Are Yaesu transceivers good scanners?

[Gadgetguy2009]

Hello all,

there are a number of Yaesu transceivers with wide band coverage ( VX-2R and higher) - 500 kHz up to 999 MHz.

As per some, these are better (more sensitive, good selectivity) than small handheld wide band receivers (Icom R5, Yausu VR-120D).

I am looking for a small, non trunking full coverage handheld receiver: should I go for a transceiver or for a dedicated unit?

Thanks for any advice!

 

[burner50]

Most transceivers will work better as a receiver than a scanner will, but they dont scan worth a darn, and usually dont have a convenient way to lock out channels or select banks.

If a transceiver is the way you want to go, you will be better off with several, one for each band you want to listen to as that will get you the best sensitivity and rejection.

 

[W6KRU]

Yep Burner nailed it. The problem with wideband handlheld trancievers is that they are widebanded with small components that do not handle strong signals well. You use to hear it all the time on the ham repeaters. Somebody would have just went out and got a new widebanded HH and would be dismayed at the poor frontend on it. Now everybody just accepts it.

But my yaesu vx170 is pretty good though in spite of the poor scanning features.

 

[Gadgetguy2009]

Most transceivers will work better as a receiver than a scanner will, but they dont scan worth a darn, and usually dont have a convenient way to lock out channels or select banks.

If a transceiver is the way you want to go, you will be better off with several, one for each band you want to listen to as that will get you the best sensitivity and rejection.

Thanks for the input. The Yaesu VX-3R has very similar features than their scanners (you can lock out frequencies, there are memory banks, dual watch, priority watch, preferential memories, 1000 memories, stereo radio, listening to radio while monitoring another frequency at the same time etc. - very similar to the VR-120D).

The only aspect I do not know yet is the scanning speed. Would anyone know how they compare (considering that the VR-120D in itself is quite slow in scanning)?

It looks I may be better off the get a VX-3R as a scanner, as its more sensitive, more rugged and has the same price as the VR-120D.

DDan: you mention poor frontend - how is this going to impact reception? Is it worse than the frontend on the VR-120D or Icom R5?

Thanks again for your comments.

 

[N8IAA]

Before most of my metro area went trunked, I carried around either my VX-2, FT-60 to monitor the airwaves. Much better selectivity (less interference from strong non-public service repeaters) than a scanner. Now, I have just one ham ht. A VX-170. Use my Pro-106 for most all of my scanning now. Charge the ht once in a while in case of bad weather.
Larry

 

[n1das]

Yep Burner nailed it. The problem with wideband handlheld trancievers is that they are widebanded with small components that do not handle strong signals well. You use to hear it all the time on the ham repeaters. Somebody would have just went out and got a new widebanded HH and would be dismayed at the poor frontend on it. Now everybody just accepts it.

But my yaesu vx170 is pretty good though in spite of the poor scanning features.

I have an ICOM IC-208H mobile in one of my cars and I have a love / hate relationship with it. It's a radio that I absolutely love to hate because of the poor front end in it. It has a sensitive receiver but it's as broad as a barn. It gets hammered a LOT in any urban environment. I actually have some scanners that have better front ends in them and work better in a dense signal environment than the 208H does.

I'm actually leaning more and more toward using the good (but expensive) commercial gear instead of acquiring more ham market gear. I've also been bitten by the APCO-25 digital and 900MHz bugs on Amateur Radio, so that means commercial gear only.

A real good test of receiver performance in a ham HT vs. scanner vs. commercial HT is when you try to listen to distant stations while hilltopping at commercial site. You'll be trying to listen while you've got cell phone site transmitters, a UHF TV station, a couple of FM broadcasters, one or more paging transmitters, and other VHF and UHF stuff operating nearby. In that environment, the commercial HT will likely win when it comes to receiver performance. A well known spot to test receiver performance is "Intermod Alley" in Chigago.

IIRC, the VX-170 is based on a commercial HT design. It's supposedly a commercial radio that's been Amateur-ized. That may explain why it performs well and is a great radio in spite of its poor scanning ability.

 

[burner50]

Thanks for the input. The Yaesu VX-3R has very similar features than their scanners (you can lock out frequencies, there are memory banks, dual watch, priority watch, preferential memories, 1000 memories, stereo radio, listening to radio while monitoring another frequency at the same time etc. - very similar to the VR-120D).

I didnt say that it DIDNT have those features... But on a scanner you generally have a L/O button, and an easy way to turn banks on and off... Its just not as easy with a transciever. It is usually done thru the menus instead of a quick push of a button.

 

[W6KRU]

DDan: you mention poor frontend - how is this going to impact reception? Is it worse than the frontend on the VR-120D or Icom R5?

Thanks again for your comments.

I have no experience with either of those. Wideband front ends are usually prone to intermod.

 

[ratboy]

I use a Yaesu VX-170 2 Meter HT for railband, and some VHF use. It's got amazing sensitivity, and I've never heard a peep of intermod out of it, even where most radios I've had get some. It scans slowly and is generally awkward to use as a scanner, as is any amateur handheld. The multi band radios tend to be worse performers in general, so they make even less sense as a scanner substitute.

 

[elk2370bruce]

The more things that a radio can do, the more likely it is that it will do none of them well. Transceivers are designed for two-way amateur communications (usually repeaters) and some will, obviously, serve as a receiver. You can spend an equal amount of money and get a transceiver (if you're licensed) and a scanner designed for that purpose for better results all the way around..

 

[Gadgetguy2009]

Thank you all for the input. I agree, the VX-170 or similar seems to be a bit more challenging to use than a scanner. Is this also the case for the newer VX-3R or VX-6R (the VX-170 is about 4 yrs old, the VX-3R is quite new)?
I am looking for the best price / performance ratio small, durable scanner (to be a second unit next to my Pro-106) and I am not sure if I should get a small dedicated handheld wideband receiver or a transceiver. My alternatives are: Icom R5, Yaesu VR 120D, VX-3R or VX-6R.
Pro's for receiver: more user friendly, pro's for transceiver: more sensitive, more rugged, smaller (?)

 

[W6KRU]

A real good test of receiver performance in a ham HT vs. scanner vs. commercial HT is when you try to listen to distant stations while hilltopping at commercial site.

Funny you should mention that. I was sitting at a site last weekend pulling relay duty for an offroad motorcycle race. I was worried about the vx150 I was using but it was fine. I have been on much worse sites but never attempted to use a radio.