Good 'front end' receiver Chinese radio recommendations?

[TassieJay]

I've done a little bit of research to try and find a budget / value for money Chinese made radio with a good 'front end' receiver in it. The Baofeng UV-B6 and UV-B6 are consistently mentioned for their good receiver characteristics in terms of overload, selectivity & sensitivity.

Are there any others out there that would receive similar recommendations? (Bonus points if you *know* that your recommendation uses an AT1846S radio IC within)

Ultimate aim is to see if there's any difference in the parameters (there are many!) being sent to the AT1846S that strike just the right balance for optimum receiver performance, and then use that data so it can be applied to *any* radio using the same IC.

 

[prcguy]

I've had a few Baofengs, a few Wouxuns and several Anytones. Anytone stands out as the best of the bunch by a big margin working fine in heavy RF areas where Baofeng and Wouxun receivers get blitzed.

The Anytone series I'm having great success is the AT-3318UV-D and E series. The latest Alinco DJ-500T is the same radio inside as the AT-3318UV-D and should work identical.

 

[RFI-EMI-GUY]

I've done a little bit of research to try and find a budget / value for money Chinese made radio with a good 'front end' receiver in it. The Baofeng UV-B6 and UV-B6 are consistently mentioned for their good receiver characteristics in terms of overload, selectivity & sensitivity.

Are there any others out there that would receive similar recommendations? (Bonus points if you *know* that your recommendation uses an AT1846S radio IC within)

Ultimate aim is to see if there's any difference in the parameters (there are many!) being sent to the AT1846S that strike just the right balance for optimum receiver performance, and then use that data so it can be applied to *any* radio using the same IC.

Having a "good front end" requires components external to the AT 1846S chip as well as component layout, grounding and shielding. . So even if a manufacturer managed to build an outstanding radio using that chip, simply flashing that code into a mediocre radio would not yield the same results. If you buy a "low parts count radio", you must ask the question, why does an expensive radio have so many parts?

 

[lmrtek]

ANY radio with a wide frequency range will have a poor front end.
I have blister pack FRS radios with MUCH better front ends than baofengs and others from China.

 

[alcahuete]

ANY radio with a wide frequency range will have a poor front end.
I have blister pack FRS radios with MUCH better front ends than baofengs and others from China.

Motorola and Hytera make radios with just as much frequency range as the CCRs, but have great front ends.

 

[RFI-EMI-GUY]

Motorola and Hytera make radios with just as much frequency range as the CCRs, but have great front ends.

It comes down to the design of the radio. For example the Motorola MX300 and Astro digital Saber are both excellent radios. The UHF MX300 has a fixed tuned preselector that allows only 2 MHz tuning bandwidth without degradation. while the Astro digital Saber will tune 440-470 MHz. How does the Astro Saber do it? Varactor tuning in the front end.

You can also have a 30 MHz bandwidth by proper selection of a front end filter an high intercept point (power handling) RF pre-amplifier, like the analog Saber radios, which cost money in design and materials.

If you buy a low parts count radio for $30, you won't get same performance as a radio costing thousands.

 

[alcahuete]

It comes down to the design of the radio.

Correct. That's why I'm saying, just because the radio is wideband does not mean the front end is garbage. That's a completely incorrect statement to make. Notice he even put the ANY in all caps. Bad statement to be making.