SDS 100 North Jersey Assessment

WILSON43 · Sep 19, 2018

OK, so by this time we've all heard the hype and debate about the new SDS100 scanner.

It was touted as the be all, end all of scanners to receive P2, simulcast systems flawlessly, yet reviews have been mixed. Without getting into the antenna mount and battery debacles, I was looking to hear from SDS100 users in the North Jersey, metro NYC area and have their reports on the performance of this radio.

We are all aware of the many challenges we face monitoring this hectic and complicated radio landscape, so....

For the systems we encounter in that area, does it really KILL on receiving the simulcast systems?

Is VHF and UHF reception as bad as many are saying?

Is this thing worth $650 not including the upgrades? Would love to hear from actual North Jersey users.

Markscan · Sep 19, 2018

I’ve had mixed results with my SDS 100. I’ve had it since June, and I will say that it does really pull in the trunked systems. It is perfect on NJICS, Wayne, and Morris P25. I can receive NJICS all over with no trouble. With my 436, I had no luck with Wayne unless I was in Wayne, and then it was distorted. The SDS pulls it in loud and crystal clear. Morris County was the same , if I was in Morris County the 436 worked with some distortion. The SDS pulls that in perfectly as well.

As far as VHF and UHF, it does ok. In my opinion it’s no better or worse than the 436. It does surprise me sometimes. I have an HP2 hooked to a rooftop antenna. The two radios were side by side and I picked up a VHF transmission on the SDS, but not on the HP2.

Sometimes the SDS will keep scanning on NJICS while the HP2 will stop on one of the talk groups and play audio as it should.

For full disclosure I am using the first firmware update that was released just before the SDS was released for sale. I am waiting for UNIDEN to hopefully get this thing figured out. Also I am using the Radio Shack 800 antenna. The stock antenna is not good.

Battery life for me averages 5 hours and 15 minutes.

My opinion, if you suffer really bad simulcast issues, then the SDS is a great choice. I’m still using my 436 as my everyday scanner. AA battery life on my 436 is close to 11 hours. When you need to you put in another set of AA’s.

Sorry for the long winded response, but my SDS spends more time charging than anything else. Maybe Whistler will come through with something better. Forgot to mention I am located in West Essex area.

Mark

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

richee2000 · Sep 19, 2018

i just ordered mine, i am in somerset co. i will post results when in

simpilo · Sep 19, 2018

I kind of wondering if the Trunking bands on th SDS100 are I/Q samples and the rest of the scanner is conventional because people saying VHF/UHF is comparable to a Pro II and a BC436 which have no I/Q. If that is the case what is the reasoning for not saying what it is which is a hybrid radio? I almost bet the mixed reviews on the SDS100 lead to it. Open that radio up to see if the usual circuitry is there and a ADC chip.

WILSON43 · Sep 20, 2018

I think that with the complexity of these digital trunking simulcast systems the time will soon come for "scanner" manufacturers, basically two now, Uniden and Whistler, to abandon the notion of these dusk to dawn frequency coverage scanners and focus on the specific bands folks will require moving forward.

The Unication radios, which are not "scanners" per se is already there, focusing on either VHF or UHF bands and adding 700 / 800 mhz. As a result, these receivers perform very well with excellent reception and performance on the digital trunking - simulcast systems.

Once again, I wish Uniden would refrain from trotting out it's spokesman to hype these things in advance, drive up expectations, and then release a radio certainly not ready for prime time on many levels.

It's seems like Whistler is taking their time and hopefully learning from Uniden's mistakes. I wish they would take a few chapters from Unication's playbook as well and zero in and performance. We'll see.

markjrenna · Sep 20, 2018

You may want to consider a Unication G4 or G5. Perfect for P25 LSM issues and NJICS.

WILSON43 · Sep 20, 2018

markjrenna said:
You may want to consider a Unication G4 or G5. Perfect for P25 LSM issues and NJICS.

Yes, I have a G-5 and you are correct. Works perfectly.

nosoup4u · Sep 20, 2018

Comparing analog audio between the SDS and the 436, I think the 436 wins on that end. However digital goes to the SDS hands down, especially dealing with LSM. If I had to choose only 1, it would be SDS hands down.

joerobb23 · Sep 20, 2018

read replies concerning north jersey ill try some of those systems. however on both 436 & sds100 trying to monitor fdny uhf very staticy can anyone advise how to clear up reception? Yhanks

NParkNJ · Sep 20, 2018

dconti said:
I think that with the complexity of these digital trunking simulcast systems the time will soon come for "scanner" manufacturers, basically two now, Uniden and Whistler, to abandon the notion of these dusk to dawn frequency coverage scanners and focus on the specific bands folks will require moving forward.

The Unication radios, which are not "scanners" per se is already there, focusing on either VHF or UHF bands and adding 700 / 800 mhz. As a result, these receivers perform very well with excellent reception and performance on the digital trunking - simulcast systems.

Once again, I wish Uniden would refrain from trotting out it's spokesman to hype these things in advance, drive up expectations, and then release a radio certainly not ready for prime time on many levels.

It's seems like Whistler is taking their time and hopefully learning from Uniden's mistakes. I wish they would take a few chapters from Unication's playbook as well and zero in and performance. We'll see.

Yeah but what about those of us in local Passaic/Bergen County?

I live in Ringwood.

There is West Milford and Oakland, on low band.

There’s Ringwood on VHF. And I like to listen to ALS 901/902. Those are on VHF.

Wanaque and Pompton, Butler, etc are all UHF.

Wayne is UHF Phase 1 LSM.

Passaic County is ICS.

