BCD436HP first-month performance assessment

[jonwienke]

That sounds like a reasonably good A-B comparison to me. All I can say is that my 436HP does not exhibit similar symptoms. While I don't have a 396, I've made similar comparisons between my 436HP and several Baofeng, Yaesu, and Icom HTs, and the 436 seemed to receive about the same as the other radios across UHF and VHF bands.

With the stock ducky, it doesn't pick up CB worth crap, but when I hook up the Antennacraft ST-2 base antenna, it receives CB pretty well.

I'm guessing it's possibly a unit-to-unit inconsistency where perhaps some units are out of spec.

 

[lamarrsy]

Yes there is a serious problem with analog VHF, I have made the same A / B experiment with my BCD396XT / BCD436HP as kc5igh did. I did get about 2/3 of the 396's Rx on my 436 if I used a Yaesu FT-270 VHF antenna *and* an earphone halfway connected so as to act as an antenna counterpoise... And even so, I was *not* at the rx level + quality of the 396XT...
And please note that this is my second BCD426HP unit, same result.

 

[SCPD]

436HP you mean...

Yes there is a serious problem with analog VHF, I have made the same A / B experiment with my BCD396XT / BCD436HP as kc5igh did. I did get about 2/3 of the 396's Rx on my 436 if I used a Yaesu FT-270 VHF antenna *and* an earphone halfway connected so as to act as an antenna counterpoise... And even so, I was *not* at the rx level + quality of the 396XT...
And please note that this is my second BCD426HP unit, same result.

What firmware version?

 

[lamarrsy]

1.03
But I've downgraded to 1.02.03 and am trying it presently to see if there's any difference.

 

[kc5igh]

Hello, Sylvain.

Are you able to let us know how reverting from firmware version 1.03 to 1.02 affected your 436's performance?

I've given up listening to my 436 until Uniden updates the current firmware, but I'm very curious about whether or not the firmware reversion improves analog VHF sensitivity.

Thanks.

-Johnnie

 

[sibbley]

Hello, Sylvain.

Are you able to let us know how reverting from firmware version 1.03 to 1.02 affected your 436's performance?

I've given up listening to my 436 until Uniden updates the current firmware, but I'm very curious about whether or not the firmware reversion improves analog VHF sensitivity.

Thanks.

-Johnnie

Analog VHF and UHF do get somewhat better by reverting to a previous firmware. But my experience shows it's not enough. The only real help is by adding a mobile antenna into the mix. I'm currently running 1.02.03, with a Larsen mobile antenna. It sucks, if I wanted a mobile unit I would have bought the 536. I haven't found a duck yet that has helped any reception on VHF/UHF Analog.

If I rig a counterpoise to the radio reception does get a bit better. Using the headphones does make things better. I'm starting to think this radio will not get fixed with a firmware update. I'll most likely just use the radio for digital in the future. IMHO, it's great on digital systems.

 

[lamarrsy]

Hi,
After a week or so I can't confirm there's an improvement, at least not enough --in my case-- to justify rolling back to 1.02.03

I, too, am very frustrated having a 700$ radio as deaf as this --on analog VHF for those just catching up on the topic--.
I am just pleased each time I turn on my Icom ID-51 with a 4" stubby duck and hear (Analog VHF) stations that the 436 zap over, not even knowing there's something there... And the ID-51 records audio too ... But no P25 though...

 

[sibbley]

Hi,
After a week or so I can't confirm there's an improvement, at least not enough --in my case-- to justify rolling back to 1.02.03

I, too, am very frustrated having a 700$ radio as deaf as this --on analog VHF for those just catching up on the topic--.
I am just pleased each time I turn on my Icom ID-51 with a 4" stubby duck and hear (Analog VHF) stations that the 436 zap over, not even knowing there's something there... And the ID-51 records audio too ... But no P25 though...

I feel your frustration, especially when someone has the gall to say what we are dealing with is "pilot error".

 

[kc5igh]

Analog VHF and UHF do get somewhat better by reverting to a previous firmware. But my experience shows it's not enough. The only real help is by adding a mobile antenna into the mix. I'm currently running 1.02.03, with a Larsen mobile antenna. It sucks, if I wanted a mobile unit I would have bought the 536. I haven't found a duck yet that has helped any reception on VHF/UHF Analog.

If I rig a counterpoise to the radio reception does get a bit better. Using the headphones does make things better. I'm starting to think this radio will not get fixed with a firmware update. I'll most likely just use the radio for digital in the future. IMHO, it's great on digital systems.

Thanks for the report, sibbley!

I was afraid that would be the outcome of reverting to the 1.02 firmware. Like you, I've found my 436 to be very sensitive to digital signals, so much so, in fact, that I've had to attenuate the radio to be able to track a local system that's transitioning from analog EDACS to P25.

