I apologize for not answering your question.
Yes, I have monitored both the Wauseon and Lucas County Simulcast with no results.
Home Patrol 2 issue with Northwest Ohio Regional Public Safety System.
- Thread starter Greg43545
- Start date
- Status
I apologize for not answering your question.
Yes, I have monitored both the Wauseon and Lucas County Simulcast with no results.
So, which Remtronics 800 antenna would you recommend to resolve an issue of poor receiving signal for a 771.70625 freq. on an HP-2?
Since the antenna jack on the HP-2 is SMA female (and I assume you use the radio's stand,) you will need a SMA male to BNC adapter like this:
Then you can use a Remtronix REM-830A antenna, which is a right-angle BNC mount:
Amazon.com: DHT Electronics 2pcs RF coaxial coax adapter SMA male to BNC female: Electronics
Buy DHT Electronics 2pcs RF coaxial coax adapter SMA male to BNC female: Gender Changers - Amazon.com ✓ FREE DELIVERY possible on eligible purchases
www.amazon.com
Then you can use a Remtronix REM-830A antenna, which is a right-angle BNC mount:
Amazon.com: REMTronix REM-830B UHF BNC Antenna: Electronics
Buy REMTronix REM-830B UHF BNC Antenna: Radio Antennas - Amazon.com ✓ FREE DELIVERY possible on eligible purchases
www.amazon.com
Will the REMTronix REM-830B resolve my issue of poor receiving signal for a 771.70625 freq. on an HP-2?
I want to make sure I buy the correct antenna the first time that will resolve my issue rather than buying one antenna after another until I find the correct one to resolve my issue.
Unfortunately it is impossible to say. Everyone's listening situation is unique, thus trial-and-error is the only method that works 100%, lol. That's why a *lot* of us have a pile of unused gear, cables, wire, adapters, antennas - and radios...
My reservation with this particular solution is that I personally have never used the right-angle Remtronix antenna, but I have used the SMA and BNC straight version with excellent results. An alternate config *could* be a right-angle SMA male to SMA female adapter, and use a SMA Remtronix. The adapters introduce a fractional dB signal loss. Ideally, you would want a SMA antenna to mount directly to the SMA antenna jack on the radio, but the HP-2's design precludes that option.
I think you know my ultimate suggestion I mentioned earlier.
Last edited:
They are essentially identical in RF performance, but I prefer the solid construction and audio power of the SDS200. And it has other secondary features that support networking / streaming. I replaced my SDS100 with a Unication because I like the G5's commercial grade construction and form factor - I knocked the SDS100 off a table more than once (the SDS100 has a smallish base and is a bit top heavy.)
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2016
- Messages
- 858
I have a Coment BNC W100RX antenna on my SDS200, fully extended. It does still pick up the 700Mhz CLMRN system we have here, but in comparing it with my SDS100 that has the Remtronix antenna, the SDS100 performs better on that system.
That being said, the reason why I have the Comet antenna on the SDS200 and did not get one of the Remtronix for it is that the SDS200 picks up certain analog frequencies that the SDS200, and even some other units, fail to. The issue in my case is location. Topography and woodland working together to make scanning difficult.
The SDS100, in comparison, performs poorly on the analog frequencies mentioned above, hence my using the Comet antenna on the SDS200 for now.
OK, thank you for the info.
I realize Remtronix Antennas differ in physical qualities ( IE: Straight, L-Shaped, BNC, SMA, Etc. )
With that being said would all Remtronix Antennas be the same in quality and ability to resolve my issue of poor receiving signal for a 771.70625 freq. on an HP-2?
OR, would some models be better in doing so than others?
With that being said would all Remtronix Antennas be the same in quality and ability to resolve my issue of poor receiving signal for a 771.70625 freq. on an HP-2?
OR, would some models be better in doing so than others?
I believe that as for the antenna itself, all three versions should be the same. The antenna with "elbow" (the swivel joint) might have slightly less performance since the swivel is a "connector" between the antenna and it's connector. However, it likely would not be enough of a difference to notice. Other than the combination adapter noted below, you're going to have two connections between the scanner and the working part of the antenna.
If you bought your HP-2 new, you should have received an SMA Mail to BNC female with it. Sometimes it's esay to overlook, as it's stuck in a fold or pocket of the cardboard packing that keeps the scanner secure during shipping. If you don't have that adapter, then you'd need to purchase one.
The adapter that maus92 linked above in post 43 would work to adapt the scanner. However, I prefer one like this, from Amazon.
Amazon.com: DHT Electronics 2pcs RF coaxial Coax Adapter SMA Male to BNC Female goldplated: Electronics
Amazon.com: DHT Electronics 2pcs RF coaxial Coax Adapter SMA Male to BNC Female goldplated: Electronics
www.amazon.com
That one screws down flat on the scanner, giving it more support. The adapter that Uniden ships with the scanner looks like that, but with a silver color. I like this one that Universal Radio sells. It's black color makes it look like part of the scanner when tightened down (item #0292 on this page). That's what I use on my HP-1 & HP-2, along with a 90 degree BNC male to BNC female. While that is "two connections", there is not enough loss to matter. I'm not missing anything that I should be able to hear because of the potential loss of signal strength caused by inserting the adapters.
