New Uniden Scanner announcement at SEMA 2025

[mc48]

Also another nice feature would be the ability to directly edit a channel. So if you hit the channel hold, you can press one or two buttons to edit it quickly without going through the nominal 6-7 menu steps to do so.

Press Hold then "E".

 

[CollinsURG]

That's one way of doing it but if only using one scanner you can program a site or conventional department twice and then scroll or quick key back and forth between them to compare when you set different to them.

/Ubbe

I had not thought of trying that. Good idea. And of course that works at a particular location. Change locations and the interfering signals change.

The fact that filters are not in the menu of the SDS150 says a lot for the potential that the RF design issue of the SDS100 was resolved.

 

[werinshades]

The fact that filters are not in the menu of the SDS150 says a lot for the potential that the RF design issue of the SDS100 was resolved.

A little walk down memory lane, but the SDS 100 didn't have filters when first released either. They were added in firmware after some problems were reported by us early adapters. The main problem with the filters is "some" don't understand how to utilize them, nor understand that making slight adjustments like NFM to FM clear up problems too. If a user doesn't create Favorite Lists, it really limits the ability to use these features, and hence the complaint threads are started.

 

[CollinsURG]

I'm currently in Florida. I plan on testing the 150 and 100 around the Lee/Collier County area.

There is a lot of milair activity just off the coast of where you are in Florida. Exercises start early in the morning and end early afternoon. Most of the fighter aircraft are on 138-144 and 148-150 MHz AM 25 khz spacing. I did not save a hit list from my last visit to Marathon.

 

[CollinsURG]

A little walk down memory lane, but the SDS 100 didn't have filters when first released either. They were added in firmware after some problems were reported by us early adapters. The main problem with the filters is "some" don't understand how to utilize them, nor understand that making slight adjustments like NFM to FM clear up problems too. If a user doesn't create Favorite Lists, it really limits the ability to use these features, and hence the complaint threads are started.

The filters were a patch for a bad design. Manufacturer's DO have bad radio designs. I had an Alinco DJ-580T handheld 2M/440 years ago that could not hold up to a moderately busy signal environment using just the stock rubber duck. Reception was plagued with images. Happens from time to time.

 

[werinshades]

The filters were a patch for a bad design.

Well, that's up for debate since we have many happy SDS 100 users throughout these forums for the past 7+ years. As Jason and other beta testers know, despite the time and effort trying to duplicate every possible RF environment, band, trunking, conventional systems, it won't be perfect for all. The size of it turns me off right away...it's huge! I much prefer a smaller "low profile scanner" with a small multi band antenna so I can tuck it into a pocket or put it in a compartment in a vehicle so it's not visible if I need to leave it. The price won't be cheap, and I predicted at least $100-$150 above the SDS 100 MSRP at the time it's released to the public (1st quarter 2026 at best?) not including DMR/NXDN/Waterfall/ TETRA? add-ons. I was very interested in the SDS 100 and then the SDS 200 because of simulcast issues. For me, I have what I need, am very happy with them, and will sit and watch when the first ones come out. Don't be surprised if filters are needed and a firmware is released with the same set up as the SDS 100 & 200.

 

[CollinsURG]

Well, that's up for debate since we have many happy SDS 100 users throughout these forums for the past 7+ years. As Jason and other beta testers know, despite the time and effort trying to duplicate every possible RF environment, band, trunking, conventional systems, it won't be perfect for all. The size of it turns me off right away...it's huge! I much prefer a smaller "low profile scanner" with a small multi band antenna so I can tuck it into a pocket or put it in a compartment in a vehicle so it's not visible if I need to leave it. The price won't be cheap, and I predicted at least $100-$150 above the SDS 100 MSRP at the time it's released to the public (1st quarter 2026 at best?) not including DMR/NXDN/Waterfall/ TETRA? add-ons. I was very interested in the SDS 100 and then the SDS 200 because of simulcast issues. For me, I have what I need, am very happy with them, and will sit and watch when the first ones come out. Don't be surprised if filters are needed and a firmware is released with the same set up as the SDS 100 & 200.

If the SDS150 corrects the SDS100 flaws, my SDS100 will be available on eBay.

