Jump to content
  • 0

Baofeng UV-5R (V2+) vs. BF-F9 V2+ or ???


BigCountry
 Share

Question

So I am new to the GMRS and HAM world of communications.  I recently got my GMRS license and am studying to get my HAM license.  A friend suggested for me to buy a Baofeng UV-5R.  When I visited Amazon to purchase it I found that the Baofeng BF-F9 V2+ had tri-power capability over the dual-power of the UV-5R for not much more costs.  Also for $15 more Amazon suggested to purchase the Nagoya NA-771 15.6-inch whip VHF/UHF (144/430mhz) antenna.  

 

What would you recommend for the new guy who wants an all purpose handheld radio that will work with FRS/GMRS, HAM, Weather and etc?  I would like to keep it under $200 but can spend more if needed.  Is the aforementioned antenna any good?  Is the radio world like most other things where you usually get what you pay for?

 

Thanks much,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0

If you chose any Baofeng radio, you can not legally operate on FRS since FRS has a 1/2 watt power limit. GMRS should be no problem with a 50 maximum. also keep in mind higher power seldom equates better coverage. Height of antenna has far more impact than power output. lastly not a single Baofeng/Pofung radio carries Part95 certification, Many consider this Cert. necessary to operate on GMRS legally. Take your time and chose wisely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

Yeah, I knew about the 1/2 watt deal with FRS and guess I mis spoke when adding it in my original post.  What make and model handheld radios are most recommended that will work (and licensed to work) with both HAM and GMRS? Additionally are there any handheld models that will work with DSTAR repeaters and GMRS frequencies? I have also been looking at some of the icom radios but I don't think they will do both. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
CURRENT    FCC Part 95 Rule 95.631 (e) -   "No GMRS or CB transmitter shall employ a digital modulation or emission."

Disallows it, While FCC Part 95 Rule 95.635 allows it, as well as 95.637 and 95.639 and probably others. JMHO I could be mistaken. :rolleyes:

"A single channel containing quantized or digital information without the use of a modulating sub-carrier, excluding time-division multiplex"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

Which just goes to show that some of the FCC rules were likely written by a first-year communications-major law school intern who not only lacked the real-world experience necessary to write Federal Code, but also didn't consider extant rules when authoring new ones.

Also, there's the concept of the spirit of the law versus the letter of the law, wherein I believe that the FCC's intent was to permit various forms of digital signaling - DCS, for example - while simultaneously disallowing the use of DV (digital voice) modes of operation.

That's my two cents (now 22 cents with inflation) on the matter. :)

Regards,

Frank.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
Guest spd641

Which just goes to show that some of the FCC rules were likely written by a first-year communications-major law school intern who not only lacked the real-world experience necessary to write Federal Code, but also didn't consider extant rules when authoring new ones.

 

Also, there's the concept of the spirit of the law versus the letter of the law, wherein I believe that the FCC's intent was to permit various forms of digital signaling - DCS, for example - while simultaneously disallowing the use of DV (digital voice) modes of operation.

 

That's my two cents (now 22 cents with inflation) on the matter. :)

 

Regards,

 

Frank.

You need to change that to 22 9/10ths if you want to split hairs lol...William

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

You need to change that to 22 9/10ths if you want to split hairs lol...William

 

You, sir, are obviously a mind reader (that was a compliment).

 

I say this because I had actually been thinking of writing 22.5 cents, but then decided that that was a bit too retentive. :)

 

In point of fact, the 11x multiplier that I used was roughly based upon my personal observance of the cost (of most things that most people buy) today versus the cost of those same things back when I was a teenager, which was, needless to say, a long time ago but still, in the course of human events, not really all that long ago.

 

Computers, and computer related products, represent one of the few areas where progress, measured in terms of price/performance ratio, have really excelled over the course of time.

 

Regards,

 

Frank.

 

P.S. Speaking of FCC regulations that at times may appear to the ordinary reader as being confusing, difficult to understand, or even contradictory, just spend a few hours sometime studying the IRS code. It's almost guaranteed that your head will eventually explode (at least figuratively speaking).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Answer this question...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Guidelines.