Could FM CB supplant FRS?

[WRTC928]

A few months ago, I bought a CB radio for my truck after decades of being off the air. Since September 2021 (IIRC) CBs can use FM mode, and this one has that capability. To my surprise, it also has the capability to use "privacy" (a misnomer, but whatever) tones. So, it's now a radio that transmits in FM mode on a free, channelized service, in essence just like FRS. Unlike FRS, however, it can operate at 4 watts, is allowed to have external antennas, and has 40 channels instead of 22. There's no technical reason why FRS would be a better choice for family/friends traveling together or camping/whatever. The main impediment to widespread adoption of FM CB for "family" communication, as I see it, is the cost of entry. CB radios can be had fairly cheaply, but not as cheaply as the "bubble pack" FRS radios. Is there any chance that FM CB could eventually take a significant portion of the FRS market? (Full disclosure -- I don't really care, I'm just curious.)

 

[OffRoaderX]

There is at least one technical reason why FRS would be a better choice:

You can get way (wayyyy) more fars-per-inch of the antenna with an FRS than a hand-held CB.. a 5-inch antenna an on FRS radio can get you 10miles in excellent conditions, ~1/2 mile in decent/poor conditions.

For those same farz on CB, you would need a 25-inch (just a guess, but much larger, you get the point) antenna on the radio, making a hand-held very unwieldy and a potential deadly eye-poking menace.

[Lscott]

29 minutes ago, WRTC928 said:

There's no technical reason why FRS would be a better choice for family/friends traveling together or camping/whatever.

Except for the ridiculously huge antennas to get any kind of reasonable range out of a portable radio. Somehow a 102 inch quarter wave whip antenna on a hand held radio doesn't sound very convenient.  Not to mention the size of the required ground plane to go with it.

At FRS/GMRS frequencies a quarter wave antenna is about 6 inches long. The metal chassis of your hand held radio is about that size making for a reasonable ground plane.

[WRTC928]

Hmmm... Those are good points. I hadn't thought about the length of the antenna. It's less of an issue on a vehicle, but then it's a lot less convenient because you can't get out of the vehicle and take it with you. The best compromise between portability and power is still GMRS, and even without the antenna issue, FM CB wouldn't be a better option than GMRS due to its power limitations. Eh. It was just a thought exercise.

[marcspaz]

 

I'm going to close my post out with something that will piss some people off, and others will say I don't know what I am talking about... so if you don't want to read all of the post, you may want to skip to the END.

 

The reason CB went to the wayside isn't known for sure, but I have a few ideas.  Modulation type isn't one of them.  I think there is zero chance of CB replacing FRS.  I don't think it could even take a significant part of the market, and I will explain why.

First, people get extremely frustrated because their mobile CB radio performs so poorly, with regard to range.  As mentioned above, that is almost always due to the antenna.  The primary problem is, the average DIY person doesn't poses the tools or skills to properly install a CB and antenna, nor verify if it is working correctly.  This wasn't always the case, but somewhere in time, this common knowledge kind of vanished, leading people to think they can just bolt on the antenna and life is good.

Then, there is the size of the antenna. The shortest proper length for a CB antenna is 104 inches.  That's not a type-o... that is over eight and a half feet.  Not everyone is willing to put an antenna that big on their vehicle.  So, you see everyone using a compromised antenna... like the 4' and even 3' firestik antennas.  I own a 4 footer and a 1 footer, but I know they are only going to work for a mile or less. 

FRS is at a frequency that only requires a 6" antenna, and the installation is way, way more forgiving.  Just by it's nature, its not common to incorrectly install an FRS antenna.  And when manufacturers put even shorter antennas on them, say a 3", it's no where near the compromise made in CB with a 3' antenna.

So, you take a radio and antenna that doesn't install correctly easily and complicate that install with an antenna that more resembles a dummy load than an antenna, and yeah, the performance is gonna suck.  Creating an even smaller, overpriced version in a handheld doesn't sound like a good time, either.

Now, there is also another issue to deal with.  While there are FM CB radios available, FM quality on CB is no where near the audio quality of FRS.  FRS radio uses a lot more bandwidth, which means the signal can carry more data, aka higher fidelity audio.  Many people will prefer FRS just because it sounds better. 

 

END

Now to upset some people... I believe that a properly installed mobile CB and antenna or a quality CB handheld will outperform an FRS radio 100% of the time.  I also believe that a properly installed mobile CB and antenna AND a quality CB handheld will outperform their counterpart in GMRS radio a vast majority of the time, when it comes to P2P comms.  The two top reasons why GMRS has made it to the top of the pile is due to repeaters and the frequency used is ideal for heavily wooded and dense urban areas.  While generally, I believe CB is superior in many cases, it seems that US radio use in dense woods and cities are the most common use cases... hence GMRS (and FRS) win over mobile and handheld CB.

[WRTC928]

See? Even if you ask a stupid question, you can learn something.

[SteveShannon]

4 minutes ago, WRTC928 said:

See? Even if you ask a stupid question, you can learn something.

It wasn’t a stupid question.  

[marcspaz]

Agreed. 

[WRYS709]

3 hours ago, WRTC928 said:

A few months ago, I bought a CB radio for my truck after decades of being off the air. Since September 2021 (IIRC) CBs can use FM mode, and this one has that capability. To my surprise, it also has the capability to use "privacy" (a misnomer, but whatever) tones. So, it's now a radio that transmits in FM mode on a free, channelized service, in essence just like FRS. Unlike FRS, however, it can operate at 4 watts, is allowed to have external antennas, and has 40 channels instead of 22. There's no technical reason why FRS would be a better choice for family/friends traveling together or camping/whatever. The main impediment to widespread adoption of FM CB for "family" communication, as I see it, is the cost of entry. CB radios can be had fairly cheaply, but not as cheaply as the "bubble pack" FRS radios. Is there any chance that FM CB could eventually take a significant portion of the FRS market? (Full disclosure -- I don't really care, I'm just curious.)

 

Yes!  And with the 11 year solar sun cycle at its Maximum, enjoy DX when the band opens!

[Davichko5650]

2 hours ago, marcspaz said:

 

I'm going to close my post out with something that will piss some people off, and others will say I don't know what I am talking about... so if you don't want to read all of the post, you may want to skip to the END.

 

The reason CB went to the wayside isn't known for sure, but I have a few ideas.  Modulation type isn't one of them.  I think there is zero chance of CB replacing FRS.  I don't think it could even take a significant part of the market, and I will explain why.

 

 

Two-way radio for the non-hobbyist or dedicated user seems to be a fad item, As the CB boom of the mid 70's came and went, it has died down; a small resurgence is occurring in that service as seen by the plethora of YT videos and FB groups.  But F/GMRS is the current go to in the radio fad world. Prepper driven to some extent, but also the mass availiblity of the units (both FR and GMR) and the ease of use has made it the radio du jour!