Best scanner to look into, not SDS Series?
- Thread starter chad_96
- Start date
Ubbe
Member
If you need the RR database and SD card recording, discovery and LCN finder, then its probably the best one but if you don't need those features, you already know what to scan, then the 996p2 will probably have a slightly better receiver and can do P25phase2 and be upgraded to DMR and NXDN. If not needing those modes, now or in the future, then the plain 996 will do fine, they both have excellent RF performance and comes at a lower price than 536. Those who live in simulcast areas will sell their non-simulcast scanners at a low price.
/Ubbe
Many mixed suggestions. I have had the 200, 536 and 996. I currently own the 200 and 996. Much prefer the 996 over the 536, just personal opinion. Much easier to use on a day to day basis. The 200 is useful for more in depth scanning because of the display info. Only issue for me is difficulty of keeping data updated between them having to use 2 separate programs but I do not have to do often.
I have the 200 tweaked pretty well so it is equal to the 996 on most reception. Each has its + and - . As stated above, it will be easier with the 536 if you have to change data a lot since sentinel can handle both your radios easily. However, not like others have mention, I found the 536 somewhat less sensitive and less pleasant on audio to the 200 and 996. Again just personal.
I have the 200 tweaked pretty well so it is equal to the 996 on most reception. Each has its + and - . As stated above, it will be easier with the 536 if you have to change data a lot since sentinel can handle both your radios easily. However, not like others have mention, I found the 536 somewhat less sensitive and less pleasant on audio to the 200 and 996. Again just personal.
Bob1955
Member
Uniden Bearcat BCD996P2- Very reliable and "trouble" free.
So, you're SDS200 was your best option. No other radio does well on any of the simulcast systems on Colorado DTRS. I had a BC436HP before I got the SDS100 when I lived there and it was missing so many transmissions and cutting off half of comms. I'd stick with your SDS200 as you aren't going to get any better reception via those others. Especially not the BC436HP.
Why all the filter fighting? I've never set any filters on my SDS100 and had great results.
Last edited:
I actually don't have simulcast anywhere near me in Colorado.
I would just like to get into another scanner that has the best receiver. The 200 is just awful and allows way to much interference. I also believe from what I've read that it would be more beneficial on weaker signals to get a scanner with a better receiver than the SDS line offers.
From what I've been advised and read thay would again lead to the 996p2 or more preferred 536hp. But I'm not familiar with either. Also shows Colorado is phase 1 on the radioreference database. But have seen its phase 2. So not to sure what's going on there.
So where are you actually located in Colorado? What systems are you trying to scan? If you are talking about the dtrs state system you will need a SDS 100 or 200 as that is a simulcast system. If you are talking about analog conventional frequencies you can get away with a BC 125at or something like the bcd996p2 or something along those lines. What are you trying to scan where are you located would help a lot
I'm in the southeast corner of Colorado.
Per many conversations from others who are definitely experienced and then more, I have had zero tell me that the State of Colorado DTRS statewide system is a simulcast system. This is a first.
As a matter of fact, when I was fighting an issue I thought maybe it was in the simulcast/multi-cast category. This based on some things I was experiencing. With the Colorado DTRS system being dually noted. I was told my area was neither of those.
Again, this is mind boggling you say it's a simulcast system. I've also been advised that the SDS series is claimed to be the only scanner to handle simulcast, and that's also false, depending on the system.
I apologize. I missed the few things you specifically asked about.
I'm scanning Otero/Bent Counties as well as Colorado State Patrol. My 2 key sites for my listening are the La Junta and Fort Lyon Correctional Sites.
So yes those counties are included and on the state dtrs system. As well as CSP.. simulcast systems you aren't likely to find anything better than the sds200 to scan those systems.
That is understandable. I agree from the hundreds of threads I've read that the SDS series is the best at handling simulcast.
However, I would inquire more so why you have been the first and only person who has said the Colorado DTRS statewide system is all simulcast? Again, ive had a truck load of people tell me it's not. I have also read that it's also not a total simulcast system, only certain areas.
I'm not arguing that you are incorrect. I'm curious, and much more confused as to how you came to this conclusion...?
Well perhaps then it was just my area maybe not all areas but my area was so as far as that goes the area I lived in was and like I said before the only radio that I found to scan that Statewide system the best was the SDS 100 or 200
No...I think you just solved a big piece of the puzzle I have been trying to solve.
