I have a question for NWI_Scanner_Guy: Do you think the 125AT picks up VHF FM ~150 MHz range better than the BC396XT ? I had one and I felt it did. Just curious of another opinion.
BC125AT vs 396XT question
- Thread starter EarlSuitor
- Start date
- Status
Earl,
I moved your post above out of the BCD436HP sticky thread since
it had nothing at all to do with the BCD436HP. In the future please
help us by keeping your posts on topic.
Thanks!
Marshall KE4ZNR
I moved your post above out of the BCD436HP sticky thread since
it had nothing at all to do with the BCD436HP. In the future please
help us by keeping your posts on topic.
Thanks!
Marshall KE4ZNR
NWI_Scanner_Guy
SCANNING THE AIRWAVES SINCE 1987
To my ear, here in the Chicago / Northwest Indiana area, they both are about the same. The 125 might have a slight advantage, but not enough to make a difference.
10-4 Will do ! Sorry.
BC125AT vs BCD396XT
I own both the BC125AT and the BCD396XT and cannot tell any difference between the two in the VHF range. They both perform well. The difference for me is the audio. I favor the BC125AT audio over the BCD396XT.
I own both the BC125AT and the BCD396XT and cannot tell any difference between the two in the VHF range. They both perform well. The difference for me is the audio. I favor the BC125AT audio over the BCD396XT.
First off I will start by saying I own both and agree that the BC125AT has a slight advantage over the BCD396XT and it's by no surprise either...
The BC125AT is not as wideband as the BCD396XT; it doesn't cover ANYTHING higher than 512MHz. That allows the receiver to be better filtered and isolated from outside images, mixing, etc.
The more wideband coverage a receiver has, the worse things will generally get as there is a delicate balance between cost of engineering vs performance. Can a wideband receiver be made with good performance, sure, but it's going to cost allot more than a $500 scanner.
What I use my BC125AT for is scanning amateur radio repeater and simplex frequencies for activity. Also for AM aircraft, GMRS, FRS, and other services that are VHF/UHF; it's the best radio for it and for under $100, you can't beat this radio for VHF/UHF work on the cheap.
On a more future note, I am in the process of comparing both of these scanners alongside my new BCD436HP to see how the performance is; however, I expect the same or similar results given it another wideband receiver...
The BC125AT is not as wideband as the BCD396XT; it doesn't cover ANYTHING higher than 512MHz. That allows the receiver to be better filtered and isolated from outside images, mixing, etc.
The more wideband coverage a receiver has, the worse things will generally get as there is a delicate balance between cost of engineering vs performance. Can a wideband receiver be made with good performance, sure, but it's going to cost allot more than a $500 scanner.
What I use my BC125AT for is scanning amateur radio repeater and simplex frequencies for activity. Also for AM aircraft, GMRS, FRS, and other services that are VHF/UHF; it's the best radio for it and for under $100, you can't beat this radio for VHF/UHF work on the cheap.
On a more future note, I am in the process of comparing both of these scanners alongside my new BCD436HP to see how the performance is; however, I expect the same or similar results given it another wideband receiver...
- Status
Similar threads
