Rx focused ht

[peatious]

if I wanted to hear the best, the furthest, the most isolated, and clear with an ht using a 1/4 wave antenna, what would i get?

under $300

[SteveShannon]

10 hours ago, peatious said:

if I wanted to hear the best, the furthest, the most isolated, and clear with an ht using a 1/4 wave antenna, what would i get?

under $300

I don’t know.
What I do know is that there are two important standards for reception: sensitivity, which is the ability to hear a weak signal and selectivity,which is the ability to pick one signal out of several, to reject adjacent signals.  
The manufacturer’s typically will publish both specifications but I haven’t seen a table comparing the various handheld radios. You might find that most of the better radios hear about the same.

For selectivity and clarity of output (a factor of audio amplifier quality and speaker quality), I suspect that many of the folks who have worked with commercial radios will tell you that commercial radios have superior selectivity and audio clarity, and I wouldn’t be surprised if they’re right. Some of those radios cost in the thousands when new and presumably the difference in cost meant something. They were designed to discern signals reliably and reproduce loud and clear audio in the worst conditions.  But I’m one of the few people here who hasn’t got an old Motorola or Kenwood commercial handheld radio.  Personally I’m very happy with the performance of my Yaesu handheld radios. Even my $100 Yaesu Ft-65 sounds really good when paired with the external factory microphone/speaker.

I will say that the antenna is frequently the most important element in sensitivity, so be prepared to hear some opinions on what’s best there. Also, you neglected to specify which bands you want to hear “the best, furthest, and clear”.

Good luck!  I’ll be watching to see what I can learn.

[kidphc]

For rx only, you have the options of a ht scanner. Although, a half way decent sdr will have some serious sensitivity.

No suggestions on hts. Only because I found that the more you spend generally you, after a certain point, you get more features (ie ruggedness, color screens etc.)

But I will say I have been more impressed by the selectivity, and sensitivity of commercial offerings by motorola, kenwood, harris than any of my amateur radio gear.

Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk

[nokones]

6 hours ago, peatious said:

if I wanted to hear the best, the furthest, the most isolated, and clear with an ht using a 1/4 wave antenna, what would i get?

under $300

For a GMRS and consumer grade radio, I would stay away from the cheap Chinese POS radios and take a look at the Midland GXT 67 Pro or the Rocky Talkie. They may not have any foo-foo bells and whistles that really don't make the radio better but, they are simple to use and of better quality than those radios produced by a non-english speaking government owned corporation in a far-away land.

There are videos comparing the two aforementioned radios that are produced by an English speaking non-government owned corporation located on the "Land of the Free".

[kidphc]

For a GMRS and consumer grade radio, I would stay away from the cheap Chinese POS radios and take a look at the Midland GXT 67 Pro or the Rocky Talkie. They may not have any foo-foo bells and whistles that really don't make the radio better but, they are simple to use and of better quality than those radios produced by a non-english speaking government owned corporation in a far-away land.
There are videos comparing the two aforementioned radios that are produced by an English speaking non-government owned corporation located on the "Land of the Free".

Are they made in the us?

I mean the pro's fccid shows it was tested by a chinese firm. Well I guess 98% of shit now adays is made in china.

Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk

[Socalgmrs]

1 hour ago, nokones said:

For a GMRS and consumer grade radio, I would stay away from the cheap Chinese POS radios and take a look at the Midland GXT 67 Pro or the Rocky Talkie. They may not have any foo-foo bells and whistles that really don't make the radio better but, they are simple to use and of better quality than those radios produced by a non-english speaking government owned corporation in a far-away land.

There are videos comparing the two aforementioned radios that are produced by an English speaking non-government owned corporation located on the "Land of the Free".

I really hope mentioning midland or Rocky talkie is a joke.  
 

 

to the op.  I’ve used and tested every type or gmrs, ham, super hydr, blah blah blah.  If all things are equal general same watts and antenna it does not matter at all.  What matters more is LINE OF SIGHT.   That’s really it.  Especially for receiving on an ht.  I talk, transmit and receive, all day long every day 30-40miles.  Some times up to 60 miles on cheap $20-$30 radios.  Simplex and repeaters.  My professional Motorolas sit at home in the shelf.  So do my woxouns.  I use $27 water proof radios.  We use them for work, for the kids, on horses and quads and animal evacuations and for general communication. They work well.  Line of sight is most important.  If they can’t see you you can’t hear them.  

[LeoG]

You really need to travel into some hilly areas with trees.

[GreggInFL]

I don't know which is worse, hilly areas with trees or flat areas with trees.  If you are at the right place on a hill you might get your HT above the trees; that will never happen on the flats.

