I currently own a BCD436HP and need to mount a mobile unit in my truck. Everything around Central Ohio is goings to MARCS. Is there enough difference to justify the extra money of a 536 over a 996P2?
Bcd996p2 vs bcd536hp?
- Thread starter WeldGuy
- Start date
- Status
marksmith
Member
I have both, and I would say it's a personal preference.
One thing to consider is MARCS is a huge system in terms of sites and talkgroups.
To get the whole thing into a 996 p2 you will need to probably break it into pieces as it has a 500 record max per system. A frequency or talkgroup is a record.
The 536 will allow you to load the whole thing easily.
Both radios will monitor that system fine, and if you get creative with how you program it, the 996 p2 will do the job.
Just for the system size limitation I would recommend the 536, even though the 996 p2 is built more to take hard mobile use.
The 536 uses an SD card, and 996 p2 does not. This can be an issue for some.
Mark
536/436/ws1095/996p2/996xt/325p2/396xt/psr800/396t/HP-1/HP-2 & others
94caprice9c1
Member
Is there a difference in reception between the BC536HP and the 996p2? I have always felt the reception of the 536 is not as good as other radios ie: the 396XP.
Syncopations
Hears voices in my head.
Yes. To me, the 996P2 seems more sensitive than the x36.
94caprice9c1
Member
Good to know! Thank you!
marksmith
Member
If monitoring the MARCS system is the issue, a system with tons of powerful sites all across the state, sensitivity is not much of an issue.
I would also mention that the filters in the 536 are way ahead of the 996p2, so selectivity is every bit as important as sensitivity.
If all you want is sensitivity, get a real hot front end scanner (not Uniden), that gets blown away with interference.
Mark
536/436/ws1095/996p2/996xt/325p2/396xt/psr800/396t/HP-1/HP-2 & others
I would also mention that the filters in the 536 are way ahead of the 996p2, so selectivity is every bit as important as sensitivity.
If all you want is sensitivity, get a real hot front end scanner (not Uniden), that gets blown away with interference.
Mark
536/436/ws1095/996p2/996xt/325p2/396xt/psr800/396t/HP-1/HP-2 & others
The comparisons I've done don't show that.
I have both units and I monitor MARCS daily in my vehicle and at my office.
Both units do a good job. There is absolutely no reason to pay the higher price for the 536 if you are monitoring a few counties and you know the exact sites and talkgroups you want to hear and understand how to program a non-SD card unit.
If you will be travelling all over the state (or out of state) then the 536 might be a better option because of its GPS capability, larger storage capacity, etc.
But performance wise they are pretty equal.
I don't know how many simulcast systems are involved, but I like my x36's for simulcast decode better than my x96XT. Granted you are looking at the P2, a newer version and it could be better on this than older sibling.
The 536 is better at maintaining. You can remove the SD card and get it to a computer to update "stuff". With the 996 you have to get the computer to the scanner.
As mentioned above, programming a large statewide system will exceed memory limits. Also such things have more information to show in the display and the display is bigger than the 996 (from the standpoint of characters per line).
Lastly the programming for the 536 would be identical to the 436. The 996 is different and you'd have to remember 2 different quick key "arrangements".
The 536 is better at maintaining. You can remove the SD card and get it to a computer to update "stuff". With the 996 you have to get the computer to the scanner.
As mentioned above, programming a large statewide system will exceed memory limits. Also such things have more information to show in the display and the display is bigger than the 996 (from the standpoint of characters per line).
Lastly the programming for the 536 would be identical to the 436. The 996 is different and you'd have to remember 2 different quick key "arrangements".
The 536 uses the exact same programming as the 436, so you don't need two different software packages to program them both. You can program both units identically and interchange SD cards. If you have a spare card, you can put it in either unit, and it will work just fine.
High endurance cards eliminate almost all card failure and corruption issues. If you have a spare card, fixing a failure takes less than a minute. Scanner off, replace card, scanner on.
The greater memory limits of the x36 scanners are a big deal when scanning large statewide or multistate trunked systems. This is particularly relevant in a vehicle, especially if you aren't confining use to one or two counties, and plan on using GPS capabilities. On longer road trips, the advantages of the x36 line and GPS outclass every other model of scanner by any manufacturer.
The x36 receivers are the best available in a scanner, not just in sensitivity, but selectivity. I live next to a cell/pager tower that bleeds through every VHF frequency on most CCRs. But even with a ST-2 antenna outside with a clear line of sight to the tower, and no filters between the antenna and scanner, the 436 and 536 ignore the interference, unless tuned within 2-300 KHz of the actual TX frequency.
If you already have the 436, pairing it with a 536 makes a lot of sense for a lot of reasons.
High endurance cards eliminate almost all card failure and corruption issues. If you have a spare card, fixing a failure takes less than a minute. Scanner off, replace card, scanner on.
The greater memory limits of the x36 scanners are a big deal when scanning large statewide or multistate trunked systems. This is particularly relevant in a vehicle, especially if you aren't confining use to one or two counties, and plan on using GPS capabilities. On longer road trips, the advantages of the x36 line and GPS outclass every other model of scanner by any manufacturer.
