BCD436HP or SDS100...?
- Thread starter sloper48
- Start date
- Status
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2007
- Messages
- 6,174
I personally think so!
Check the database for your state to see how many simulcast towers are around you. If you have allot, a 436 will work but could have issues with many simulcast towers. The SDS series was built to handle the simulcast towers allot better. You could buy a used 436 to try out. If it doesn’t work out, sell it for a SDS100. Always 436 for sale on this forum. My SDS200 does do a better job at home than the 436 when I compared them. But the 436 is used for on the road only. Works for me. Good luck on your decision.
Welcome to the forums. If you have a simulcast TRS in your area you're interested in monitoring then YES, it definitely is worth the extra $$$
Hello, sloper48.
In my experience, the SDS100 is worth the money if you're trying to monitor linear simulcast modulation systems. Nothing else compares to its simulcast performance, except the Unication G5 or an expensive radio from a manufacturer like Motorola or Harris.
Having said that, my BCD436HP and my BCD325P2 are somewhat better performers than the SDS100 on non-simulcast digital systems and conventional signals.
Your mileage will probably vary, depending on where you're located relative to the systems you're trying to monitor.
-Johnnie (KC5IGH)
I'm not a fan of any of my micosd card scanners. I still prefer the older DMA scanners such as the GOAT Uniden 396XT.
Yup! The 396XT was a great little scanner, but it could only handle P25 Phase 1 transmissions, and it didn't have recording capabilities, as do the newer micro SD card scanners.
I still drag out my 396XT and 396T for occasional, nostalgic scanning sessions that don't require P25 Phase 2, other digital modes, or recording.
-Johnnie (KC5IGH)
For this listener, I have mixed feelings about spending the money for the SDS 100. However, I experience minimal linear simulcast distortion here in Waco, Texas. However, if I visit a dense scanning environment like Houston, Texas, there is no comparison. The SDS 100/200 locks on like a pit bull.
Despite many SDS 100 adjustments, it is still slower than a snail on Librium. My 435HP hits quicker.
If you do buy the Uniden 436/536 or SDS 100/200, make sure you get a 700/800 MHz antenna. I don't know what works on the SDS 200 since it is a base unit.
Nostalgia? The 396XT is STILL a highly capable scanner! While I do run my SDS100 and SDS200 often for Phase 2, DMR and NXDN I still prefer my 396XT for everything else! It has better analog performance by a country mile.
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2007
- Messages
- 6,174
So all of these replies are very appropriate and good advice, the ultimate decision is your own. Not worth getting into a needs assessment of your systems Etc. That's on you, look it up in the database and see what kind of phase ll tdma systems are relevant to you in addition to phase l simulcast systems.
As far as conventional systems, the SDS radios are excellent in this area, the very best aircraft performance I've seen, you just have to know how to properly program them, using the tools available in the radio. Most users have no idea, but that is slowly changing.
If I could recommend, look up the discussions on your particular area and what is relevant, check out your database and see what your needs are. It's not easy, takes some work and you can't count on people to do the work for you as they did in the past.
Go on to your state forum, after researching what exactly is in your area look it up and see what others say in your area and they'll pretty much tell you what radio works best.
You are spending a lot of money, you might decide to spend a little more if you find out that discussions are talking about a future simulcast system in your area, that means that the 436 would work now but not in the future after the changeover so the extra money would future proof you. The 436 is 8 years old.
Let us know what you decide!
As far as conventional systems, the SDS radios are excellent in this area, the very best aircraft performance I've seen, you just have to know how to properly program them, using the tools available in the radio. Most users have no idea, but that is slowly changing.
If I could recommend, look up the discussions on your particular area and what is relevant, check out your database and see what your needs are. It's not easy, takes some work and you can't count on people to do the work for you as they did in the past.
Go on to your state forum, after researching what exactly is in your area look it up and see what others say in your area and they'll pretty much tell you what radio works best.
You are spending a lot of money, you might decide to spend a little more if you find out that discussions are talking about a future simulcast system in your area, that means that the 436 would work now but not in the future after the changeover so the extra money would future proof you. The 436 is 8 years old.
Let us know what you decide!
Last edited:
No doubt these scanners are great "IF" you know how to program them. My old 396T kicked butt. But it took me 2 months to figure out the digital side. 95% of folks know how to use a computer. Uniden did a great job with sentinal for the 436/536 and SDS100/200. Beats punching in all the frequencies like before. And its great to actually record something of interest. Older ones can't do this. Old and new scanners have there place of duty.
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2021
- Messages
- 97
This information is really helpful to me as well, Im in the market to upgrade my 325P2 as things like replay and recording have become things I've ended up wanting or needing for various reasons. I live in Eastern MA so I have to deal with conventional analog, 400mhz P25 and both a Moto Trunk that still runs analog and the States new P25 system. Others have stated that analog conventional on the SDS is poor but @trentbob you say thigs is the best Airband performance you've seen. So do you or others think the SDS's issues on conventional analog come down to users not knowing how to program it and make the most of the radio or are legacy scanners such as the 436 and 325P2 better than Uniden's latest offerings.
