GMRS Type Accepted Radio List

[WRQC527]

Just now, WSAA635 said:

Thanks back4more70. 

We all had high hopes for you. From what I could tell, you seemed genuinely interested in GMRS and radio in general. But now, after holding your hand for all this time, giving you advice that you asked for, answering all your questions, and generally welcoming you into the realm, you seem to have turned on us. Good luck with your journey. 

[WSAA635]

How, pray tell, have I "turned" on you? I simply believe as a Free American I should have the Right to use any radio I want to talk on the GMRS channels that I'm licensed to use. I'm not going to talk on HAM frequencies, I'm not licensed for those. 

I honestly don't understand why some make such a HUGE deal about the equipment when the REAL focus should be on the channels/frequencies we're using. If you're licensed for GMRS then talk on GMRS, the radio that's used shouldn't matter.  

[Lscott]

42 minutes ago, marcspaz said:

 

I am acquainted.  I am one of the people that Randy consulted with on a video about Spurs, where he actually tested radios with an analyzer.

I was at the Ham swap a while back in Fort Wayne Indiana. Part of the free test bench, used for checking used radios people buy before leaving, had a Rigol spectrum analyzer setup. The link below is the model I believe they were using at the time, DSA-815.

https://www.rigolna.com/products/spectrum-analyzers/dsa800/

Some people were solicited specifically so they could test their radios as an informal survey. The results were socking for some people when they saw the results.

The original classic UV-5R was well known for poor filtering of harmonics on the output. I found the attached VHF spectrum tests for one on-line and a copy of the schematic, likely the first generation design, for the radio.

UV-5R VHF Harmonics Test.pdf SCHEMATIC Baofeng UV-5R.pdf

[SteveShannon]

8 minutes ago, WSAA635 said:

How, pray tell, have I "turned" on you? I simply believe as a Free American I should have the Right to use any radio I want to talk on the GMRS channels that I'm licensed to use. I'm not going to talk on HAM frequencies, I'm not licensed for those. 

I honestly don't understand why some make such a HUGE deal about the equipment when the REAL focus should be on the channels/frequencies we're using. If you're licensed for GMRS then talk on GMRS, the radio that's used shouldn't matter.  

I don’t think you have turned on us, but you have gotten to the point where you have expressed a disregard for the regulations and it’s clear you don’t understand (or even want to understand) why they exist. 
There are four sets of frequencies in GMRS. The requirements for bandwidth and RF power (and how measured) vary considerably with some of the frequencies (interstitial) wedged tightly in between others from other sets.
You claim the right to transmit on these frequencies with whatever radio you want to use, but you don’t know what you don’t know. 
So, that’s kind of off-putting to people who are trying to help you learn. 

[marcspaz]

5 minutes ago, WSAA635 said:

How, pray tell, have I "turned" on you? I simply believe as a Free American I should have the Right to use any radio I want to talk on the GMRS channels that I'm licensed to use. I'm not going to talk on HAM frequencies, I'm not licensed for those. 

I honestly don't understand why some make such a HUGE deal about the equipment when the REAL focus should be on the channels/frequencies we're using. If you're licensed for GMRS then talk on GMRS, the radio that's used shouldn't matter.  

 

 

Honestly... I (mostly) agree with you.  100+ years ago, we didn't need permission from the government to grow food, fish, use a radio, etc.  What was once considered our Rights have somehow evolved into us having permission to do things on a free-range human tax farm.  The ATF/BATFE is a great example.  Machine guns, short barrel rifles and suppressors are "dangerous and unusual"... but if you pay your tax, all of a sudden everything is fine.  The whole concept is ridiculous. 

 

I feel like much of our government suffers from the same hypocrisy, with agencies like the FCC being almost as bad as the ATF, when it comes to rule making.  The problem is, as part of living in a polite, civilized society, we have all agreed to live by these rules. 

 

If there are rules missing or rules we don't like, the people (at least in theory these days) have the ability to change those rules by petitioning the government.  However, with very limited exception, if there are rules we don't like, we have agreed to live by them until the rule changes or is repealed.

 

So, with that said, I provided you with fact about why things are the way they are.  I don't necessarily agree with all of it due to a common moral compass that many of us share.  However, that same moral compass guides me toward typically following the rules we all agreed to follow and not publicly condoning ignoring those rules.