The x36 receivers are the best available in a scanner, not just in sensitivity, but selectivity. I live next to a cell/pager tower that bleeds through every VHF frequency on most CCRs. But even with a ST-2 antenna outside with a clear line of sight to the tower, and no filters between the antenna and scanner, the 436 and 536 ignore the interference, unless tuned within 2-300 KHz of the actual TX frequency.
If you already have the 436, pairing it with a 536 makes a lot of sense for a lot of reasons.
I have both, IMHO - 536, especially since you already have a 436. You already know what it can do and how to set it up.
I feel it's slightly better than the 996P2, I ususally can get a few sites (barely ) that I can't get on the 996 with similar antennas.
Seriously - a 536 and a GPS, some tweaking of favorite lists and it's a perfect mobillesetup. I'd do the same but don't have room.
I feel it's slightly better than the 996P2, I ususally can get a few sites (barely ) that I can't get on the 996 with similar antennas.
Seriously - a 536 and a GPS, some tweaking of favorite lists and it's a perfect mobillesetup. I'd do the same but don't have room.
I initially had a 436 and debated between the 536 or 996, next. This is the exact reason I went with the 536. With the exception of the whole wifi debacle, I've been happy with it.
marksmith
Member
As you have probably determined from the responses, the 996 will do the job, and the 536 is worth the difference in updated or improved technology, identical to program as your 436.
It's a personal preference, but the 536 is a better radio. I don't use it mobile, but as you are probably aware from the 436 it can do stuff the 996 cannot. You just need to decide what is most important.
Mark
536/436/ws1095/996p2/996xt/325p2/396xt/psr800/396t/HP-1/HP-2 & others
It's a personal preference, but the 536 is a better radio. I don't use it mobile, but as you are probably aware from the 436 it can do stuff the 996 cannot. You just need to decide what is most important.
Mark
536/436/ws1095/996p2/996xt/325p2/396xt/psr800/396t/HP-1/HP-2 & others
Which radio [996 or 536] handles digital simulcast distortion best?
marksmith
Member
Agree, but neither handle simulcast distortion well.
Mark
536/436/ws1095/996p2/996xt/325p2/396xt/psr800/396t/HP-1/HP-2 & others
Mark
536/436/ws1095/996p2/996xt/325p2/396xt/psr800/396t/HP-1/HP-2 & others
Hmmm... lots of good points on both sides. I don't stray far from Fairfield and Franklin Counties, so I don't think a huge database would be an issue.I mostly monitor Fairfield County SO, Pickerington PD and Violet Fire.
marksmith
Member
Always a great problem. What should my additional scanner be?
Mark
536/436/ws1095/996p2/996xt/325p2/396xt/psr800/396t/HP-1/HP-2 & others
I own a BCD996P2 and a BCD325P2.
Yesterday I took delivery on a BCD536HP and will receive a BCD436HP today!
If your radios will be static (as in stationary). I think the BCD996P2 and a BCD325P2 are awesome!
If you monitor huge P25 systems with a massive amount of talk groups, or you travel, especially into unfamiliar areas, the BCD536HP and BCD436HP can't be beat. Between being able to store the entire RR database and utilize GPS technology to automatically program your scanner on-the-fly as you drive is invaluable. Simple fast programming gear to a zip code and a distance radius from that zip code is also very convenient!
The only thing I've noticed with the BCD536HP (likely the 436 will be similar) is that it hangs onto a talk group after it's inactive for a little longer than I think it should. When it stops on a talk group and the transmission stops, my BCD996P2 has moved on and is monitoring another talk group. This causes the BCD536HP to miss some transmissions temporarily. Having only played with it for a few hours today, it could be operator error.
While the display on the BCD536HP can show more info and longer text labels (important). The display on the BCD996P2 is brighter and the fonts are larger (important if you have eyesight problems). The display on the 996P2 allows for different colors as well.
Yesterday I took delivery on a BCD536HP and will receive a BCD436HP today!
If your radios will be static (as in stationary). I think the BCD996P2 and a BCD325P2 are awesome!
If you monitor huge P25 systems with a massive amount of talk groups, or you travel, especially into unfamiliar areas, the BCD536HP and BCD436HP can't be beat. Between being able to store the entire RR database and utilize GPS technology to automatically program your scanner on-the-fly as you drive is invaluable. Simple fast programming gear to a zip code and a distance radius from that zip code is also very convenient!
The only thing I've noticed with the BCD536HP (likely the 436 will be similar) is that it hangs onto a talk group after it's inactive for a little longer than I think it should. When it stops on a talk group and the transmission stops, my BCD996P2 has moved on and is monitoring another talk group. This causes the BCD536HP to miss some transmissions temporarily. Having only played with it for a few hours today, it could be operator error.
While the display on the BCD536HP can show more info and longer text labels (important). The display on the BCD996P2 is brighter and the fonts are larger (important if you have eyesight problems). The display on the 996P2 allows for different colors as well.
- Status
Similar threads
