• To anyone looking to acquire commercial radio programming software:

    Please do not make requests for copies of radio programming software which is sold (or was sold) by the manufacturer for any monetary value. All requests will be deleted and a forum infraction issued. Making a request such as this is attempting to engage in software piracy and this forum cannot be involved or associated with this activity. The same goes for any private transaction via Private Message. Even if you attempt to engage in this activity in PM's we will still enforce the forum rules. Your PM's are not private and the administration has the right to read them if there's a hint to criminal activity.

    If you are having trouble legally obtaining software please state so. We do not want any hurt feelings when your vague post is mistaken for a free request. It is YOUR responsibility to properly word your request.

    To obtain Motorola software see the Sticky in the Motorola forum.

    The various other vendors often permit their dealers to sell the software online (i.e., Kenwood). Please use Google or some other search engine to find a dealer that sells the software. Typically each series or individual radio requires its own software package. Often the Kenwood software is less than $100 so don't be a cheapskate; just purchase it.

    For M/A Com/Harris/GE, etc: there are two software packages that program all current and past radios. One package is for conventional programming and the other for trunked programming. The trunked package is in upwards of $2,500. The conventional package is more reasonable though is still several hundred dollars. The benefit is you do not need multiple versions for each radio (unlike Motorola).

    This is a large and very visible forum. We cannot jeopardize the ability to provide the RadioReference services by allowing this activity to occur. Please respect this.

AM or FM MODULATION BETTER FOR OFF-ROAD TRAIL COMMS

nokones

Newbie
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Feb 19, 2011
Messages
712
Location
Sun City West, AZ
I checked that after I posted my previous. No Stick. Well so much for using the CW27. I guess, I'll just stay with the Firestik II antenna. At least it will VSWR out at just barely more than 1.0:1 on Ch. 1 to less than 1.1:1 on Ch. 40. It is what it is, a CB on a Jeep and my 3 miles in the FM mode is fine for me. Its only a CB.
 

K6GBW

Member
Joined
May 29, 2016
Messages
704
Location
Montebello, CA
you have a great set up and are running out of room.... just a thought.... they make a tiny Radioddity CS-47 CB.... size of a pack of cigarettes ... after you modify it .. it gets all the ham bands... and it puts out 8 watts on AM and 15 watts on FM!!! all the controls are in the mic so you just have to clip the mic on the dash and you're done..... 15 watts FM is pretty damn good... it has HUGE heat sinks to deal with all the power....
this radio also has the new Noise reduction technology making it hear pretty good...... for $94 I thought I would mention it.


Wow, now that’s a cool little radio! I might need to look into one of those.
 

Davidbt

Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2024
Messages
131
Location
Sierra Vista, Arizona
I'm keeping an eye on this thread. After I get my QT-80 installed in my truck, I'm thinking my next project is installing the CS-47 in my jeep tj. There's a antenna bracket at the driver rear tail light already from the previous owner. I just installed a Radioddity DB20-G last week thought I may as well have cb also.
 

exkalibur

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Aug 15, 2006
Messages
2,934
Location
York, Ontario
UHF FM is going to be king in the vast majority of cases. VHF in theory is going to go further, but antennas are almost never given a proper RF ground plane on modern vehicles, and certainly not in a Jeep or other compromised install. A proper RF ground plane is a third of the size on UHF and even a janky installation should be suitable. Also, antennas on UHF are much smaller (5 inches as opposed to 19, give or take) meaning you can get a much better performing antenna in the same space as a VHF quarter wave.

Years ago I compared Low Band, VHF, UHF and 900MHz to see which worked better in a mobile environment for real-world results. Antennas were all quarter wave antennas. VHF won by a long shot, but only because I had a proper ground plane. With even a slightly compromised ground plane (such as a lip mount), performance went down, quickly (as well as SWR).

And regarding AM vs FM? FM 100%. FM isn't nearly as susceptible to noise and fading as AM is. Especially for off-road comms where you often have after-market LED lights which can be REALLY noisy, RFI wise. Another reason I'd use UHF as well; most of those LED lights wreak havoc on lower frequencies, but UHF and up are more or less immune.
 
Last edited:

niceguy71

Active Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2023
Messages
710
Location
Massachusetts
I checked that after I posted my previous. No Stick. Well so much for using the CW27. I guess, I'll just stay with the Firestik II antenna. At least it will VSWR out at just barely more than 1.0:1 on Ch. 1 to less than 1.1:1 on Ch. 40. It is what it is, a CB on a Jeep and my 3 miles in the FM mode is fine for me. Its only a CB.
most manufacturers have gone to Aluminum.... so, your hood may be aluminum and it will work just as good as steel for the NMO-27.....
you have a magnetic mount K-40... that was one of my favorites for 20 years..... I wonder if you take the K-40 and place it on the hood in the area where you think you could live with the NMO-27 and see how it does... you can't drive with it but.......... if you could test it to see how it does it will tell you how a NMO-27 might work..... but I don't know if a mag mount on Aluminum will still ground plane?

