BCD325P2/BCD996P2: Considering the Uniden BCD996P2

[KC2GVX]

I am looking for a base scanner that will do my county's new 700 P25 Phase 2 system this year and got some Christmas money to spend. I have been a Radio Shack / Whistler man for most of my scanners. I would be new to the Uniden club, and have a couple questions for you guys here.

1. Do I need a special cable to connect this scanner to my Windows 7 computer?
2. Is there free software included, and if not- what is the best out there? ( I am use to WIN 500 software)
3. How hard is this one to program by hand?
4. Is it worth spending the extra for the 536?

Thanks in advance, and Merry Christmas!

 

[ShyFlyer]

1. Do I need a special cable to connect this scanner to my Windows 7 computer?

Unlike the 996XT (it's predecessor), you don't need a special cable. A simple USB cable will work and I believe there is one in the box. You will have to download drivers ("Serial Drivers for USB") so that the scanner will be recognized by the PC.

BCD996P2 < UnidenMan4 < TWiki

2. Is there free software included, and if not- what is the best out there? ( I am use to WIN 500 software)

No software is included. FreeScan v2.18 is available for free via their website. I've only used FreeScan and find very easy to use once you understand Uniden's DMA style. Other software programs (ProScan, ARC-XT) are available, but they are not free.

Uniden DMA Software Support - The RadioReference Wiki

3. How hard is this one to program by hand?

I've never attempted to program by hand as the task looks far too daunting. However, there are those out there that say programming by hand is far easier.

4. Is it worth spending the extra for the 536?

This is subjective. Personally, while I like the ability to download the entire RadioReferance database with just a few clicks and the option to add ProVoice decoding capability, I don't like the fact that unless you create a Favorites List, you're stuck with the default RadioReferance text tags. Not that there is anything wrong with them, I just prefer tags that are more concise. I am also disappointed that the 536 does not have a color-customizable display like the 996XT and P2 have. I also like the SD card feature of the 536, allowing the user to make changes to the scanner's database without having to physically connect the scanner to a PC. Just be sure to switch the scanner off before removing the card and/or removing the power source lest you corrupt the SD card.

 

[SCPD]

Sounds like NJ likes to encrypt all of their police channels. The BCD996P2 is the better choice than the 536HP, IMHO. But neither scanner will help if/when all of the talkgroups are encrypted.

Use Freescan to program the 996P2...

 

[hiegtx]

I am looking for a base scanner that will do my county's new 700 P25 Phase 2 system this year and got some Christmas money to spend. I have been a Radio Shack / Whistler man for most of my scanners. I would be new to the Uniden club, and have a couple questions for you guys here.

1. Do I need a special cable to connect this scanner to my Windows 7 computer?

ShyFlyer & nick typed faster than I did.

The scanner comes with a cable, standard USB->USB Mini. (Note that you do NOT need the Uniden USB-1 cable, despite it's erroneous inclusion in the "Frequently bought together" items on Amazon's page (the other of the trio is the GPS puck). You may need to download a driver for the included cable to work, but that is freely available.

2. Is there free software included, and if not- what is the best out there? ( I am use to WIN 500 software)

No 'free' software is included with the 996P2. However, FreeSCAN does work on this product, and as the name implies, it is free. Your other, paid, software options are ProScan & ARC-XT.

3. How hard is this one to program by hand?

Manual programming instructions are available here: Easier to Read BCD996P2/XT Digital Scanner Manual
The scanner can be fully programmed manually, through the keyboard. However, programming by software is much quicker, as you know from using Win500. Plus, you can see virtually all required settings at the same time, making it easier & quicker to spot and correct minor omissions and errors made during data entry.

4. Is it worth spending the extra for the 536?

To me, it was. The built in record function allows recording of unidentified
channels and talkgroups, especially when the scanner is unattended. (That can be done using a computer as well, along with the log & record options in FreeSCAN or ProScan, or the "Pro" version of ARC-XT; not available with the 'Basic' version of ARC-XT.) However, in the 536, or it's portable sibling the 436HP, that can be done using the scanner alone, no computer needed other than to review and catalog recordings once you are back home.

