BCD436HP/BCD536HP: Poor overall reception

There's been a lot of talk about this radio's UHF reception, or lack thereof. I think I am lucky. I don't have those UHF issues. However, it seems that my radio's reception is less "sensitive" than other scanners. Specifically, the 396 XT. With both radios side-by-side, the 396 XT receives signals where the 436 is either deaf or noticeably weaker. And this holds true for all bands. Although my comparisons are not scientific, I have used the same antenna systems for the test. Has anyone else experienced this or do I have a bad radio?

sflmonitor said:

There's been a lot of talk about this radio's UHF reception, or lack thereof. I think I am lucky. I don't have those UHF issues. However, it seems that my radio's reception is less "sensitive" than other scanners. Specifically, the 396 XT. With both radios side-by-side, the 396 XT receives signals where the 436 is either deaf or noticeably weaker. And this holds true for all bands. Although my comparisons are not scientific, I have used the same antenna systems for the test. Has anyone else experienced this or do I have a bad radio?

Click to expand...

What you have described is exactly what the issue is. It is a poor receiver on UHF. It is not deaf, but certainly bellow average in reception in UHF and VHF. Use an out side antenna or an antenna mounted away from the radio and the 436 receives as well or better than the 396. We have found that some shielding on the battery door helps this. Look at that thread for more detail.

You'll need to look into this we've been doing some tests

http://forums.radioreference.com/uniden-tech-support/337172-436-how-improve-your-uhf-reception.html

I had a 436 and a 325 and neither one could hold a candle to my 396 and my HP-2.

Unfortunately I've tried what has been mentioned. I've tried outside antennas and mobile antennas and the 396 still has superior reception. The battery cover with copper seems to have produced a LITTLE bit better results). But as an example, I had both radios next to each other yesterday. I was monitoring a local VHF repeater that was about 15 miles from me. The 396 has full quieting with five bars while the 436 had no bars and a significantly lower signal strength.

Maybe it's just the way the radio is designed and I'm expecting more since I'm used to the 396. And by no means am I knocking the 436. I actually love the radio and have bought both upgrades which I'm very happy with. It's just that weaker reception that's killing me. Thanks for the replies.

Unfortunately you may have some other problem that is effecting reception. If its under warranty, have Uniden check it out. Or take a look at the antenna connector in the radio, and make sure there is not a problem there. I have had to replace, and re solder the connector on the 396XT and a couple of other radios.

Well, I did some checking and comparing. The antenna connector seems fine. When compared to another 496 using the same antenna system, mine is definitely much less sensitive. It actually missed a whole lot of traffic. It's still under warranty so I'm going to ship it Uniden repair to see what they find. Oh well, such is life.

just real quickly double check, your antenna center pin area on the scanner's antenna connector and make sure no metal debris is between the center pin and outer grounding sleeve as well as the antenna/cables center pin to shielding itself.

Thanks darunimal, good call. Unfortunately that's not the problem either, although it could have certainly been. I've had it happen to me in the past with the actual BNC connector grounding itself. I've decided to box it up and send it to uniden.