Dirty Radios

[WRJZ939]

There are a lot of folks who shake down radios with test equipment, and for that I am intrigued and grateful. 

But when it comes to purchasing equipment, all I own is an SWR and power meter and I'd be willing to bet a lot of people don't own that much test equipment. 

So I really have to take it on faith that the manufacturer testing and FCC certifications have to cover my buying decisions. 

I don't in any way shape or form want to use a dirty radio and spew spurious emissions all over the place but I really don't know if I'm doing it or not.  I suppose I could semi-test with an RTL-SDR or something.

The day someone walks up to me and says "when you key up, my TV goes bonkers" is the day I'll stop using that particular radio. 

I know there are strong opinions on non-compliant radios but if I buy a radio and the FCC ID data says it is complaint and certified that is all I have to work with (mostly).   Not trying to stir up hate and discontent but just my opinion on the matter. 

[SteveShannon]

48 minutes ago, WRJZ939 said:

There are a lot of folks who shake down radios with test equipment, and for that I am intrigued and grateful. 

But when it comes to purchasing equipment, all I own is an SWR and power meter and I'd be willing to bet a lot of people don't own that much test equipment. 

So I really have to take it on faith that the manufacturer testing and FCC certifications have to cover my buying decisions. 

I don't in any way shape or form want to use a dirty radio and spew spurious emissions all over the place but I really don't know if I'm doing it or not.  I suppose I could semi-test with an RTL-SDR or something.

The day someone walks up to me and says "when you key up, my TV goes bonkers" is the day I'll stop using that particular radio. 

I know there are strong opinions on non-compliant radios but if I buy a radio and the FCC ID data says it is complaint and certified that is all I have to work with (mostly).   Not trying to stir up hate and discontent but just my opinion on the matter. 

Yes. That’s true.  GMRS is intended to be a service using retail products that comply to part 95e. It’s not a service designed to encourage experimentation or require tuning before use.

[WSAA254]

14 minutes ago, Sshannon said:

Yes. That’s true.  GMRS is intended to be a service using retail products that comply to part 95e. It’s not a service designed to encourage experimentation.

Could not agree more.   I ASSUME if the radio has some degree of complience standard, and the radio manufacture has been around awhile, it should be ok.  No spurious emissions, etc.  All I have is a nano vna, I have never verified that the wouxun xmits at the power advertised.   Course if I had to make a choice on selecting a really "clean" transmission, or the last watt out, I will take the "clean" transmission.   xmit power is more of a advertising point, as oppose to what it really means.  Great content, and information..   all info is good info.   regards

[back4more70]

When in doubt, look it up on YouTubes,  SOMEONE will likely have a testing video somewhere.

[WSBZ540]

Something to also keep in mind is that some of the ccr brands are not super consistent. I've got quite a few ccr's and I've put them on the analyzer. 75% of them are 'clean enough'. Of the 25% that are kinda dirty, they might pass, some def wouldn't.

So even if you find a vid claiming radio X is dirty, that doesn't mean yours would be. If its a sad ham doing the review I ignore it. I don't even get on 2m anymore because all they do is piss and moan about ccr's. It's not the 8th grade anymore guys..

Fwiw, I have yet to find a mobile (even a ccr mobile) that won't pass. I don't have as many mobiles as I do HTs (mostly btech or tyt radios) but they have all been clean.

[Socalgmrs]

Oh no.  Here it comes.  The “Dangerous “ emissions conversation.   So glad I can ignore things like this.   Some people are going to be soo upset.  

[OffRoaderX]

I trust and believe everything that the government tells us!!  If the FCC decrees that a radio passes their testing and approves/certifies it with a Part 95 Approval, then this PROVES beyond any shadow of a doubt that it is good/clean and SAFE and EFFECTIVE for use on the airwaves.  anyone saying that a radio is not 'clean' when the government has decreed that it IS clean and save & effective for use, is just spreading misinformation and should be silenced. 

Obviously anyone claiming that these Part-95 certified radios are not clean, safe, and effective, are just conspiracy theorists.. These radios are approved using scientific methods and everyone knows that the science is never wrong, so anyone saying otherwise is a science-denier.

