UHF vs VHF radios

[starsty96]

Hi, I dont know if this would exactly be the place to ask... but i have an HT1000 VHF radio, and a HT1250 UHF radio. i noticed the signal is a lot harder to pick up on VHF than UHF. I can hear UHF much more clearer than any of the fire departments or pd's on VHF. is VHF harder to receive or transmit than UHF? just wondering if maybe it was something wrong with my antenna on the ht1000 or the radio itself. Seems fine at certain times. but alot of times theres a lot of static and cuts in and out a lot. im not far at all from the fire departments and police departments im listening to as well.

thanks to anyone who can help me.

 

[LtDoc]

Euwww, lots of factors in that! Both being 'line of sight' type bands it depends on the availability of repeaters, antenna height, distance from who you're listening to, and the color of socks you're wearing? All things being equal (yeah, right), VHF tends to have more 'range' than UHF. Not a huge difference in range, but some. It depends to some extent on the environment/surroundings too. UHF tends to 'bounce' around in metal 'forests' (buildings) more than VHF, so the chances of you hearing a particular signal could be increased because of that. It's a two-sided coin though, sometimes it works out just the opposite. And it all boils down to which band is in more use?
- 'Doc

 

[N4KVE]

You can't compare when listening to different transmitters. Years ago I did a controlled test. My friend & I were both sitting at work in our cars, & we both had dual band radios, & antennas, & were about 5 miles apart. We were speaking on UHF simplex, so that leaves repeaters out of the equation. There was some egg frying noise, but copy was still solid. We then switched to VHF, & remember. Same radios, & antennas, & neither car was moving. The copy was now practically full quieting. So in a controlled test, VHF was better. But generally out in an open space with no buildings, VHF will go further, but with plenty of buildings, UHF will have better penetration. I also did a similar test between 2 dual band ht's 1 mile apart. Again, VHF won.

 

[ronenp]

In general VHF signal last longer as distance grow (or have less DB per KM of attenuation) but UHF penetrate better in urban area so it depend where you are listen and where the transmitter sit and the path between you

Ronen - 4Z4ZQ
Ronen Pinchooks (4Z4ZQ) WebSite

 

[rapidcharger]

UHF is the superior band when range is not an issue.
When range is an issue, the distances are greater, the terrain is more hilly VHF is more user-friendly but more prone to interference from modern electronics, computers, motors as well as penetrating steel buildings.

Not enough info to say for sure what is going on in your particular case. Try going outside, away from any electronic device and see if that makes a difference.

 

[RoninJoliet]

I live in the area also of Kendall and Kane Co in ILL, what your hearing is normal on my scanners also...There is a influx of some signal loss due to more than one repeater used in both Kendall and Kane Co signals resulting in what you and I and Bob Parnass are hearing...I doubt there is any problem with your antennas....

 

[FFPM571]

Also ... the UHF is going to be repeatered for the most part. VHF is going have the bases with more wattage than the mobiles so unless the whole channel is repeatered the mobile and portables will be harder to hear unless your close. How is it working today?

 

[AgentCOPP1]

Also ... the UHF is going to be repeatered for the most part. VHF is going have the bases with more wattage than the mobiles so unless the whole channel is repeatered the mobile and portables will be harder to hear unless your close. How is it working today?

Is anyone else having trouble understanding this? Sorry if I'm sounding rude, but I can't understand like half of that.

 

[FFPM571]

Well.. Since it wasn't directed at you.. I don't think you need to worry about it.. I was replying to the OP ..:Let me put it so you can understand it.. You being a HAM should be able to understand what a repeater is Right? The UHF systems in Kendall county is repeatered and has higher power transmit sites that repeat the mobiles and portables. The VHF stuff is a MIX of Repeater and simplex therefore not every signal will be as strong... I also was asking the OP how it was working today as he is talking about receiving signals with the HT1000 I just sold him.. Does that make it clearer?

 

[N4KVE]

The problem with the OP's post is that the VHF, & UHF repeaters are at different locations, so asking if VHF, or UHF works better doesn't really apply, as he might be closer to one site than the other. In his case, which ever site he is closest to would be better. Even if it was 800 mhz. By doing controlled tests like I did, by using dual band mobiles in parked cars, & switching between VHF, & UHF, can a choice be made. So I guess the proper response to him would be the better band would be the one he's closest to the repeater's antenna site.

 

[starsty96]

I live in the area also of Kendall and Kane Co in ILL, what your hearing is normal on my scanners also...There is a influx of some signal loss due to more than one repeater used in both Kendall and Kane Co signals resulting in what you and I and Bob Parnass are hearing...I doubt there is any problem with your antennas....

ahh ok thanks! i wasent sure if it was just me or what. i listen to kendall county fire, and kane county sheriff and stuff, and it just seems real messy. But there are a lot of buildings and houses around us so that probably interferes with it enough. and my UHF radio is perfectly clear when listening to kendall county sheriff.