BCD325P2/BCD996P2: BCD996P2 vs BCD536HP Reception differences

[BC2001]

Hi. I have both the scanners listed in the title.
I have noticed that the 536HP recieves analog traffic better (less static, clearer reception in general) than the 996P2.

The 996P2 seems to have more of a problem receiving the vhf/uhf frequencies with the same exact antenna.

But that's on most channels, besides the closest ones nearby.

Could this just be because its different models and designs or could there be an issue with my BCD996p2?

 

[buddrousa]

I do not see that with my large setup of 536's 996p2's 15's and 15x's all sharing the same antenna at the sametime.
Also on this setup is a TRX2 rs197 785d

 

[BC2001]

I do not see that with my large setup of 536's 996p2's 15's and 15x's all sharing the same antenna at the sametime.
Also on this setup is a TRX2 rs197 785d

Hm. I guess I'll just keep an eye (or ear 👂😉) on it. If it gets worse or something, I may just take it to the Uniden hospital. Haha, that just popped in my head and I couldnt resist.

Anyway, thanks for your reply !

 

[buddrousa]

I have programmed a sds200 536 996p2 and 15x to a county 30 miles away UHF Police and VHF Fire EMS analog and all 4 on my Shared antenna received the same signals with the same results

 

[Ubbe]

I would expect the 996p2 to be using the exact same radio circuit as the 15x. Have you compared the two? Tolerances in the specification usually allow for lots of leverage in sensitivity that Uniden usually doesn't do anything about, but if it is a big difference, as it seems to be, then it could be a bad component in the 996, like a diode damaged by a electrostatic discharge.

I assume you run your scanners from a splitter and a common antenna or it would be difficult to compare as when antennas are at the back of a scanner it can behave very differently and can have different distances to a local interference close to one of the scanners.

/Ubbe

 

[Bmacs]

BC,

I have seen the same thing... My BCD536 is the best analog (particularly AM Milair) scanner in my arsenal - and this was very surprising to me.
I like the 996P2 for general scanning and non-simulcast digital - it does very well, but the 536 is superior.

Bill

 

[Chris0516]

I had the 325p2, and have the 436HP. I recently sold my 325p2, to save up for an SDS100. The 325p2 had poorer reception, than my 436HP. I don't listen to much analog, other than aviation.

 

[BC2001]

I would expect the 996p2 to be using the exact same radio circuit as the 15x. Have you compared the two? Tolerances in the specification usually allow for lots of leverage in sensitivity that Uniden usually doesn't do anything about, but if it is a big difference, as it seems to be, then it could be a bad component in the 996, like a diode damaged by a electrostatic discharge.

I assume you run your scanners from a splitter and a common antenna or it would be difficult to compare as when antennas are at the back of a scanner it can behave very differently and can have different distances to a local interference close to one of the scanners.

/Ubbe

Thanks for the suggestion. I have tried comparing the two. And you are correct; the BCT15x & 996P2 both receive the same (slightly weaker than the 536HP. So, that helped alot!

Unfortunately, I have a new issue: BCD996P2: - Issue With Speaker?
Any help is appreciated.