• Effective immediately we will be deleting, without notice, any negative threads or posts that deal with the use of encryption and streaming of scanner audio.

    We've noticed a huge increase in rants and negative posts that revolve around agencies going to encryption due to the broadcasting of scanner audio on the internet. It's now worn out and continues to be the same recycled rants. These rants hijack the threads and derail the conversation. They no longer have a place anywhere on this forum other than in the designated threads in the Rants forum in the Tavern.

    If you violate these guidelines your post will be deleted without notice and an infraction will be issued. We are not against discussion of this issue. You just need to do it in the right place. For example:
    https://forums.radioreference.com/rants/224104-official-thread-live-audio-feeds-scanners-wait-encryption.html

Uni. 436 vs. HP II distance (miles) range

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
May 2, 2018
Messages
30
Location
Rochester, NY
#1
**To admin ... I tried to post this in the Uniden forum, and for whatever reason, it won't allow me to. Just letting you know. Please move it if you need to. Thank you.

I was just wondering maximum range (miles) you can expect from 436HP compared with Home Patrol II. I've read where people have actually gotten up to 90 miles away on a HPII. At the same time, I've also heard they have problems picking up a PD department just a few miles away.

Is there any difference between the two in this regard, and what the actual ranges you can "set" on those scanners?

Thanks for any info, I'm looking at both scanners, that's why I'm asking.
 
Joined
Jul 18, 2014
Messages
8,884
Location
PA
#2
You can't post in the main Uniden forum because that is for Uniden corporate only. Read the notice posted prominently there. You have to post in one of the subforums.

The antenna is the most important consideration. If you want to pick up distant signals, you have to use an outdoor antenna mounted high up, at least higher than the roofline and nerby trees and hills. A whip or duck antenna will only pick up fairly strong local signals.

The receiver in the 436 is better than the one in the HP-2, especially for simulcast. The 436 has issues with simulcast (which is why the SDS-100 was introduced), but the HP-2 is pretty much useless in that regard. For non-simulcast transmissions, the 436 is still better, but less blatantly so. The 436 can also be upgraded to receive ProVoice, NXDN, and DMR digital, the HP-2 cannot.
 
Joined
Dec 22, 2013
Messages
3,014
#3
**To admin ... I tried to post this in the Uniden forum, and for whatever reason, it won't allow me to. Just letting you know. Please move it if you need to. Thank you.

I was just wondering maximum range (miles) you can expect from 436HP compared with Home Patrol II. I've read where people have actually gotten up to 90 miles away on a HPII. At the same time, I've also heard they have problems picking up a PD department just a few miles away.

Is there any difference between the two in this regard, and what the actual ranges you can "set" on those scanners?

Thanks for any info, I'm looking at both scanners, that's why I'm asking.
If range sensitivity is an issue, I would avoid the 436 and go with the 536 and also an external antenna . The 436 has issues with internally generated noise getting into the antenna due to the plastic case. This may be a concern with any scanner that is handheld. The 536 is in a metal case and you can also put an external antenna outside a vehicle or home.

If you are trying to receive a simulcast system, the 536 is at this time as good as you can get for both sensitivity and simulcast. The new SD100 is reportedly better for simulcast, but again, it is a plastic handheld and unless Uniden has encased everything inside in metal, it may have noise interfering with its own antenna.

As far as miles, there is no easy answer. Only receiver sensitivity and effective sensitivity which takes into account, noise and certain other interference sources.

Sent from my SM-T350 using Tapatalk
 
Joined
Jul 18, 2014
Messages
8,884
Location
PA
#4
If range sensitivity is an issue, I would avoid the 436 and go with the 536 and also an external antenna . The 436 has issues with internally generated noise getting into the antenna due to the plastic case.
That 436 noise issue was dealt with a couple years ago. When I connect my 436 and 536 to the same antenna, there isn't any significant difference between them regarding what signals one will pick up vs. the other. The 436 may have a plastic outer case, but most of the RF portion of the circuit boards are covered with metal shielding.

If you want the 536 for its Wi-Fi features, that's fine. But it's not a signicantly better RF performer than the 436.
 
Joined
Dec 22, 2013
Messages
3,014
#5
That 436 noise issue was dealt with a couple years ago. When I connect my 436 and 536 to the same antenna, there isn't any significant difference between them regarding what signals one will pick up vs. the other. The 436 may have a plastic outer case, but most of the RF portion of the circuit boards are covered with metal shielding.

If you want the 536 for its Wi-Fi features, that's fine. But it's not a signicantly better RF performer than the 436.
If you connect the 436 to an outside grounded antenna it should be ok as you say.

But out of the box there are a ton of complaints of CPU noise radiated from the battery compartment, back into its locally attached antenna, the counterpoise for which is the radio PCB and battery. There is a whole thread on the concern on this BB.

Honestly, any hand held device might have the same issue, though the pricy commercial LMR products shift spurious signals by changing clock frequency depending upon the channel selected.

I have had a variety of scanners, Regency, Bearcat etc. that had plastic cases and shielded RF subsystems, and they will radiate poorly contained CPU noise back to their own locally attached antenna.

So personally, I avoided the 436 and bought the 536. The OP might want a handheld, and that's fine. But he is asking for max mileage.



Sent from my SM-T350 using Tapatalk
 
Joined
Jul 18, 2014
Messages
8,884
Location
PA
#6
If you connect the 436 to an outside grounded antenna it should be ok as you say.

But out of the box there are a ton of complaints of CPU noise radiated from the battery compartment, back into its locally attached antenna, the counterpoise for which is the radio PCB and battery. There is a whole thread on the concern on this BB.
I'm well aware of that thread, as I participated in it extensively. And the cause of the problem (a missing capacitor) has been resolved for over 2 years now. So what you're saying is old news about a problem that was resolved years ago, and is a complete non-issue in new scanners.

I've tested dozens of 436s against my 536 (it's SOP after installing a GPS or battery mod to make sure I didn't break anything). I install the capacitor in units that don't have it (that's how I know when Uniden started including it in new units), and with the capacitor installed, there is no statistically significant difference between the performance of a 436 and 536, if they are connected to the same antenna and programmed the same.
 
Joined
Dec 22, 2013
Messages
3,014
#7
**To admin ... I tried to post this in the Uniden forum, and for whatever reason, it won't allow me to. Just letting you know. Please move it if you need to. Thank you.

I was just wondering maximum range (miles) you can expect from 436HP compared with Home Patrol II. I've read where people have actually gotten up to 90 miles away on a HPII. At the same time, I've also heard they have problems picking up a PD department just a few miles away.

Is there any difference between the two in this regard, and what the actual ranges you can "set" on those scanners?

Thanks for any info, I'm looking at both scanners, that's why I'm asking.
Where are you, and what stations are you wishing to listen to? Are you listening from home or walking or in a vehicle?

Sent from my SM-T350 using Tapatalk
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top