Scanner with good railroad band reception

Status
Not open for further replies.

Summitgh

Newbie
Joined
Mar 11, 2018
Messages
2
Location
Cuyahoga Falls, OH
Any scanners out there with good railroad band reception? Recently purchased a BC996P2 to listen to both public service and railroads and I'm not impressed with the VHF-Hi reception. My old BC350A will pull in distance transmissions better than my BC996P2 with the same external antenna.
 

ncrailfan

Member
Feed Provider
Joined
Oct 10, 2010
Messages
45
The Whistler TRX-1 has a pretty hot receiver I am told but deaf in dense RF areas. It also can be upgraded to digital NXDN.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

cbehr91

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jun 22, 2010
Messages
419
A great handheld scanner is the Uniden BC125AT. Not real sure about a mobile. While expensive, I have heard good things about the Whistler TRX-2.
 

Swipesy

Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2003
Messages
2,055
Location
Northern Ohio
A great handheld scanner is the Uniden BC125AT. Not real sure about a mobile. While expensive, I have heard good things about the Whistler TRX-2.

I second the BC125AT. Great reception, great screen, easy to program and easy to use and the right price. I have never found that any of my trunk scanners were much good for train listening.
 

nickwilson159

Member
Feed Provider
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
68
Location
Hudson Valley, NY
What about purchasing a commercial VHF radio to supplement your BC996P2? Then you can have the best of both worlds. A commercial radio will outperform a scanner in terms of sensitivity & selectivity, meaning better reception. You can future-proof yourself by purchasing a Kenwood NX-700 or Icom F5061D (make sure the 'D' is present - it means Digital NXDN) for less than the cost of a TRX-1 or BCD536HP, and both will get better reception. If you're set on having one single receiver though, I would say the TRX-1 would be your best bet.
 

RadioDitch

Signals Identification Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 24, 2010
Messages
3,074
Location
All over the map.
I would highly recommend considering using an Amateur Radio portable. Specifically the Yaesu FT270. Generally 16-20hrs of battery life in continuous use at higher volumes, which is a couple days at trackside. It's significantly better in environments with a lot of interference than a general consumer scanner, and is nearly commercial grade. It's built to IPX7 standards, so it's fine in heavy rain and can take one hell of a beating. Ask me how I know...lol. And it really is pretty much the standard amongst buffs.

It's also comparably priced to any scanner at anywhere from $125-$150, so you get a better radio for the same money. And it's not as hard to program as many like to complain about. That's what the manual is for. It does have an SMA antenna connector, so you would need an adapter for SMA to BNC, but that's a couple bucks.

And since it's a common question, you do not need a license to own it for receive only (unless you live in Kentucky or New York...their scanner/receiver laws are a little overkill).
 
Last edited:

Mikejo

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jul 18, 2007
Messages
226
Location
Waltham,MA
I use a Uniden Bearcat BC95XLT, seems to work OK. Has anyone else used one for Railroad scanning, and if so, what do you think? How does it stack up to others?
 

TailGator911

Silent Key/KF4ANC
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
2,687
Location
Fairborn, OH
I have monitored the rails on my TRX-1, 536HP, WS-1065, and my old Realistic Pro-2006 and I have to say that the 2006 is just as good if not better than any of them, so I have dedicated 2 banks on that scanner with great results.

JD
kf4anc
 

etihparg

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Dec 25, 2002
Messages
103
Location
Gilbert, Arizona
I have a railfan for many years. Believe it or not, the best scanner I ever had for VHF was a Bearcat BC-220. You can pick one up on Ebay for like $20-$30. I now us a Relm RMV-25.
 

INDY72

Monitoring since 1982, using radios since 1991.
Joined
Dec 18, 2002
Messages
14,636
Location
Indianapolis, IN
Also the PRO-92/2067... For analog rail anyway. But for the now increasing NXDN usage the BCD436/536HP or TRX series.. Or save the big bucks up for an SDS100....

Or get an actual commercial radio... Just make sure you CAN NEVER talk on RR freqs as you can get in so many levels of trouble its not funny. From FCC issues, to US DHS issues....
 

DennisKink

Member
Joined
Mar 12, 2018
Messages
118
Location
Pickle City,IL.
Also the PRO-92/2067... For analog rail anyway. But for the now increasing NXDN usage the BCD436/536HP or TRX series.. Or save the big bucks up for an SDS100....

Or get an actual commercial radio... Just make sure you CAN NEVER talk on RR freqs as you can get in so many levels of trouble its not funny. From FCC issues, to US DHS issues....

Will these commercial (mobile) radios receive with the mic unplugged,or is there an electrical connection that has to be connected?
 

N9JIG

Sheriff
Moderator
Joined
Dec 14, 2001
Messages
5,581
Location
Far NW Valley
Will these commercial (mobile) radios receive with the mic unplugged,or is there an electrical connection that has to be connected?

Most will work without the mic plugged in.

Most will also allow you to set them for receive only on a per-channel basis.

For mobile use I use a BCT15X or a BCD996XT for railroad use but I also have an Alinco dual bander and use it for rail channels. The Alinco is usually set on the local Road channel and the scanner scans the rest.

For handhelds I like the BC125AT for it's size and performance.
 

Voyager

Member
Joined
Nov 12, 2002
Messages
12,060
Scan speed? Almost always. Reception quality and ability? Never.

Speed, capacity, programmability, and multi-mode support. And yes sometimes reception quality and ability although generally the commercial radio will perform better.
 

cbehr91

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jun 22, 2010
Messages
419
Speed, capacity, programmability, and multi-mode support. And yes sometimes reception quality and ability although generally the commercial radio will perform better.

The only scanner that came close to matching the sensitivity of a commercial rig were the Regency HX scanners from the 1980s. Years ago there was a guy on Trainorders who tested one against a Motorola mobile (maybe a Spectra?) and the Regency HX1000 actually beat it!
 

N9JIG

Sheriff
Moderator
Joined
Dec 14, 2001
Messages
5,581
Location
Far NW Valley
The only scanner that came close to matching the sensitivity of a commercial rig were the Regency HX scanners from the 1980s. Years ago there was a guy on Trainorders who tested one against a Motorola mobile (maybe a Spectra?) and the Regency HX1000 actually beat it!

Those were very sensitive and the later Relm HS200/MS200 scanners were also as good. The big problem with these were that they were not nearly as selective as the current scanners. Older scanners would get blasted by RF noise in downtown areas, near paging towers or hospitals or gas stations when current scanners tend to be less affected by these (RF) noisy areas as well as adjacent channel problems.

The older Bearcat scanners like the BC200 and BC100 XLT series and the BC220/250 type mobile/bases were just as sensitive and also suffered from the same selectivity issues.

With narrowbanding and new channels stuck in between the old ones as well as new rules regarding image rejection the days of hyper-sensitive scanners are gone.
 

Voyager

Member
Joined
Nov 12, 2002
Messages
12,060
I think they will make a comeback once technology catches up with the rules.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top