-Johnnie

 

[kc5igh]

Hi,
After a week or so I can't confirm there's an improvement, at least not enough --in my case-- to justify rolling back to 1.02.03

I, too, am very frustrated having a 700$ radio as deaf as this --on analog VHF for those just catching up on the topic--.
I am just pleased each time I turn on my Icom ID-51 with a 4" stubby duck and hear (Analog VHF) stations that the 436 zap over, not even knowing there's something there... And the ID-51 records audio too ... But no P25 though...

Thanks, lamarrsy!

It looks like we may be stuck with a radio that seems to perform reasonably well on digital, but simply can't handle weaker analog signals. There are some lucky owners out there who are focused on monitoring P25 and P25 phase 2, but the rest of us have just been taught an expensive lesson by Uniden.

-Johnnie

 

[Farhad]

Alas, I can confirm what is said above. My BCD436HP (with firmware 1.03.00) does very poorly on airband and VHF but performs well on 700/800mhz. Replacing the stock antenna with a Diamond Original SRH789 did not solve this problem. In fact, my old RadioShack PRO-97 has a better airband and VHF performance then 436. Considering that the latest firmware did not solve this problem, I am afraid that it is cheapo/poor quality hardware which is to blame. For a unit that expensive, this absolutely unaccpetable, imho.

Farik

 

[sibbley]

Alas, I can confirm what is said above. My BCD436HP (with firmware 1.03.00) does very poorly on airband and VHF but performs well on 700/800mhz. Replacing the stock antenna with a Diamond Original SRH789 did not solve this problem. In fact, my old RadioShack PRO-97 has a better airband and VHF performance then 436. Considering that the latest firmware did not solve this problem, I am afraid that it is cheapo/poor quality hardware which is to blame. For a unit that expensive, this absolutely unaccpetable, imho.

Farik

Try reverting back to firmware 1.2.03 and turn squelch to 8. I've been having some good luck with these settings. I know, squelch at 8? But it seems to work better.

Go to Index of /files/firmwares/436 to get the firmware. Load 1.2.03 into the firmware folder on the SD card. Then turn off the scanner and the firmware will load.

Give it a shot, may help, may not.

You could also use a base antenna or a mobile. I get much better results on VHF/UHF using either of these antennas. I don't monitor air band so I can't say if any of my suggestions will make a difference there.

 

[Farhad]

You could also use a base antenna or a mobile.

Could you recommend a specific model?
Which antennas helped most?
(I rather try a better antenna then downgrading the firmware)

Thanks a lot in advance,

Farik

 

[sibbley]

Could you recommend a specific model?
Which antennas helped most?
(I rather try a better antenna then downgrading the firmware)

Thanks a lot in advance,

Farik

When at home I use the Antennacraft ST- 2 Antennacraft Scanner Antennas

Mobile I use this Laird antenna http://www.theantennafarm.com/catalog/laird-tech-a150-450c-5583.html

I can't speak for either antenna on air band as I only monitor public safety.

 

[Farhad]

When at home I use the Antennacraft ST- 2 Antennacraft Scanner Antennas
Mobile I use this Laird antenna http://www.theantennafarm.com/catalog/laird-tech-a150-450c-5583.html

thanks.
no handheld antennas?
Thanks a lot,
Farik

 

[sibbley]

thanks.
no handheld antennas?
Thanks a lot,
Farik

I have not found 1 duck antenna to work very well on VHF/UHF. If I use a duck it's only for 700/800MHZ, and I use the Spectrum Force 700MHZ antenna from Scanner Master.

 

[jonwienke]

This one works well on UHF/VHF for me:

Amazon.com: Diamond (Original) RH77CA 144/440 MHz. Dual-Band High Gain Handheld Antenna Rx: 120~900 MHz. (Gain: 440 Mhz. 2.15 dBi, Max Power: 10 Watts, Length: 15") BNC: Sports & Outdoors

As a bonus, it has a BNC connector, so I can leave the SMA-BNC adapter on the scanner all of the time. It makes switching antennas from the whip to the mobile or base and back much more convenient. And the wear from switching antennas happens to the adapter, which can be easily replaced if it starts having connection problems. Win-win-win.

 

[Farhad]

thanks!
I just ordered one too
Kind regards,
Farik

 

[SCPD]

RH-77ca

This one works well on UHF/VHF for me:

Amazon.com: Diamond (Original) RH77CA 144/440 MHz. Dual-Band High Gain Handheld Antenna Rx: 120~900 MHz. (Gain: 440 Mhz. 2.15 dBi, Max Power: 10 Watts, Length: 15") BNC: Sports & Outdoors

As a bonus, it has a BNC connector, so I can leave the SMA-BNC adapter on the scanner all of the time. It makes switching antennas from the whip to the mobile or base and back much more convenient. And the wear from switching antennas happens to the adapter, which can be easily replaced if it starts having connection problems. Win-win-win.

That is one great antenna for ham and scan!