If money was no object should i up grade my536 and 436

Would you

  • Yes I would

    Votes: 6 60.0%
  • Your an idiot

    Votes: 4 40.0%

  • Total voters
    10
  • Poll closed .

kg6hvm

Newbie
Joined
Jun 12, 2022
Messages
2
I have both scanners and they have all the upgrades. Cost not being a factor. Should I get the sds 100 and 200. Am I going to gain anything or would it ge a waist of money. I had them in my cart and almost hit checkouy
 

KT4HX

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
693
Location
Spotsylvania County, Va
Are the scanners you have now doing everything you need them to do in your particular location? Do you have to deal with simulcast issues, which can cause problems for the 436/536 models? I am sure you're aware that you cannot transfer the upgrades you installed on your 436/536 models to the SDS models, as the upgrades are specific to each individual scanner.

To me, if what you have is working as you need them to for your location, you may not need to pull that trigger. If you are having simulcast issues on some systems you want to monitor then you may well wish to pull that trigger. Also even if you don't have simulcast problems now, its always possible you might in the future. If money is absolutely no object and you simply want the latest models from Uniden, then pull that trigger. But the fact you thought about it and didn't initially makes me think that maybe you are happy with what you have, and that the money could be used for other things that you like to do. Your call.
 

eaf1956

Member
Feed Provider
Joined
May 11, 2007
Messages
3,351
Location
Evansville, IN
I have both scanners and they have all the upgrades. Cost not being a factor. Should I get the sds 100 and 200. Am I going to gain anything or would it ge a waist of money. I had them in my cart and almost hit checkouy
If Money is not a problem just buy the new scanners and keep the older ones. Ask Buddrousa
 

kg6hvm

Newbie
Joined
Jun 12, 2022
Messages
2
Are the scanners you have now doing everything you need them to do in your particular location? Do you have to deal with simulcast issues, which can cause problems for the 436/536 models? I am sure you're aware that you cannot transfer the upgrades you installed on your 436/536 models to the SDS models, as the upgrades are specific to each individual scanner.

To me, if what you have is working as you need them to for your location, you may not need to pull that trigger. If you are having simulcast issues on some systems you want to monitor then you may well wish to pull that trigger. Also even if you don't have simulcast problems now, its always possible you might in the future. If money is absolutely no object and you simply want the latest models from Uniden, then pull that trigger. But the fact you thought about it and didn't initially makes me think that maybe you are happy with what you have, and that the money could be used for other things that you like to do. Your call.
Thanks for taking the time to reply. That's the answer I thought I was going to get. I will hold off (for now) My scanners work great and I really have not had a problem with simulcast. I just mention the upgrades as I would have to add that to the cost of the replacement scanners. I'm just an old ham with more dollars than sense.
 

Nascar18

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Mar 3, 2005
Messages
334
Location
Southeast Massachusetts
Because the SDS 200 operates differently from most scanners, system, dept. and channel soft keys and if you have P-25 (digital) trunking sites near by I would buy the SDS 200 scanner. If you want it to monitor UHF 450-485mhz systems the SDS 200 still has the crackling sound after transmissions that is very annoying. Uniden tried to fix the crackling noise with an firmware update in 2019 and is still a problem today.
 
Last edited:

bearcatrp

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Apr 11, 2005
Messages
2,497
Location
Land of 10,000 taxes
Your 536 may be working good for you but you may not even know your missing frequencies. Do you have 3 or more simulcast towers around you? If so, upgrade to the SDS200 first. Don’t sell the 536 yet. Run them both side by side. If by chance the 536 is keeping up with the 200, send the 200 back for a refund. But, as time moves on, more simulcast towers will pop up. Within 3 years, my area went from 3 to 7 towers. Good luck with your decision.
 

trentbob

W3BUX- Bucks County, PA
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Feb 22, 2007
Messages
5,605
Because the SDS 200 operates differently from most scanners, system, dept. and channel soft keys and if you have P-25 (digital) trunking sites near by I would buy the SDS 200 scanner. If you want it to monitor UHF 450-485mhz systems the SDS 200 still has the crackling sound after transmissions that is very annoying. Uniden tried to fix the crackling noise with an firmware update in 2019 and is still a problem today.
Appreciate that comment, if you've mastered the x36, you can pretty much take theSDS-100 and 200 out of the box and treat it the same, some fun tweaking with filters that will take care of imperfections with the x36 radios who are 8 years old, but it's the same radio with simulcast reception.