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2007
- Messages
- 6,174
There are so many different opinions and different levels of understanding. Blanket assumptions and beliefs. So many factors you have to consider. The antenna that you are using can have a lot to do with it.
It has been my experience using the SDS radios since they were both introduced is that they do deliver the best reception in all areas that I listen to including conventional VHF High, aircraft, UHF conventional, nxdn and 7-800 MHz phase l and Phase ll simulcast systems. If for some reason you don't need to listen to simulcast systems and don't need that improved performance with simulcast distortion secondary to LSM, other radios like the x36 and others work great on conventional objects.
I'm not sure why some people say otherwise but it might have to do with the way they program the radio or not using all of the tools available like filters properly.
For example, aircraft frequencies are deaf in my area unless I apply IFX to each one of them. Filter wise they do great on default which is normal filter.
All one has to do is Google what IFX is, read about it and try it. There's also a lot of confusion about global filters and applying filters directly to the sites of a particular system or department options of a group of conventional frequencies.
Global filters are used to sample systems and conventional frequencies for improvement as they affect every single object on the radio. This must be done on the radio itself using the keyboard so you can assess real time reception indicators like noise level and error rate on systems or RSSI and noise level on conventional objects. Once you find an improvement, you return Global filters to their default which is normal which puts every object on the radio on normal unless you go in to the sites of a particular system and change the filter on those particular sites. Or you go into department options of a group of conventional objects and change to filter in department options. By returning Global filters to default or normal it doesn't compromise objects that work well on normal.
I can understand someone changing the Global filter to improve and accommodate one system or conventional object but ruining reception on a majority of other systems and conventional objects because the filter is applied to them too and it's not optimal, the assumption is, poor performance on conventional objects, but it's really user error.
I agree that it's a lot of fine-tuning that some people don't have tolerance and patience for, don't understand or don't want to have to deal with. The bottom line is it works.
The conventional frequencies like aircraft, marine radio, Railroad, VHF hi frequencies that rebroadcast fire frequencies from simulcast systems, amateur radio frequencies all come in great on my radio after I do whatever I have to do to adjust them whether it be IFX, or filter adjustment or doing absolutely nothing which would be using normal filter which is default for Global filters.
That's been my experience, I use a rather simple Sputnik ground plane. Seems to work the best for me, I'm close to the trunked systems I monitor and it does a great job on conventional frequencies.
Everybody's results are different, I have found the SDS radios to deliver optimal reception on anything I listen to.
Last edited:
Ubbe
Member
If you have issues receiving simulcast systems then there's not much else to choose from than a SDS scanner, if you still want to use a scanner with all its features.
Uniden managed to set the correct narrow demodulation AM filter in SDS, as it is under software control, so that VHF-AIR sounds fantastic. In other Uniden scanners it uses too wide filters and in BC780 it even uses the FM wide filter and not the more narrow, but still too wide, NFM.
But the receiver in itself are too poor and Uniden had to come up with different ways to try and compensate for that, the many filter settings are one method that demands a lot from a user to try and figure out how to test and when to apply a filter setting. But it will only shift the problem to another frequency and not eliminate it. If you are unlucky non of the settings will help as you could replace one problematic interference with another one.
SDS100 test
Another performance test
/Ubbe
I would also like to add IF you're going to spend the time to learn how to program them, and not jump on the forum after you turn it on asking "how do I adjust the squelch", or "how do I stop on a channel only". Take the time, don't buy all the extras until you get a grasp on the most important part, learning how to use it.
fantasma25
Member
I sold my sds100, got fed up with the sloooooooow scanning speed! Even booting up is slow !!! I live in the Los Angeles area and find that my 436 works fine for what I need.
I enjoy it when others agree with me, LOL.
Probably less people agree with you because they're not seeing the same results. I'm sure many of your problems were more to do with your programming than the scanner itself and I recall many of us making suggestions about reducing sites, filter usage, IFX, and changing modulation to FM, changing Volume Offset settings and on and on, but you moved on to something that works for you and not everyone thought the previous models worked that well for them. The SDS series will be a little slower because unlike it's predecessors, it actually stops and samples the DATA from a control channel and looks for Talkgroups instead of zooming by it because it can't properly decode a simulcast system. For me, that trade off for a milisecond or two in scan speed is well worth it.
We can discuss the "copper foil fix on the battery compartment" in order to get the 436 to receive the 460Mhz. band, the lack of power using 4 AA's and lasting about 4-5 hours, let's not get into the awful simulcast distortion issue again, and the thing was huge compared to sticking my SDS100 in my back or jacket pocket and being "low key", but that's just me.
I'd surely like to see some firmware improvements on the SDS scanners, and because many of us submitted debug logs to UPMan, we were able to get the x36hp scanners to decode and receive Cap+, DMR One Frequency, and all the NXDN type systems and the engineering staff sent out beta firmware for us to test and send back suggested improvements, were able to make it the best possible which carried on to the SDS series, and any future scanners if capable.
So...mark me as one that doesn't agree with your assessment, and I'm glad you found what you're happy with...at least for the time being, because as radio systems evolve, and simulcast systems become more common where you're at, you'll be back or you'll be getting a pager instead, and new problems will develop.
- Status
