• To anyone looking to acquire commercial radio programming software:

    Please do not make requests for copies of radio programming software which is sold (or was sold) by the manufacturer for any monetary value. All requests will be deleted and a forum infraction issued. Making a request such as this is attempting to engage in software piracy and this forum cannot be involved or associated with this activity. The same goes for any private transaction via Private Message. Even if you attempt to engage in this activity in PM's we will still enforce the forum rules. Your PM's are not private and the administration has the right to read them if there's a hint to criminal activity.

    If you are having trouble legally obtaining software please state so. We do not want any hurt feelings when your vague post is mistaken for a free request. It is YOUR responsibility to properly word your request.

    To obtain Motorola software see the Sticky in the Motorola forum.

    The various other vendors often permit their dealers to sell the software online (i.e., Kenwood). Please use Google or some other search engine to find a dealer that sells the software. Typically each series or individual radio requires its own software package. Often the Kenwood software is less than $100 so don't be a cheapskate; just purchase it.

    For M/A Com/Harris/GE, etc: there are two software packages that program all current and past radios. One package is for conventional programming and the other for trunked programming. The trunked package is in upwards of $2,500. The conventional package is more reasonable though is still several hundred dollars. The benefit is you do not need multiple versions for each radio (unlike Motorola).

    This is a large and very visible forum. We cannot jeopardize the ability to provide the RadioReference services by allowing this activity to occur. Please respect this.

Need some help.

Status
Not open for further replies.

gezafisch

Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
15
Location
Northeast Ohio
Here is my analysis of a NA-771 with the center tuned to 466.9875. As is clearly shown, the VSWR at that frequency is infinity... :roll:

In fact, at the actual lowest VSWR of ~3.8:1 is 422.187!!! :eek:
I'm not 100% sure what the end result of that test is, as im a complete noob when it comes to radios. Does that mean that the NA-771 will work on 466.9875 or not?

Thanks!
gezafisch
 

N4GIX

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
May 27, 2015
Messages
1,961
Location
Hammond, IN
I'm not 100% sure what the end result of that test is, as im a complete noob when it comes to radios. Does that mean that the NA-771 will work on 466.9875 or not?
See the little green triangle at the lowest peak of the curve? That indicates the frequency of the best VSWR (vertical standing wave ratio) for that range of frequencies.

What that means is that at least for the two NA-771 antennas I have here, neither one of them would work well at your 466.9875 MHz frequency.
 

toastycookies

Member
Joined
May 29, 2010
Messages
726
Location
the far east
I think there is something wrong with your antenna. Mine looks a lot better, however it is tuned much higher in freq than I thought (and want). I had to piece together a couple adapters and a pigtail so it's probably off a bit anyways. Had to use a SMA to SO-239 to PL-258 to a pigtail with a PL-259 to a SMA male to NA-771.

Anyways, here are my results.





looks like jonwienke is right that they are tuned much closer to GMRS than 70cm ham band.

Unfortunate for me since that's what I use it for.
 

gezafisch

Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
15
Location
Northeast Ohio
Could I just get a replacement antenna for, say, the Motorola CP200 and hook it up to the UV5R with an adapter? Would that give me better reception?

Thanks
gezafisch
 

toastycookies

Member
Joined
May 29, 2010
Messages
726
Location
the far east
N4GIX - now that I look at your results again scratch that "something wrong with your antenna" I said before.

Why do you have your scan set soooooo wide? makes it a lot harder to see the important part.

Guess I need to get a SMA to SMA connector for this thing to get a more accurate result for mine.




gezafisch : My antenna would actually be perfect for you LOL! Was a huge surprise to me, I thought it was tuned much lower.
 

gezafisch

Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
15
Location
Northeast Ohio
Oh cool!


From the manual of the UV-5R : If you use an external antenna, make sure the SWR is about 1.5:1 or lower to avoid damage to the transceiver.

What does this mean? Is it a setting within the radio or is it a spec on the antenna?

Thanks!
gezafisch
 
Last edited:

N4GIX

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
May 27, 2015
Messages
1,961
Location
Hammond, IN
The antenna's performance is best at its resonant frequency. VSWR is a measurement of that resonance. Generally anything less than 2:1 is acceptable, but 2:1 means a 11% loss* of transmitted power.

Nota bene: I corrected the above loss per 'toastycookies' polite note
 
Last edited:

N4GIX

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
May 27, 2015
Messages
1,961
Location
Hammond, IN
N4GIX - now that I look at your results again scratch that "something wrong with your antenna" I said before.