I did a simple Google search just now (of all things) and it says,
"
Yes, Colorado's statewide Digital Trunking Radio System (DTRS) is considered a simulcast system, meaning multiple transmitters broadcast the same radio signal on the same frequency to extend coverage across a large area; this is particularly evident in the state's public safety communications network, which utilizes the DTRS system with multiple simulcast zones to achieve wide reach. "
So, it appears you are absolutely correct. And that may be a big factor on SOME of the issues I've been having along my journey with the SDS 100 and 200.
The Colorado system is operating in simulcast. Simply, when I thought it was operating in a simulcast manner, I was correct and told no. That was incorrect and my intuition was correct all along.
I assume you monitor the Colorado DTRS system normally as well? Either way, thanks for the advice and help.. you solved a major piece of the puzzle for me. Now to figure out thr biggest problems I'm facing and keep ahold of the SDS scanners!
I don't follow it any longer I have since moved out of state but I did for 8 years I scanned that system I was always under the impression that it was simulcast that's what I had learned that's what I read and that's one of the reasons that I switched out my BCD 436 HP for a Uniden SDS 100 originally. I don't know who had been telling you that it was not I don't know that it is listed as a simulcast system in radio reference but just an FYI radio reference is only as good as what is input into it by whomever. So if it is not updated properly then it's going to have errant information. Best of luck to you
Understood.
I know someone who has an older radioshack scanner, thing is always plagued with digital garble. Not all thr time but a fair amount sometimes. That among some things I discovered tinkering with my programming led me to think my area was dealing with simulcast. too many folks on here told me no, there's no simulcast in my area. Couldn't keep track of them all.
Anyhow, I don't know what a scanner would act like in a simulcast area, if it didn't handle simulcast. Just made me a little suspicious the way the ladies radioshack scanner always acted. Hear good sometimes, a lot of the digital garble other times.
Nonetheless, I do know I wad told if my sites had different frequencies and none the same, it wasn't simulcast. And thats true that neither of mine have any of the same frequencies. But I sure can hear the exact same radio transmissions from a user on either site, irregardless of the frequencies. This being the major reason I looked at the simulcast possibilities.
Thanks again for the advice!
Colorado DTRS is Project 25 Phase I. Where have you seen that it is phase 2?
While there are some simulcast sites on CO DTRS, simulcast will not be a factor in his area near LaJunta. I will note that Pueblo does have a simulcast site.
The Colorado State system seems similar to my home system, in Minnesota, ARMER. We have a lot of simulcast in the Metro and then more so single sites in the rural/outstate areas. My old Radio Shack scanners don't work at all for most of our sites, minus a few. I run Unication G5's in addition to my Department radios. I too played the game with my Uniden 436/536HP with Simulcast and non Simulcast sites, and it was kind-of a lost cause. I ended up selling them, and have considered getting an SDS, but haven't yet. I would say to keep your SDS's, and perhaps start from scratch. If you have Facebook, there are many scanner groups, and one gentlemen in particular, who is extremely good at programming, and he is able to help a lot of folks with their issues. Send me a PM if you'd like some more information. I'd be happy to help in anyway I can.
You'll have to see if the site you want to monitor is actually simulcast. I know at least some of it isn't I was just out there visiting my daughter in Greeley and while Weld county was simulcast on the front range system the DTRS site I was listening too was not simulcast. I actually monitored that when first got there on my 536 prior to getting my Unication pager re-programmed. I don't remember which site it was though. "Something" mountain. I know that won't help out there a lot.
RMason,
I had done a simple Google search, versus going to the radioreference database at that time, for time saving purposes and a quick answer. On that Google search it said that the Colorado DTRS system was phase 2.
However, after that I had gone to the database, where it states the Colorado DTRS system Phase 1, after overlooking it on the database.
Ultimately, absolutely confusing. But I have went with the intentions of it being Phase 1, as indicated in the database as it would be the best and most reliable resource, unless it happened to be incorrect.
As far as the simulcast situation. That has been the major confusion. I have been reading on simulcast, and Colorado. It seems the Colorado DTRS system only operates "In a similar way" as simulcast. But, is not actually a simulcast system completely, unless noted as simulcast.This of course I just read minutes ago as I started looking further Into it all.
Similar threads