[tweiss3]

If you are just listening, the Motorola XPR7550e has one the most sensitive receivers, the can be had for around $300 if you look for the right deal.

 

[LeoG]

51 minutes ago, GreggInFL said:

I don't know which is worse, hilly areas with trees or flat areas with trees.  If you are at the right place on a hill you might get your HT above the trees; that will never happen on the flats.

That is true.  But a signal can punch through a tree if you have power.  It's dead in the water with a formidable hill.

[AdmiralCochrane]

1 hour ago, LeoG said:

That is true.  But a signal can punch through a tree if you have power.  It's dead in the water with a formidable hill.

Yes,    a   tree.      Make it 50 trees and even 50 watts might not push 65cm a mile.

[LeoG]

You aren't telling me anything I don't know already

My antenna is on the back building highlighted in orange.  Needs to go up another 20-30 feet

[SteveShannon]

It also depends on how much moisture is in the tree. It’s not the wood as much as the water. 

[LeoG]

I really haven't noticed after a rain a difference in my reception of the transmission.  I thought that was a bit odd.

In the winter when the leaves are off I expect better results.  But hopefully by then the antenna will be up higher.

[peatious]

On 7/4/2024 at 1:39 AM, SteveShannon said:

I don’t know.
What I do know is that there are two important standards for reception: sensitivity, which is the ability to hear a weak signal and selectivity,which is the ability to pick one signal out of several, to reject adjacent signals.  
The manufacturer’s typically will publish both specifications but I haven’t seen a table comparing the various handheld radios. You might find that most of the better radios hear about the same.

For selectivity and clarity of output (a factor of audio amplifier quality and speaker quality), I suspect that many of the folks who have worked with commercial radios will tell you that commercial radios have superior selectivity and audio clarity, and I wouldn’t be surprised if they’re right. Some of those radios cost in the thousands when new and presumably the difference in cost meant something. They were designed to discern signals reliably and reproduce loud and clear audio in the worst conditions.  But I’m one of the few people here who hasn’t got an old Motorola or Kenwood commercial handheld radio.  Personally I’m very happy with the performance of my Yaesu handheld radios. Even my $100 Yaesu Ft-65 sounds really good when paired with the external factory microphone/speaker.

I will say that the antenna is frequently the most important element in sensitivity, so be prepared to hear some opinions on what’s best there. Also, you neglected to specify which bands you want to hear “the best, furthest, and clear”.

Good luck!  I’ll be watching to see what I can learn.

which bands?

i think I'm confused. isn't gmrs all found within a single band? its all UHF 462-468MHZ. 64cm? 65cm? something like that? I'm used to hearing about choosing bands from HAMs and i had to calculate the wavelength just now to even answer

[peatious]

On 7/4/2024 at 1:39 AM, SteveShannon said:

I don’t know.
What I do know is that there are two important standards for reception: sensitivity, which is the ability to hear a weak signal and selectivity,which is the ability to pick one signal out of several, to reject adjacent signals.  
The manufacturer’s typically will publish both specifications but I haven’t seen a table comparing the various handheld radios. You might find that most of the better radios hear about the same.

For selectivity and clarity of output (a factor of audio amplifier quality and speaker quality), I suspect that many of the folks who have worked with commercial radios will tell you that commercial radios have superior selectivity and audio clarity, and I wouldn’t be surprised if they’re right. Some of those radios cost in the thousands when new and presumably the difference in cost meant something. They were designed to discern signals reliably and reproduce loud and clear audio in the worst conditions.  But I’m one of the few people here who hasn’t got an old Motorola or Kenwood commercial handheld radio.  Personally I’m very happy with the performance of my Yaesu handheld radios. Even my $100 Yaesu Ft-65 sounds really good when paired with the external factory microphone/speaker.

I will say that the antenna is frequently the most important element in sensitivity, so be prepared to hear some opinions on what’s best there. Also, you neglected to specify which bands you want to hear “the best, furthest, and clear”.

Good luck!  I’ll be watching to see what I can learn.

oh disregard that last comment. i need to specify rx GMRS because i very well could have been asking about receiving anything since i was soley asking about receiving. i didn't pick up on why you asked before

[SteveShannon]

17 minutes ago, peatious said:

oh disregard that last comment. i need to specify rx GMRS because i very well could have been asking about receiving anything since i was soley asking about receiving. i didn't pick up on why you asked before

So Motorola commercial products (probably other commercial radios like Kenwood as well) are well known for their ability to reject adjacent signals that could interfere with reception. That’s important if a band is congested but GMRS has very specific frequencies assigned with sufficient spacing that you should be okay with any decent handheld radio connected to a good antenna using high quality coax suitable for UHF. Do you want to receive from a single direction or are you interested in monitoring in all directions?