

[WRWE456]

Hi BoxCar.

Thanks for the reply. I agree with all the points you make and am working toward optimizing all those things. For instance I just switched from RG-8U cable with UHF connectors to LMR400 with N connectors to improve feed line loss with UHF, even replaced the antenna with one with N connector, now it's down to a higher gain antenna and more power. And yes I do try and use the least amount of power needed but am limited by the HT's low power. The more I think about it the more I like the idea of having the option of stepping up transmit energy if trying to reach someone in a fringe area and with that in mind having a higher gain antenna should help with receiving them as well as I understand it so I think I'm on the right track.

Thanks again.

[WRZG694]

Other aspects to consider about antenna gain

• A higher gain antenna does not create more power than the radio produces on its own. Antenna gain increases or decreases signal directionality.
• Looking at antenna charts demonstrates the signal pattern of an antenna. Notice, the higher the gain the more directional its signal pattern becomes; think Yagi antennae. 
• Consider your location of use, then chose the appropriate antenna.

Using an example of an adjustable lens flashlight (torch) such as the Maglite: Remove the adjustable end exposing the bulb only, notice the produced light may fill a dark room; think low gain antenna. This why a lower gain antenna is much better in an urban area, in areas with much more obstructions, in forests, and the like. That is why many folks in locations with buildings, many obstructions, forest, and the like, when switching to low gain antennae have better TX and Rx signal reports as well.

Now connect the adjustable section and its lens to the flashlight, adjust it. Notice it is now concentrating the light in a much more directional beam. Now the light does not fill a room with light; it performs better pointing into the room; think high gain antenna. The higher gain antenna performs better in less obstructed areas, such as open roads without obstructions, mostly flat landscape and the like. Thus, in considerably more open unobstructed locations switching to a higher gain antenna will increase its reach. Keep in mind, the radio is outputting the same power to the high gain antenna as it does to a lower gain antenna. The difference is the high gain antenna is creating a more directional signal.

Yes, the above is an odd example, however I hope it makes sense.

[SvenMarbles]

Power is probably the most over emphasized part of VHF or UHF radio comms. There isn't much practical difference between say 20 and 50 watts assuming that the coax feeds and antennas were the same. VHF and UHF being mainly line of sight bands, terrain becomes your limiting factor long before power does. 50 or 500 watts will not defeat the mound of terrain between you and the receiving station. Only getting your antenna physically higher will. But once you've accomplished getting your antenna up into the clear, again, it doesn't matter if you're running 20 or 50 watts. It'll get out and sound essentially the same. Heck, even 5 watts if you're getting it through your coax feed enough to have a reasonable amount of it left to squirt out of the antenna. Consider this. Voyager, that is now hurdling through interstellar space, is equipped with a 33 watt radio. And is currently still in touch with Earth. When you conceptualize that an antenna in the clear, is an antenna in the clear, you'll understand that it doesn't even matter if you're running a 15 watt GMRS radio or a 50 watt one.

I see a lot of people wasting a lot of money and energy buying 50 watt GMRS radios and dealing with the hardwire install needed for the amp draw needed to run it at 50 watts. It's largely a waste.. Concentrate on your antenna, geography, and coax. The actual radio part of radios (generally speaking) are interchangable appliances. The science of success in radio is entirely done at the antenna level..

[AdmiralCochrane]

99 & 99/100% agree.

Pretty sure there are more 50 watt models available than 25 or 30. Most people are buying 50's because that's what is mostly available above HT power, not because they didn't want a 30.

[WRYZ926]

I can give one example where 50 watts helped compared to 20 watts. Otherwise I have to agree with everyone that antenna height and quality coax makes more of a difference.

My shack setup as far as the antenna goes is; Comet CA712-EFC with the base at 22 feet above the ground, 30 foot of LMR400 from antenna to the wall pass through and a 15 foot LMR400 jumper inside. 

There is a repeater that is 50-55 miles away. I can get into it with my Wouxun KG-XS20G but there is  quite a bit of noise in my transmission. I get in to that repeater and am heard clearly with the extra 30 watts from my WOuxun KG-1000G. 

Going from 20 watts to 50 watts did not change how far I can talk but it did make it so that I am heard better at the longer distances.

Now getting my antenna up another 10-20 feet and away from all the trees in my yard would make a big difference over actual output power of my radios.

To answer the original question. YES you will see an improvement when going from a 5 watt radio to a 20 or 50 watt radio. You are quadrupling the power going from 5 watts to 20 watts. This is when everything else is equal such as connecting both radios to the same antenna and coax.