I wonder if that would be a way to test to see if it's an Aluminum hood and would give a good ground plane for the Larsen NMO-27...
anyone know??????
 

niceguy71

Active Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2023
Messages
710
Location
Massachusetts
I'm keeping an eye on this thread. After I get my QT-80 installed in my truck, I'm thinking my next project is installing the CS-47 in my jeep tj.

K6GBW

I watched a lot of youtube video's on that CS-47 and was always a fan and recommended it to anyone with a jeep..... one guy showed it at 8 watts AM and it would swing up to 27 watts when talking on it....... I said SOMEDAY I'm going to get me one and range test it....
Radioddity had a $10 off sale so I got it for $84 bucks a few months ago......
I can't say I like it...... everyone I talked to said I sound VERY distant.... they kept telling me to put the mic closer to my lips... .... I turned up the Mic Gain to max but it didn't help......
the thing I just could not get used to was the push button Squelch...... I would be driving and the radio gets loud as some skip is rolling in... I would grab the mic and find the button and have to go click click click click click to turn it up.... then later I think the skip is gone and do the reverse..... also to change many of the settings you go into the menu and make the change then shut the radio off then turn it back on turn off hold button for 5 seconds.... then turn on .... hold button for 3 seconds.... every little adjustment!
I used it one day and didn't like it so I stopped playing with it..... given a few days of use I'm sure I would get used to the menu driven radio..... but if I didn't have the room it is my first choice..... then again what do I want from a $84 dollar radio???
 

niceguy71

Active Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2023
Messages
710
Location
Massachusetts
Yes, it would and would be a good test.
NOKONES there is your answer, if Mmckenna thinks it will work I'd give that a test!... I would sit in one spot and have your friend in the pick-up truck go out two miles as you talk to him once he gets at the two mile mark take the K-40 off the hood and place it on the fiberglass top and see if there is a difference.... that way you can actually tell if it is working on the hood VS fiberglass top.... have the Alvalance go out as far as possible and if you think that K-40 is working....... drill baby drill
 

Davidbt

Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2024
Messages
131
Location
Sierra Vista, Arizona

K6GBW

I watched a lot of youtube video's on that CS-47 and was always a fan and recommended it to anyone with a jeep..... one guy showed it at 8 watts AM and it would swing up to 27 watts when talking on it....... I said SOMEDAY I'm going to get me one and range test it....
Radioddity had a $10 off sale so I got it for $84 bucks a few months ago......
I can't say I like it...... everyone I talked to said I sound VERY distant.... they kept telling me to put the mic closer to my lips... .... I turned up the Mic Gain to max but it didn't help......
the thing I just could not get used to was the push button Squelch...... I would be driving and the radio gets loud as some skip is rolling in... I would grab the mic and find the button and have to go click click click click click to turn it up.... then later I think the skip is gone and do the reverse..... also to change many of the settings you go into the menu and make the change then shut the radio off then turn it back on turn off hold button for 5 seconds.... then turn on .... hold button for 3 seconds.... every little adjustment!
I used it one day and didn't like it so I stopped playing with it..... given a few days of use I'm sure I would get used to the menu driven radio..... but if I didn't have the room it is my first choice..... then again what do I want from a $84 dollar radio???
Since I'm putting the QT-80 in my truck, I'm wondering if I need ssb in my jeep. I have gmrs in my jeep and carry a couple of uv5r's to give to anyone that doesn't have comms in their rig. I probably don't really need cb at all.
 

KI4ZNG

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 30, 2010
Messages
105
We did have some “kick ass” stuff. But field radios are limited by battery and antenna considerations. When we were on an operation we were rarely that far apart. What the Army calls LOS (Line of Sight) communications is usually no more than 5-10 miles. In a military conflict ten miles is a long way! Don’t believe me…try walking it! For Beyond Line of Sight (BLOS) communications we used a small (25 lbs) HF radio that put out about twenty watts. That got us around three hundred miles. The satellite stuff was for theatre wide and strategic use, so the guys that never got dirty used that. The “new” radios the military uses are a bit more powerful (vehicle mounted SINCGARS) can run up to 50 watts. But the footprint of a radio rarely is affected much by power. It’s always affected more by antenna and location. We’d have guys out 2000 to 3000 years (so within a mile) and I could see them through binoculars. With the 1.5 watt PRC-77 I could hear them great. Then they’d duck down behind a ridge line and POOF they were gone. In the military I needed the guy I’m talking to to hear me but not someone twenty miles away, so we kept the radio power as low as possible.

I guess the point I’m trying to make is that in all my years on Radio Ref and other sites so many people are looking for the magic bean of radio that lets them talk anywhere with nothing. We’d all love to be able to talk 100 miles on a walkie talkie, but they don’t exist. If you keep your expectations realistic and use the radio for he ranges they were really designed for then they become much more fun. When it comes to CB proper antennas, good grounding etc will make them work the distances they should work. As for the AM/FM debate. If it were me I’d use FM on caravans and trail runs because you’re never that far apart (1-2 miles). If I was trying to talk distance (beyond about 8-10 miles) I’d use SSB. AM would be the last mode I’d use because it’s noisy, two wide and subject to the most interference.
Oh yes the PRC-77 was a real workhorse! I remember the day that my platoon sergeant handed it to me and said that it was my baby now. My first thought was great just what I needed more weight to carry around. But I learned quickly that I was the lifeline between us and the people in the rear with the gear. So I took good care of mine and it took care of us.
 