 

I share this at the risk of sounding too political, because I hope this helps you understand where I am coming from.  And while I obviously can't speak for others, I have a funny feeling that many people who are protesting using non-compliant radios or FCC rule violations, likely feel darn close to what I do, if not the same.

[marcspaz]

18 minutes ago, Lscott said:

I was at the Ham swap a while back in Fort Wayne Indiana. Part of the free test bench, used for checking used radios people buy before leaving, had a Rigol spectrum analyzer setup. The link below is the model I believe they were using at the time, DSA-815.

https://www.rigolna.com/products/spectrum-analyzers/dsa800/

Some people were solicited specifically so they could test their radios as an informal survey. The results were socking for some people when they saw the results.

The original classic UV-5R was well known for poor filtering of harmonics on the output. I found the attached VHF spectrum tests for one on-line and a copy of the schematic, likely the first generation design, for the radio.

UV-5R VHF Harmonics Test.pdf 154.98 kB · 0 downloads SCHEMATIC Baofeng UV-5R.pdf 1.58 MB · 0 downloads

 

 

Wow!  That HT is horrific!  I'm not surprised... but I should be.  LOL 

 

Thanks for sharing.  That really drives home the point.

 

8 minutes ago, Sshannon said:

I don’t think you have turned on us, but you have gotten to the point where you have expressed a disregard for the regulations and it’s clear you don’t understand (or even want to understand) why they exist. 
There are four sets of frequencies in GMRS. The requirements for bandwidth and RF power (and how measured) vary considerably with some of the frequencies (interstitial) wedged tightly in between others from other sets.
You claim the right to transmit on these frequencies with whatever radio you want to use, but you don’t know what you don’t know. 
So, that’s kind of off-putting to people who are trying to help you learn. 

 

 

QFT !!!

[WSAA635]

I guess I'm just too Libertarian for some people.  I understand that there are "Rules and Regulations" about the frequencies we can use. I just don't think it makes sense to regulate the equipment. I think ALL radios that are manufactured and sold should be "legal" to use on any and all frequencies that a person is licensed to use. That would solve a lot of these issues.

[marcspaz]

2 minutes ago, WSAA635 said:

I guess I'm just too Libertarian for some people.  I understand that there are "Rules and Regulations" about the frequencies we can use. I just don't think it makes sense to regulate the equipment. I think ALL radios that are manufactured and sold should be "legal" to use on any and all frequencies that a person is licensed to use. That would solve a lot of these issues.

 

I get it... if all radios were equally well built and met the greatest of standards, I would tend to agree.  However, they are not, hence the rules.

[WRXB215]

@WSAA635 Everyone here cares about freedom just as much as you.

With freedom comes responsibility.

[WRXB215]

@Lscott Interesting how the schematic for the UV-5R is a single page. The schematic for that old Kenwood I have is several pages like that. Thanks for sharing.

[WRQC527]

1 hour ago, WRXB215 said:

With freedom comes responsibility.

And, sadly, irresponsibility.

[Lscott]

17 hours ago, marcspaz said:

Wow!  That HT is horrific!  I'm not surprised... but I should be.  LOL 

Yup, it's a multi-multi-band radio. You can transmit on a half dozen VHF and UHF frequencies all at the same time.

I had a buddy at work who got one of those super cheap BF-888's UHF radios to experiment with it. There is a hack to program in some VHF frequencies. He tried it. It worked all right. Then I tuned my radio for the third harmonic. Oh-oh... I could hear him even better on the third harmonic spur! Well that ended that experiment. Never used that radio again.

[WRXB215]

@Lscott Do you know if the latest UV-5R is as bad? I have a couple of fairly new UV-5R8W that I really like. So far, no-one has complained. Maybe they are just being nice. 

Edited March 19 by WRXB215
typo

[Lscott]

52 minutes ago, WRXB215 said:

@Lscott Do you know if the latest UV-5R is as bad? I have a couple of fairly new UV-5R8W that I really like. So far, no-one has complained. Maybe they are just being nice. 

I don't know. I think there are some reviews on YouTube on the topic. I would also do some research on-line to see if there is anything. As popular as they seem to be somebody likely has done some recent testing. 