[nokones]

Midland MXT mobiles have 5, 15, and 50 watt mobiles.

[WRYS709]

Another popular 20 watt is the Radioddity DG20-G a/k/a Anytone AT-779UV: mini-mobile, 500 channels, cigarette lighter plug, easily opens to full VHF/UHF Ham

$85-$109

[WRXL702]

Go For The 50 Watt Radio. Proved It Time & Time Again.

"Height & Might Rules" - A 3db Gain Increase In Transmitter Output Power Is Substantial......

[SteveShannon]

Unfortunately a lot of people spend their money on RF output power at the radio and then waste it by using lossy coax and cheap antennas.

[AdmiralCochrane]

Yes, I was aware of those 2 models.  I bet there are 50+ 50 watt units on the market.

 

Lossy coax, cheap antennas and low to the ground physically blocked mounting.  Spend first money on a pole or chimney mount, then good antenna & coax.

When I am in range of the good GMRS local repeater, signal reports when toggling between 5w and 50w are "you are readable both ways, just louder on 50".  "Might" isn't going to get you much of anything on UHF.

[WRXL702]

Application, Application & Application.....

Equipment, Power & Antenna Will Dictate What You Are Wanting To Accomplish - Connect To A GMRS Station From Your Location On A Selected Repeater Selection Or By Simplex.....

Desired Application Is The 1st Question That Needs Answered......   

 

[WRYZ926]

1 hour ago, SteveShannon said:

Unfortunately a lot of people spend their money on RF output power at the radio and then waste it by using lossy coax and cheap antennas.

This is true. We see people go cheap with Amazon chinesium coax or the wrong type of coax. Or they buy the cheapest (and lowest quality) antenna they can find on Amazon. No amount of power out of the radio will overcome lossy cable and/or a craptastic antenna.

I had to say something to a guy that lives 300 yard down the street one time about this subject. He accidentally swapped his coax cable on his HF and VHF antennas. He had the RG58 hooked up to his VHF radio and wondered why it wasn't working like ti use to. So his answer was to hook up a 160 watt amplifier. All the amplifier did was cause me grief since we are so close to each other. I told hm that ne needed to swap the coax cables back around. But I have no idea if he did it or not. At least he isn't running the amplifier anymore.

[nokones]

1 hour ago, SteveShannon said:

Unfortunately a lot of people spend their money on RF output power at the radio and then waste it by using lossy coax and cheap antennas.

And they were purchased from a huge warehouse operation that doesn't specialize in the sales of quality two-way radio products.

[WRUE951]

i run a copper J-Pole (Home Brew) on my portable Maxon repeater (40W), in my RV mostly up in the Sierras near and around Crawley Lake and Mammoth.  The last weekend of last Sept i talked with Terry on his base station in Tonapah while relaxing at my RV , about a 90 mile hop.  When i switched to medium power he lost my contact.  On high power he hears me loud and clear.  So im gong to debunk those that say power does not mater. Yes it does!!   And BTW,,  the copper J-Pole is a nice antenna, they perform well..  KB9VBR gave me some tips on getting one to work aside from what the calculations tell you..   

[WRYZ926]

1 hour ago, WRUE951 said:

The last weekend of last Sept i talked with Terry on his base station in Tonapah while relaxing at my RV , about a 90 mile hop.  When i switched to medium power he lost my contact.  On high power he hears me loud and clear.  So im gong to debunk those that say power does not mater. Yes it does!!

I agree when everything else is the same when it comes to antennas and coax. My own experiences have proven that.

[marcspaz]

2 hours ago, WRUE951 said:

i run a copper J-Pole (Home Brew) on my portable Maxon repeater (40W), in my RV mostly up in the Sierras near and around Crawley Lake and Mammoth.  The last weekend of last Sept i talked with Terry on his base station in Tonapah while relaxing at my RV , about a 90 mile hop.  When i switched to medium power he lost my contact.  On high power he hears me loud and clear.  So im gong to debunk those that say power does not mater. Yes it does!!   And BTW,,  the copper J-Pole is a nice antenna, they perform well..  KB9VBR gave me some tips on getting one to work aside from what the calculations tell you..   

 

Increasing the transmit power of a UHF radio signal does not directly affect its ability to refract, diffract or scatter beyond the horizon.  Though, it increases the PPM of photons that are refracted, diffracted or scattered, increasing the ability for receivers to pull the signal.