[koni13]

Good afternoon Randy, follow you on social media and have a question. I have 2-Baofeng Dual Band FM receiver radios, which have programmed on CHIRP as you made mention on your YouTube videos. My question is seeking to set up a home base station, any recommendations you can suggest are greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance and keep those videos coming! 

[kidphc]

Except most radios (actually I think all) are not tested by the fcc. But rather a third party testing house. Don't believe start pulling the FCC certs and look at who signed the certification testing.

Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk

[WRJZ939]

18 minutes ago, kidphc said:

Except most radios (actually I think all) are not tested by the fcc. But rather a third party testing house. Don't believe start pulling the FCC certs and look at who signed the certification testing.

Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk
 

Yep.  There is usually a statement in the FCC ID's from the manufacturer saying X is representing us, etc. etc. etc.  I have watched so many testing videos and while I agree that makes for riveting commentary I question some of the test equipment or whether it has any calibration standard.   I own a 50 or 60 year old vacuum tube tester that I use but it hasn't been calibrated in forever so I don't know exactly how accurate it is.  Just a comparative statement.  And I've also seen plenty of videos where people have no test equipment validation that declare whether a radio is clean or dirty. 

It's a jungle out there. 

[OffRoaderX]

37 minutes ago, koni13 said:

any recommendations you can suggest are greatly appreciated.

I have several suggestions but posting them here in this conversation about Dirty Radios would be very off-topic and we all know that bardging-in and going off topic is very rude, so we shan't be doing that.

[back4more70]

2 hours ago, OffRoaderX said:

These radios are approved using scientific methods and everyone knows that the science is never wrong

Clearly, the science is settled.

[Lscott]

12 hours ago, WSBZ540 said:

Something to also keep in mind is that some of the ccr brands are not super consistent. I've got quite a few ccr's and I've put them on the analyzer. 75% of them are 'clean enough'. Of the 25% that are kinda dirty, they might pass, some def wouldn't.

That says a lot about their quality control, or lack of it. Another reason why CCR’s  have a poor reputation with people.

[Radioguy7268]

17 hours ago, kidphc said:

Except most radios (actually I think all) are not tested by the FCC. But rather a third party testing house. Don't believe start pulling the FCC certs and look at who signed the certification testing.
 

Yes - 3rd party testing, and when you drill down into the FCC Certs for Part 95 equipment, some of it has been 'certified' for strange ultra-narrow emissions and lower power than what people are actually going to use the radios for.

If the certification is for a 7 kHz bandwidth and 1.25 watts of power, your shiny Part 95 'certification' kinda gets fuzzy once the end users program their new GMRS HT for 25 kHz and 4 watts.

 

[SvenMarbles]

Another thing to consider though, and this isn't meant to be a rebuke to what you're talking about, because I agree with all of that. but when people discuss "dirty RF output" or spurs on harmonics, it's not always in the context that they're being good natured for cleanliness of the RF spectrum. If your radio has an output rating of 10 watts lets say,.. You'll put it on a meter, and sure enough you get 9.8-10 watts. Checks out,.. That meter detected a NET output wattage squirting out of the antenna hole.. But if you've got a dirty radio, it may be the case that some substantial portion of that RF output isn't even on the desired frequency. It takes wattage to power those harmonics as well,... So for selfish reasons, you may not want a dirty RF emitting radio because your effective radiating wattage might be inefficient. You might be getting 70% power where you want it, and 30% on spurs many harmonics up and down the spectrum..

[Lscott]

2 hours ago, SvenMarbles said:

So for selfish reasons, you may not want a dirty RF emitting radio because your effective radiating wattage might be inefficient. You might be getting 70% power where you want it, and 30% on spurs many harmonics up and down the spectrum..

Also if the antenna is not "resonate" at those frequencies it will contribute to reflected power back to the radio and an elevated SWR reading.

[tweiss3]

If your radio's manufacturer publishes detailed specifications to include sensitivity, selectivity and spurious response/emissions then you can view exactly how dirty/clean the transmitter is. Here is a hint, if they don't publish that information, you probably don't want that radio.