One other place to check is the FCC site. If the radio is legally sold in the US it should, required, to have an FCC ID. Using that you can look up the grant and test reports. The grant by the way will likely just show just a certification for Part 15, not 97. The FCC's main concern is the radio is blocked from receiving cell phone frequencies.

You can do an informal, crude, test using another radio. TX on 146.0MHz on the test radio. Then using a second radio some short distance away tuned for 438.0MHz, that's the third harmonic, and see if you can pick up a signal.  If you can you likely have a problem. If not the radio "might" be acceptably clean, at least on VHF. It's no guarantee it's OK on UHF however.

Dual band radios typically have two transmit "chains", power amp stages and filters, for each band. Both need to be checked. 

You can try the same kind of test on UHF but you'll likely will need a scanner that can tune up around 1.2GHz to 1.5GHz to catch the third harmonic.

Your final option is try at a local Ham Radio club. Somebody there might have a spectrum analyzer, I have a model in mind on my wish list to get sooner or later, or access to one. You can see if a test of your radio can be arranged. I'm sure you won't be the first person in a club who wants to know if their cheap radio meets FCC emission limits.

 

[AdmiralCochrane]

Wouldn't an SDR receiver capable of receiving in the appropriate band be the easiest test method?  You can even set most of them to show a waterfall wide enough to see ALL the harmonics. 

[Lscott]

4 minutes ago, AdmiralCochrane said:

Wouldn't an SDR receiver capable of receiving in the appropriate band be the easiest test method?  You can even set most of them to show a waterfall wide enough to see ALL the harmonics. 

Yes that could also work. Excellent suggestion.

[WRXB215]

@AdmiralCochrane and @Lscott I like the SDR idea but I don't currently have one so I'll have to stick to Lscott's suggestion of testing with another radio. And since my AC is out, all my planned purchases are on hold for a while. 

Edit: I do have an old scanner so maybe I can use that to test UHF.

Edited March 20 by WRXB215
Added info.

[Lscott]

To get back on track for the thread's topic there is a series of posts on radioreference.com on this exact topic. A few helpful posts shows how to look up Part 95A radios the FCC has certified. I would also imagine changing to Part 95E would also find newly certified radios as well.

https://forums.radioreference.com/threads/part-95-gmrs-radio-list.275040/#post-2046099

Then the same person posted an updated procedure:

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

TThis may be slightly better than what I posted back in 2013.

FCC OET Authorization Search

Under Application Information:
Application Status: select All Granted Statuses

Under Equipment Information:
Frequency Range in MHz: select 462.55 to 467.725 and uncheck Exact Match
Rule Parts (up to three): select 95 and uncheck Exact Match

Under Formatting Options: Show results in You can select HTML to view it on the web site
or select Microsoft Excel or XML to generate a spread sheet.

I just tried the Microsoft Excel format and it generates a file that your browser will want to download.
I don't know how that works on a smart phone or Windows. On a Linux PC with Firefox it opens a download dialog box.

If you use part 95 instead of part 95A the results could be different. It might include FRS radios too. 95A should include only GMRS radios but some of them (and FRS and CB and MURS) might have only 95 without the letter. I need to check that.
Specifying the frequency range 462.55 to 467.725 should exclude MURS, CB, RC and other PRS devices.

Today that returned 3969 lines. Some radios have multiple grants or permissive changes so the actual number of devices is way less.

[PACNWComms]

On 3/8/2024 at 9:14 AM, OffRoaderX said:

IF radio is manufactured after 2017 AND IF radio says "GMRS" on the box THEN = FCC Type Accepted*

My employer has a "Spectrum Management" organization, while I fall under the "hardware" side of the equation. I have had to specify this 2017 aspect to them so many times it has led me to send them to some of your videos for layman's term version of FCC legalese. 

We use everything from Motorola TalkAbout series GMRS, to APX8000/8500 radios.....and where the specific model meets the needs and legality of the area they will be used (nationwide). 

So many people do not understand that things changed in 2017.

 

[nokones]

On 3/18/2024 at 11:23 AM, WSAA635 said:

the radio that's used shouldn't matter.  

And it won't, as long it is completely compliant with Part 95, subparts A and E.