BC396XT vs. BC396T vs. GRE PSR 500

[brechtd]

A test was setup using a BC396T, BC396XT and a GRE PSR 500 side by side by side in Calgary montioring two CPS dispatch channels in scan mode.

The radio used in the test were:

Radio 1. BC396XT stock antenna
Radio 2. BC396T Latest firmware stock antenna
Radio 3. GRE PSR 500 Lastest firmware stock antenna


Radios were put in one room with one person monitoring one radio. The radios were set in scan mode to monitor 2 - CPS dispatch channel for just under three hour's. The group of tested rotated every 30 ~ 45 mintues or so allowing giving each tester to listen to each radio at least 3 times during the test.

Radio 1 Transmission's monitored 151 Heard 140 Missed or Motorboated 11
Radio 2 Transmission's monitored 146 Heard 128 Missed or Motorboated 18
Radio 3 Transmission's monitored 148 Heard 144 Missed or Motorboated 4

Group overall concensus was the GRE was the clear winner. The 396XT was a close second and lastly the 396t

Couple of comments on the new 396XT.
Definate improvement in P25 audio, smoother and less motorboating from the 396T. All said the GRE is still better decoding P25 but 396XT is getting closer.
All testers really liked the Radio ID feature of the GRE's and said this would be a great feature for the 396XT

Most testers were not scanner owners, of those who did owned Uniden radios.

[wise871]

Interesting test. Were they configured the same as far as settings such as audio type, modulation, etc or were they left at default? Did you try the same antenna on all three radios also? The GRE and Unidens stock antennas are different.

Again, thanks for performing the test. I'm a retired Test Director and before we test an item used in the field, we sit down with the manufacture, test team members and operational users to brainstorm how the equipment will be configured, used, etc in the field.

What you did get was a good baseline to start off with. One thing about baselines, you have to ensure all test items are configured exactly if you’re doing a side-by-side comparison or the test results can be skewed. This also depends on the items being tested and each ones capabilities.

An example would be to make sure all frequencies are set to FM or NFM or AUTO. Where I live I was missing half the radio calls for the local fire station because my frequency modulation was set to Auto on my Uniden and my Pro-197 defaults to FM. Doing a side by side comparison between the two, the 197 was smoking my 996. I later found out the AUTO setting on the Unidens defaults to NFM. Once I set my 996 was set to FM, both radios picked up the same amount of calls.

I’m a big fan of both radios and I have both, best of both worlds. Each one provides me capabilities the other doesn’t so I’m covered all the way around.

[Jay911]

Were the 396XT's talkgroups set to "digital only" for the test, or put on the default "analog and digital" setting?

So-called "motorboating" does not exist when the talkgroup is set to "digital only", so I presume the 396XT was not set up this way.

[brechtd]

Originally Posted by Jay911

Were the 396XT's talkgroups set to "digital only" for the test, or put on the default "analog and digital" setting?

So-called "motorboating" does not exist when the talkgroup is set to "digital only", so I presume the 396XT was not set up this way.

No the talkgroups were not set to digital only. I found when we did setup talkgroups to digital only it would skip the transmission completely or chop up badly

Overall I am impressed with the improvement of P25 decoding and audio on the 396XT it's really close to the GRE, now if Uniden would put in Radio Id's I would more than happy to pitch my GRE's

[brechtd]

Originally Posted by wise871

Interesting test. Were they configured the same as far as settings such as audio type, modulation, etc or were they left at default? Did you try the same antenna on all three radios also? The GRE and Unidens stock antennas are different.

Again, thanks for performing the test. I'm a retired Test Director and before we test an item used in the field, we sit down with the manufacture, test team members and operational users to brainstorm how the equipment will be configured, used, etc in the field.

What you did get was a good baseline to start off with. One thing about baselines, you have to ensure all test items are configured exactly if you’re doing a side-by-side comparison or the test results can be skewed. This also depends on the items being tested and each ones capabilities.

An example would be to make sure all frequencies are set to FM or NFM or AUTO. Where I live I was missing half the radio calls for the local fire station because my frequency modulation was set to Auto on my Uniden and my Pro-197 defaults to FM. Doing a side by side comparison between the two, the 197 was smoking my 996. I later found out the AUTO setting on the Unidens defaults to NFM. Once I set my 996 was set to FM, both radios picked up the same amount of calls.

I’m a big fan of both radios and I have both, best of both worlds. Each one provides me capabilities the other doesn’t so I’m covered all the way around.

By no means are we professional testers. We our best to match the setting to on all radios but one the forth radio not mentioned in this test.

We did the same test again for only 30 minutes using a diamond 800 Mhz antenna on the BC396XT.
The results were bascially the same, we were pretty close to the site antenna ( 10 blocks )

[Jay911]

Hmm... given the information provided, the next two questions that need to be answered are: Which tower were the radios tuned into, and where exactly was this monitoring done? Because using correct programming and monitoring the appropriate tower (which is not always the nearest tower, due to the topography of Calgary), no scanner should have motorboating or "skip the transmission completely or chop up badly".

I'm not trying to shoot you down or anything, I'm just saying, knowing where you were and what tower you were trying to monitor has a direct pertinence to the outcome you experienced.

Furthermore, was there a control of some sort such as a professional radio or a direct link to the system (like a Zonewatch controller) to help identify when signals were "missed"?

[brechtd]

Originally Posted by Jay911

Hmm... given the information provided, the next two questions that need to be answered are: Which tower were the radios tuned into, and where exactly was this monitoring done? Because using correct programming and monitoring the appropriate tower (which is not always the nearest tower, due to the topography of Calgary), no scanner should have motorboating or "skip the transmission completely or chop up badly".

I'm not trying to shoot you down or anything, I'm just saying, knowing where you were and what tower you were trying to monitor has a direct pertinence to the outcome you experienced.

Furthermore, was there a control of some sort such as a professional radio or a direct link to the system (like a Zonewatch controller) to help identify when signals were "missed"?

The tower was Fish Creek. The fourth radio not mentioned in the test was a Motorola portable radio, our professional radio. This was an un-scientific experiment meant to test the performance of the brand-new BC396XT on a P25 trunked radio system in Alberta. I was really curious how much better the 396XT was decoding P25 signals.

[torontokris]

you should post a link in the Uniden or GRE forum...

im sure lots of others are wanting to read about a comparison (scientific or not), and they may not be browsing the Western Canada forum

[mobile1]

Is anyone using the new XT on FleetNet 800 or RCMP P25 system in this province? Or soon to be ?