I'd love to be in a position of money as no object.. sigh.
 

Ubbe

Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2006
Messages
8,944
Location
Stockholm, Sweden
You would gain a bigger color display and a SDS scanner would be able to handle any simulcast systems you would like to monitor. Functions and features are the same between BCD and SDS except that SDS do not have any audio AGC function that could make it more annoying to listen to users that have different modulation levels.

The receiver in SDS scanners do not perform as good as the BCD's and Uniden added filter settings to try and compensate for it. In a problematic RF environment it could still be difficult to receive systems without getting interfered. The project manager for Unidens scanners said that if you do not have any simulcast issues then he would recommend going with the BCD scanners.

There's no problem listening to different analog and digital systems using the internal speaker of a BCD436 but my SDS100 needs an external speaker to get equal sound quality. The scan speed of a SDS100 with the latest firmware are half of what BCD436 can do, 45ch/s compared to 85ch/s.

/Ubbe
 

pinballwiz86

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 15, 2013
Messages
1,565
Location
Missouri
IMO both the 436HP and 536HP are the better scanners. I own both the SDS100 and SDS200 and they’re mainly good for simulcast due to them being a form of software defined radio. But they scan too slow, and they are too deaf unlike a “real” old school scanner like the 436HP/536HP. But actually, even those don’t hold a candle to the combo of digital/analog sensitivity and scanning quickness that my 396XT has.

Uniden lost the plot—“scanner.” That’s the main thing! It MUST scan quick! I hope their new director knows what they’re doing. They should hire a ham.
 

donc13

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
1,353
Location
Grand Junction, CO
IMO both the 436HP and 536HP are the better scanners. I own both the SDS100 and SDS200 and they’re mainly good for simulcast due to them being a form of software defined radio. But they scan too slow, and they are too deaf unlike a “real” old school scanner like the 436HP/536HP. But actually, even those don’t hold a candle to the combo of digital/analog sensitivity and scanning quickness that my 396XT has.

Uniden lost the plot—“scanner.” That’s the main thing! It MUST scan quick! I hope their new director knows what they’re doing. They should hire a ham.
The "plot" has changed significantly over the years. Originally, scanners simply had to look for RF on a channel. RF there (enough to break squelch) and bingo, it stopped. Now with control channels that always have a RF signal and the need to then see if the traffic on that channel is on your list of agencies and talk groups and not just a radio newly associating or some administrative function, or an MDT sending/receiving a data burst takes more time than "is there RF or not?" means the scanner can't possibly scan as fast.

Yes, faster processors, multi tasking chips, faster memory, more memory to keep everything in RAM vs a digital storage device, etc. help, but the amount of data, and the send rate and stop/keep going all take a finite amount of time.. Thus slower scan rates. You want to raise scan rates to the "old scanners" you are going to be paying much more money. If.nothing else, for multiple receivers in the scanner.

Just my opinion.
 

Whiskey3JMC

DXpeditioner
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jul 16, 2006
Messages
6,722
Location
40.0417240450727, -75.23614582932653
Welcome to the RR forums. Do you regularly listen to any simulcast trunked radio systems? That'd be the only major reason to upgrade IMHO. Everything else is just "bells and whistles" you may not need (color display, more detailed display, etc) Also no one above me mentioned that the SDS100's battery is proprietary & you cannot use AA batteries on it
 

StoliRaz

🇺🇲
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Dec 4, 2007
Messages
835
Location
Masshole
Question- do you need to receive a system that's simulcast?

Yes? Upgrade to SDS makes sense
No? You'd be an idiot to waste your money

I don't really have any simulcast issues in my area, so trading my 436hp for an SDS would be a luxury I can skip.

It's pretty much that simple. I'd love to get a 536hp next. Love how the SDS-200 looks but the 536 would cover everything I need.
 
Top