Also, the 536HP has a "true" narrow-band filter, which makes it handle certain systems better than a scanner without that. In general, overall comments indicate that the 536 does a better job on most simulcast systems, but that varies greatly by the specific system and location.

If using a GPS while traveling, the 536, along with the built in database, makes monitoring while going down the road very easily done. While you can use a GPS with the 996P2, you would need to include the location data when building a programming file for your projected route.

Thanks in advance, and Merry Christmas!

You're welcome.
Have a safe and enjoyable holiday season.

 

[KC2GVX]

Thanks for the replies so far. It will be stationary, in my radio room. Nothing is Pro Voice around here, so that option is not of concern for me either. I mainly need it to monitor Ocean County's new 700 system that will be on line in 2016. NJ is quickly becoming the encryption capital of the US, but FD & EMS will still be in the clear.

 

[SOFA_KING]

To me, it was. The built in record function allows recording of unidentified
channels and talkgroups, especially when the scanner is unattended. (That can be done using a computer as well, along with the log & record options in FreeSCAN or ProScan, or the "Pro" version of ARC-XT; not available with the 'Basic' version of ARC-XT.) However, in the 536, or it's portable sibling the 436HP, that can be done using the scanner alone, no computer needed other than to review and catalog recordings once you are back home.

Also, the 536HP has a "true" narrow-band filter, which makes it handle certain systems better than a scanner without that. In general, overall comments indicate that the 536 does a better job on most simulcast systems, but that varies greatly by the specific system and location.

If using a GPS while traveling, the 536, along with the built in database, makes monitoring while going down the road very easily done. While you can use a GPS with the 996P2, you would need to include the location data when building a programming file for your projected route.

Good points. To add to that, the 996P2, which I have and use for my local county monitoring, doesn't support manual P25 adjustments even though there is a place in FreeScan to do that. Mine always defaults back to AUTO, and that is a range limiter on my P25 reception. The weaker stuff I get well on my 536 (and 436) using a MANUAL setting works great, while the AUTO on the 996P2 breaks up the weak stuff. I like to hear those direct surveillance coms right down to the weakest signal I may need in order to follow the action as much as possible. And by the way, this MANUAL setting also makes a nearby simulcast system monitorable, while AUTO scanners can't get anything but broken coms on that system. Plus the 536 and 436 reject intermod images a bit better than my 996P2. The 536 & 436 work better than any other scanners I have...and I have them all...well, all the new top-of-the-line scanners.

One more thing...The 996P2 doesn't support (from what I can see) multiple rectangle location control, where you can practically recreate the exact borders of any state, county, city or town by creating boxes. I like tight borderlines on my location control. x36 scanners can do that..

That being said, I enjoy my 996P2 for local trunked, and local analog listening. I also love that color display...and the sound is real good too. If a more intermod resistant receiver, max P25 range (and better simulcast reception using MANUAL P25 control), advanced features for searching systems, recording, tight GPS border location control, and the built in database are not of interest, the 996P2 is a decent choice for a good sounding (and good looking) scanner.

Phil

 

[eaf1956]

Just remember the 996P2 ships absolutely BLANK. Nothing is programmed and it has no software included. I have both the 536HP and the 996P2, the 536HP works better with the GPS and mobile. The P2 does great at home or mobile if you don't travel far. Both will reboot on engine start w/o some kind of stabilization of the voltage. At home I would pick the P2 because I like that format screen over the 536HP white screen. One advantage of the 536HP is you can put it on your local network and access it anywhere in your house from programs like ProScan.

 

[Fireboat03]

Thanks for the replies so far. It will be stationary, in my radio room. Nothing is Pro Voice around here, so that option is not of concern for me either. I mainly need it to monitor Ocean County's new 700 system that will be on line in 2016. NJ is quickly becoming the encryption capital of the US, but FD & EMS will still be in the clear.

Actually Southern California has been the encryption capital of the world for some years now. There has been some LE agencies that have been encrypted for 15 years plus now. NJ is just catching up to the rest of the country as to the rest of the cities and counties too.

As to the 996P2 you are making a good decision. I have three of them and love them. Bullet proof. Stay away from that BCD536HP. Its a lemon