K6GBW

Member
Joined
May 29, 2016
Messages
704
Location
Montebello, CA
Oh yes the PRC-77 was a real workhorse! I remember the day that my platoon sergeant handed it to me and said that it was my baby now. My first thought was great just what I needed more weight to carry around. But I learned quickly that I was the lifeline between us and the people in the rear with the gear. So I took good care of mine and it took care of us.
Kind of funny how well those old things worked huh? I’ve always told people that they worked about as well as a CB and I wasn’t kidding! Today we could do the same thing with a 4 watt hand held! But the ”New” Army has the MBITR which is way way better than the old stuff we had. The new field radios can do 30-520 MHz and they can run VHF-Lo and TACSAT on the same radio. Times change!
 

KI4ZNG

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 30, 2010
Messages
105
Kind of funny how well those old things worked huh? I’ve always told people that they worked about as well as a CB and I wasn’t kidding! Today we could do the same thing with a 4 watt hand held! But the ”New” Army has the MBITR which is way way better than the old stuff we had. The new field radios can do 30-520 MHz and they can run VHF-Lo and TACSAT on the same radio. Times change!
Yeah bet that things have changed so much that I bet it would blow my mind!
 

MUTNAV

Active Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jul 27, 2018
Messages
1,299
Kind of funny how well those old things worked huh? I’ve always told people that they worked about as well as a CB and I wasn’t kidding! Today we could do the same thing with a 4 watt hand held! But the ”New” Army has the MBITR which is way way better than the old stuff we had. The new field radios can do 30-520 MHz and they can run VHF-Lo and TACSAT on the same radio. Times change!
And the MBITRS probably weigh as much as a single magnesium battery for the PRC-77....

Funny how they make a rifle out of what mostly seems like plastic, but the radio... No... That has to be solid (and thick) steel.

Thanks
Joel
 

prcguy

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jun 30, 2006
Messages
16,738
Location
So Cal - Richardson, TX - Tewksbury, MA
And the MBITRS probably weigh as much as a single magnesium battery for the PRC-77....

Funny how they make a rifle out of what mostly seems like plastic, but the radio... No... That has to be solid (and thick) steel.

Thanks
Joel
MBITR case is machined from a solid block of aluminum which is unusual these days as military radios have become much lighter with thinner cases compared to a few generations ago. Mil radios from around the 80s and before were unnecessarily thick skinned and heavy requiring more effort to transport.
 

MUTNAV

Active Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jul 27, 2018
Messages
1,299
MBITR case is machined from a solid block of aluminum which is unusual these days as military radios have become much lighter with thinner cases compared to a few generations ago. Mil radios from around the 80s and before were unnecessarily thick skinned and heavy requiring more effort to transport.
I personally didn't mind the weight of the radios (at the time Saber 1s), but I did get a complaint from everyone that I supervised, (they didn't HAVE to carry everything, it was just very convenient) , but between the Radio, a pager (for whoever was on standby), a Leatherman (lots of stuff could be fixed on the spot with one), a mini-mag light (lots of dark cabinets, in addition to the RAPCON which was almost always kept very dark), and a folding knife (like a gator serrater, to deal with more stuff than many would think a technician would have to).

The complaint was that there pants were being pulled down.

Thinking back, I just should have gotten web belts each with a radio holster, and made some mini tool kits in a pouch to make life easier, more organized, and more accountable.

Thanks
Joel
 

slowmover

Active Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2020
Messages
2,917
Location
Fort Worth
Thinking back, I just should have gotten web belts each with a radio holster, and made some mini tool kits in a pouch to make life easier, more organized, and more accountable.

1967 MLCE gear.
Shoulder suspenders to web belt.

.
 

MUTNAV

Active Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jul 27, 2018
Messages
1,299
Thinking back, I just should have gotten web belts each with a radio holster, and made some mini tool kits in a pouch to make life easier, more organized, and more accountable.

1967 MLCE gear.
Shoulder suspenders to web belt.

.
We could've gotten by with just the web belt..... I believe it was the ALICE system, replaced eventually with MOLLE. Just like SARAH LITE replaced (I believe) JUDY LITE.

All Purpose Individual Carryeing Equipment
MOdular Lightweight Load Carrying Equipment.

Fun fact/ IMHO when ALICE was developed, a vest design was considered, but one of the reasons for rejection was it would be too hot. So as long as we stay out of places that are hot, MOLLE is great.

Thanks
Joel
 

K6GBW

Member
Joined
May 29, 2016
Messages
704
Location
Montebello, CA
All Light Individual Carrying Equipment….said that guys that never actually carried it! I did love my ALICE medium pack though. Without a frame you could literally toss it out of a helo and it would be fine.
 
Top