This combination adapter, that I linked in a previous post, has the SMA male to connect to the scanner, an elbow, so that the antenna can be adjusted vertically when sitting in it's holder or on a desktop, and the BNC female end for the antenna.
I want to thank EVERYBODY for the tremendous help and advice given to me here - I truly appreciate you all.
Since I do indeed have the SMA Male to BNC female adapter that came with my HP-2, I have decided to purchase the Remtronix REM830B and hope that it resolves my issue of poor signal receiving for a 771.70625 freq. on my HP-2
Thank you all again. I brag about Radio Reference and the help that can be found here to all my family and friends.
Since I do indeed have the SMA Male to BNC female adapter that came with my HP-2, I have decided to purchase the Remtronix REM830B and hope that it resolves my issue of poor signal receiving for a 771.70625 freq. on my HP-2
Thank you all again. I brag about Radio Reference and the help that can be found here to all my family and friends.
I purchased the Remtronix ( REM-830B ) and it arrived today. I attached it to my HP-2 and I'm sad to say it did not improve the reception of a signal for 771.70625 of the Northwest Ohio Regional Public Safety System. I'm disappointed to say the least that it didn't resolve my issue.
I assume it is safe to say that even though my HP-2 was able to receive a signal " out and about " mobile, it is incapable of receiving a signal inside my home and will probably need to be replaced.
As I stated previously, my BCD325P2 is working fine receiving the signal inside my home and broadcasting the traffic.
With that being said I need to ask ... If my BCD325P2 is receiving the signal inside my home, will the SDS-200 be able to receive a signal and correct my issue?
I know anything is possible and nothing is certain, but before I spend $700-$800 on a scanner I would like some reassurances.
I assume it is safe to say that even though my HP-2 was able to receive a signal " out and about " mobile, it is incapable of receiving a signal inside my home and will probably need to be replaced.
As I stated previously, my BCD325P2 is working fine receiving the signal inside my home and broadcasting the traffic.
With that being said I need to ask ... If my BCD325P2 is receiving the signal inside my home, will the SDS-200 be able to receive a signal and correct my issue?
I know anything is possible and nothing is certain, but before I spend $700-$800 on a scanner I would like some reassurances.
The SDS200 is a far better radio than the HP-2. However, since you have had a good experience with the 325 on the system you want to monitor, you might try a BCD996P2 which is of the same design generation (more or less) of the 325 . Since you probably won't suffer from simulcast issues if you monitor the multicast site, it's worth a try before you go all in on a SDS. If you start wanting to monitor simulcast, then buy the SDS and skip the 996P2. Buy from a retailer that accepts returns without a restocking fee.
My SDS200 is sitting inside the house, and is not connected to an external (rooftop) antenna. However, it is receiving systems that some of the other scanners (BCD436HP & BCD536HP) cannot. If your 325P2 can receive the system, an SDS200 should be at least as sensitive, if not more. You can use the REM-830B antenna on an SDS200 or 996P2.
Simulcast is kryptonite to the HomePatrol models. In head to head testing comparing the HomePatrol2, 436HP, and SDS100, the HomePatrol got maybe 30-40% of traffic, and the 436 got about 60-70% compared to the SDS100.
It looks like the SDS-200 is the way to go.
Quick question to all - I noticed at the top of the page an SDS-200 is on sale for $649.00, yet when I click on the Ad link it shows a price for $699.00.
Does anyone know how to get the $649.00 price?
Quick question to all - I noticed at the top of the page an SDS-200 is on sale for $649.00, yet when I click on the Ad link it shows a price for $699.00.
Does anyone know how to get the $649.00 price?
It doesn't exist. A bit of bait and switch. However, if you watch HRO website, they will occasionally list "open-box" SDS200s for about $70 off. Likely returned because they are complicated radios, or did not meet a buyer's expectations. I purchased an open box 536 from them a few years ago - could barely tell it was "used."
How does the BCD996P2 compare to the SDS-200 as far % getting simulcast ?
Stinks. You cannot give an accurate "%" because each reception situation is unique. If you want to receive simulcast reliably with the 996P2, you will need to be very, very close to one tower of the simulcast site, and far away from the others. The reason for this is you want the one close site to overpower all other sites. If two or more simulcast towers are more or less equal distant, their signals will interfere with each other wrt a non-optimised receiver. For example, I use a 536 to monitor our statewide system. I live about 1/2 mile from a member tower of the statewide network's simulcast cell that covers our county. All the other member towers of the simulcast cell are at least 7 miles away, thus the signal from the nearby site overwhelms the signal from the other 10 sites in the simulcast cell. If I take the 536 on the road, i.e get closer to more than one tower, reception degrades.
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