Again, transmit power does not fundamentally change the propagation mechanics of UHF waves, but it can improve the reception of signals that are already being refracted, scattered, or diffracted.

[Raybestos]

Things to consider if going from an ht like a KG935G to a 50W base.  A dual conversion receiver such as a KG1000G will often give less noise and interference from a variety of sources.  A KG1000G offers simultaneous monitoring of two channels.  That way, you can monitor a repeater and a simplex channel, two repeaters, or two simplex channels, at once.  Weird as it is, propagation and parts of the antenna received and transmitted from on a given antenna or antennas, can change drastically with a frequency change as small as 30 or 45 KHz.  I know I am comparing apples and oranges, but a couple of friends and myself used to rag chew on 2m (VHF) simplex.  We were using different gain type antennas and brands.  We might hear each other "okay" on 146.550 MHz.  We could switch 146.580 MHz and hear each other way better, with stronger signals all the way around.  There was no interference from adjacent channels, intermod, etc; just noticeably stronger signals.

You could monitor say 462.550 on one side of your base.  If, for some reason, your ht or mobile went into a null, it is possible that they could switch to a secondary monitored channel, say 462.725, and get in good enough for you to hear them.  Also, with a good power supply like an Astron or similar, leaving your base turned on and monitoring at all times has advantages.

Another thing, if worn "on-body", there will be significant attenuation of transmitted and received signals with an ht.  A 50W base has a better chance of being heard on the belt-worn radio.  Of course, once the wearer takes the ht off of their belt, its signal improves both xmit and receive, when in-hand as opposed to against your body.  For this reason, I do not recommend using a speaker/mic for an ht on the belt unless operation will be at very close range.

 

[WRUE951]

10 hours ago, marcspaz said:

 

Again, transmit power does not fundamentally change the propagation mechanics of UHF waves, but it can improve the reception of signals that are already being refracted, scattered, or diffracted.

At the end of the day, more power does help.  Thank-you   

[WRUE951]

7 minutes ago, Raybestos said:

 

Another thing, if worn "on-body", there will be significant attenuation of transmitted and received signals with an ht.  A 50W base has a better chance of being heard on the belt-worn radio.  Of course, once the wearer takes the ht off of their belt, its signal improves both xmit and receive, when in-hand as opposed to against your body.  For this reason, I do not recommend using a speaker/mic for an ht on the belt unless operation will be at very close range.

 

I'll somewhat agree with Marc, antenna is the most import piece of in arsenal to get out.  But not every antenna is treated equal.   Power does help.  After testing/playing with four different antennas ranging from $25 bucks to nearly $400, i found the $400 antenna is the poor looser over distance (in my situation)... My little home brew copper j-pole seems to be the big winner..  My old Hustler was a winner as well..  After studying some (very little) antenna theory i'm finding that antenna take off angle has a lot do do with  how far and how well it can transmit/receive. The current Laird i use for base has a sharp low angle take off angle and I learned is meant for mountain top applications not 40' above your home. Most of the signal is basically hitting dirt, not elevated air.  The J-Pole has a wider pattern where it works better at lower elevations. I think Power helps more with a J-Pole over a higher gain narrower patter antenna.  I'm by far not expert in Antenna theory but i am trying to learn more with it..   

[SteveShannon]

11 minutes ago, WRUE951 said:

I'll somewhat agree with Marc, antenna is the most import piece of in arsenal to get out.  But not every antenna is treated equal.   Power does help.  After testing/playing with four different antennas ranging from $25 bucks to nearly $400, i found the $400 antenna is the poor looser over distance (in my situation)... My little home brew copper j-pole seems to be the big winner..  My old Hustler was a winner as well..  After studying some (very little) antenna theory i'm finding that antenna take off angle has a lot do do with  how far and how well it can transmit/receive. The current Laird i use for base has a sharp low angle take off angle and I learned is meant for mountain top applications not 40' above your home. Most of the signal is basically hitting dirt, not elevated air.  The J-Pole has a wider pattern where it works better at lower elevations. I think Power helps more with a J-Pole over a higher gain narrower patter antenna.  I'm by far not expert in Antenna theory but i am trying to learn more with it..   

Does that Laird have phased collinear elements to cause it to propagate more powerfully below horizontal? 

HF operators frequently have an issue when they mount an antenna too near to the ground (the recommended height is greater than or equal to one half wavelength) and as a result their propagation pattern is deformed to mostly skyward.  That’s especially common with longer wavelengths; it’s difficult to mount a 160 meter wire antenna 266 feet above the ground.