Why do you have your scan set soooooo wide? makes it a lot harder to see the important part.
I've not yet figured out how to set the Span... :lol:

I used two male SMA adapters and a coupling barrel. The are part of a set of adapters I bought to use with my Rigol Spectrum Analyzer.
 

toastycookies

Member
Joined
May 29, 2010
Messages
726
Location
the far east
The antenna's performance is best at its resonant frequency. VSWR is a measurement of that resonance. Generally anything less than 2:1 is acceptable, but 2:1 means a 50% loss of transmitted power.
2:1 = 11% reflected power not 50%


-------------------------------------------------------------


gezafisch: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00KC4PWQQ/

that is the exact vender I bought mine from.
 

N4GIX

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
May 27, 2015
Messages
1,961
Location
Hammond, IN
They are the wrong "sex" (male SMA). You need female SMA. :lol:

This one is both "legit" and "female". If you zoom in on the base, you can see that the label is light gray, the A has a tiny triangle for the cross-bar, and the G is stylized with some curvy lines. There are other "markers" but those are sufficient to make the determination between real and fake:

https://www.amazon.com/Authentic-NA...rd_wg=2hSgi&psc=1&refRID=4Y612NKZNMN1XB0CG2VS
 
Last edited:

jonwienke

More Info Coming Soon!
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jul 18, 2014
Messages
12,559
Location
VA
The first link is a fake. HYS in NOT Nagoya. The second link is correct.
 

jonwienke

More Info Coming Soon!
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jul 18, 2014
Messages
12,559
Location
VA
Your analyzer test is probably invalid. Most HT antennas are designed to use the body of the HT as the ground plane. Moving the antenna away from the body of the analyzer with the coax screws that up and you won't get good results from any antenna that needs a ground plane to work properly. Replace the coax with a SMA coupler, or better yet get a single adapter to attach the antenna to the analyzer.
 

jonwienke

More Info Coming Soon!
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jul 18, 2014
Messages
12,559
Location
VA
Also the antenna needs to be in open air, not lying on a table, Even non-conductive things like wood and PVC can alter the resonant freq range if in very close proximity to the antenna.
 

toastycookies

Member
Joined
May 29, 2010
Messages
726
Location
the far east
Your analyzer test is probably invalid. Most HT antennas are designed to use the body of the HT as the ground plane. Moving the antenna away from the body of the analyzer with the coax screws that up and you won't get good results from any antenna that needs a ground plane to work properly. Replace the coax with a SMA coupler, or better yet get a single adapter to attach the antenna to the analyzer.
It was propped up in open air when tested, not laying down, that was just to show the mess I had to use to connect it.

Would a counterpoise work? I do not have a simple sma coupler unfortunately.
 

N4GIX

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
May 27, 2015
Messages
1,961
Location
Hammond, IN
It was propped up in open air when tested, not laying down, that was just to show the mess I had to use to connect it.

Would a counterpoise work? I do not have a simple sma coupler unfortunately.
This is what I used for my test:
 

jonwienke

More Info Coming Soon!
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jul 18, 2014
Messages
12,559
Location
VA
Just for the sake of factual information, HYS is a line produced by the manufacturer "Hypario" who is the OEM supplier to Nagoya and other companies in China.

See: https://www.hypario.com/
I don't think so. The base of the Hypario antenna is ribbed, and styled differently than the Nagoya. One of them is a clone of the other, but with Chinese companies, who knows which is which.

I've tried several of the clones and the "Nagoya" antenna worked the best in head-to-head tests.
 

bama9999

Member
Joined
Jan 15, 2006
Messages
739
Location
Gulf Coast
I looked at the FCC listing for our patrol. It has a part 90 certification. To legally transmit on the patrol's frequencies, do I need a part 90 radio? Also, how does the FCC tell if you are or are not using a part 90 certified radio? Can they tell remotely or would they have to inspect your radio to find out? Also, I was reading on some forums about people who use radios like the UV-5R on MURS and GMRS and FRS. If you were to do this, is there a way for the FCC to know if your radio is part 95 certified or not other than manually inspecting your radio?

Thanks
Gezafisch
Here is a Baofeng that is part 90 certified, and seems to overall be a better radio than the UV-5R, and not a lot more cost. Also, I have the UV82HP, and the antenna that comes with the UV82 line is a much better antenna that what comes on the UV-5R's.

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B...Code=as2&tag=v87hh-20&linkId=DKR377YYOVIBVHII
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top