A scanner should be well-rounded in everything. I admit an antenna, and location matter. But all else being as good as it can be, scanners still need to be multiband. At least for this area.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

mondaro · Sep 20, 2018

Markscan said:
I’ve had mixed results with my SDS 100. I’ve had it since June, and I will say that it does really pull in the trunked systems. It is perfect on NJICS, Wayne, and Morris P25. I can receive NJICS all over with no trouble. With my 436, I had no luck with Wayne unless I was in Wayne, and then it was distorted. The SDS pulls it in loud and crystal clear. Morris County was the same , if I was in Morris County the 436 worked with some distortion. The SDS pulls that in perfectly as well.

As far as VHF and UHF, it does ok. In my opinion it’s no better or worse than the 436. It does surprise me sometimes. I have an HP2 hooked to a rooftop antenna. The two radios were side by side and I picked up a VHF transmission on the SDS, but not on the HP2.

Sometimes the SDS will keep scanning on NJICS while the HP2 will stop on one of the talk groups and play audio as it should.

For full disclosure I am using the first firmware update that was released just before the SDS was released for sale. I am waiting for UNIDEN to hopefully get this thing figured out. Also I am using the Radio Shack 800 antenna. The stock antenna is not good.

Battery life for me averages 5 hours and 15 minutes.

My opinion, if you suffer really bad simulcast issues, then the SDS is a great choice. I’m still using my 436 as my everyday scanner. AA battery life on my 436 is close to 11 hours. When you need to you put in another set of AA’s.

Sorry for the long winded response, but my SDS spends more time charging than anything else. Maybe Whistler will come through with something better. Forgot to mention I am located in West Essex area.

Mark

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Awesome.....

Thanks for taking your time to write this Mark, Good Job !!

Tony

WILSON43 · Sep 20, 2018

"A scanner should be well-rounded in everything. I admit an antenna, and location matter. But all else being as good as it can be, scanners still need to be multiband. At least for this area."

Absolutely, and I agree. We want everything in our scanners, air band, etc., but we've come to the point where the technology is demanding we be more practical and recognize that you can only expect these receivers to extremely well when focused on certain bands, or marginally well or not well at all when trying to cover everything. I know it's costly, but most I know that serious about covering "everything" have multiple radios / scanners dedicated to the bands on which they are optimized.

W2SJW · Sep 20, 2018

Markscan said:
For full disclosure I am using the first firmware update that was released just before the SDS was released for sale.

There is absolutely no reason to be on a FW that old and not on the latest public release (v1.05.01), IMHO.

Markscan · Sep 20, 2018

W2SJW said:
There is absolutely no reason to be on a FW that old and not on the latest public release (v1.05.01), IMHO.

I am having zero problems with the old firmware and have seen reports of degraded VHF reception, so I figured I’d wait until they have a final tweaked version before I updated. I’ve learned to wait until they get it right. Besides, my 436 and my Unication G5 do a great job.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

RadioDitch · Sep 20, 2018

For some reason my LSM issues with the 435HP, 536HP, and HP2 were never really that awful compared to others' reports. However, the SDS100 definitely is a noticeable improvement. The audio could be a little better, but it does it's job as a scanner and does it well.

SteveSimpkin · Sep 20, 2018

RadioDitch said:
For some reason my LSM issues with the 435HP, 536HP, and HP2 were never really that awful compared to others' reports....

Location. Location. Location.
Depending where you are located relative to multiple Simulcast towers, you can get 100% reception or nothing or anything between those extremes. Sometimes moving the radio an inch or two makes a huge difference. The promise of radios/scanners designed to receive LSM is that they should pick up much more consistently under most conditions, especially when receiving from multiple towers.

RadioDitch · Sep 20, 2018

SteveSimpkin said:
Location. Location. Location.
Depending where you are located relative to multiple Simulcast towers, you can get 100% reception or nothing or anything between those extremes. Sometimes moving the radio an inch or two makes a huge difference. The promise of radios/scanners designed to receive LSM is that they should pick up much more consistently under most conditions, especially when receiving from multiple towers.

Mine performed pretty consistently well all over on the road. Little lucky I guess.But again, the SDS100 is definitely better.

DSC45 · Sep 21, 2018

Original FW

Markscan said:
I am having zero problems with the old firmware and have seen reports of degraded VHF reception, so I figured I’d wait until they have a final tweaked version before I updated. I’ve learned to wait until they get it right. Besides, my 436 and my Unication G5 do a great job.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree! I'm running original FW also. No problems!

ansky · Sep 21, 2018

SteveSimpkin said:
Location. Location. Location.
Depending where you are located relative to multiple Simulcast towers, you can get 100% reception or nothing or anything between those extremes. Sometimes moving the radio an inch or two makes a huge difference. The promise of radios/scanners designed to receive LSM is that they should pick up much more consistently under most conditions, especially when receiving from multiple towers.

Exactly, it's all about location. I'm located in West Orange, so when I listen to NJICS, I can monitor the Union County simulcast with no problems, because I'm on the fringe of the coverage area. However if I try to monitor the West Orange simulcast it is completely unusable.

mikeybus44 · Sep 21, 2018

joerobb23 said:
read replies concerning north jersey ill try some of those systems. however on both 436 & sds100 trying to monitor fdny uhf very staticy can anyone advise how to clear up reception? Yhanks

I'm on Staten Island and those FDNY UHF channels are horrible - always have been. Moreso for me on the SDS than the 436. Manhattan is virtually unreadable. All the freqs have static and background noise issues. Though my SDS seems to work a little better in my man room which on the 3rd floor since I have a bit more height.

Oh how I miss the days on the old 154 mhz VHF. You could get those loud and clear anywhere.

SDS 100 North Jersey Assessment

Member

Member

Communications Professional

simpilo

Guest

Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

On the Road

Member

Member

Senior Member

Member

Signals Identification Member

Member

Signals Identification Member

Member

Member

Member

Similar threads