 

[dmfalk]

Press Hold then "E".

Makes me think the old adage about men & manuals is true.... "Manuals?! I don't need no stinking manuals!"

 

[werinshades]

If the SDS150 corrects the SDS100 flaws, my SDS100 will be available on eBay.

Yes...I know, heard the same thing about the 996T/996XT/HP-1/HP-2/436/536...etc.

 

[dmfalk]

I had not thought of trying that. Good idea. And of course that works at a particular location. Change locations and the interfering signals change.

The fact that filters are not in the menu of the SDS150 says a lot for the potential that the RF design issue of the SDS100 was resolved.

I've never met a radio that didn't need filters, especially one with everything packed in closely. I reiterate my advice from earlier not to dispose of the feature, as it's something the SDS100 had that could've been in so many others I've used over the years.

 

[werinshades]

Makes me think the old adage about men & manuals is true.... "Manuals?! I don't need no stinking manuals!"

I always check the release notes on every firmware upgrade to see if it's needed.

 

[CollinsURG]

Yes...I know, heard the same thing about the 996T/996XT/HP-1/HP-2/436/536...etc.

Actually the BCD996XT has excellent RF performance. One of the best I have ever owned. Stellar for all airband civil and military. I had a BCD436HP manufactured after the initial issues were corrected and it did well too. Should have kept it. My HP2 does great connected to a remote antenna, and is very helpful finding MilAir hits using discovery mode. I did not own the others.

 

[dmfalk]

I always check the release notes on every firmware upgrade to see if it's needed.

I do too. And I upgrade, anyway! 🙃

Firmware updates always mean they're serious about fixing or improving something, or even add new features. Nothing is ever perfect. Ever!

 

[CollinsURG]

I've never met a radio that didn't need filters, especially one with everything packed in closely. I reiterate my advice from earlier not to dispose of the feature, as it's something the SDS100 had that could've been in so many others I've used over the years.

I have, BCT15X, BCD996XT, BCD325P2, BCD396XT, BCD396T, HP2. I have never needed any external filters with any of them. Their internal RF front-end band filters have done quite well. Never needed FM traps or anything else. All of them have been used on an elevated amplified multi-band antenna.

Hopefully the SDS150 RF front end is designed like the other models using switched band filters before the first RF amplifier.

 

[werinshades]

Actually the BCD996XT has excellent RF performance. One of the best I have ever owned. Stellar for all airband civil and military. I had a BCD436HP manufactured after the initial issues were corrected and it did well too. Should have kept it. My HP2 does great connected to a remote antenna, and is very helpful finding MilAir hits using discovery mode. I did not own the others.

Simulcast distortion is the main reason for these scanners. The rest you mentioned I have little to no interest in and based on the initial reports on the SDS 100 & 200, would not have purchased one, at least until filters were added. You jumped the gun a bit, and might be heading in that direction with the SDS 150. You could be an early adapter, and an early complainer too.

 

[CollinsURG]

Simulcast distortion is the main reason for these scanners. The rest you mentioned I have little to no interest in and based on the initial reports on the SDS 100 & 200, would not have purchased one, at least until filters were added. You jumped the gun a bit, and might be heading in that direction with the SDS 150. You could be an early adapter, and an early complainer too.

Either a radio works properly or it does not. I have had several scanners and HAM radios, most worked well. Some great, some good, some terrible. SDS100 is great for simulcast. I rely on the others for everything else.

 

[jasonhouk]

Stock antenna at the pool. Monitoring aircraft only. To my ears it sounds damn good. Will review all the recordings a little later as I have adult beverages to consume.

 

[CollinsURG]

Stock antenna at the pool. Monitoring aircraft only. To my ears it sounds damn good. Will review all the recordings a little later as I have adult beverages to consume.

Great to hear. If you have time, lots of fighter aircraft doing exercises just off the coast there in that southwest corner going out to Dry Tortugas. I did not keep a hit list from last trip to Marathon, but AM mode 25 khz channel spacing 138-144 and 148-150 Mhz is an easy target and busy out there. Of course 225-400 but too wide a band to search in a short time.

They go out early AM and return mid afternoon.

 

[RandyKuff]

I'm currently in Florida. I plan on testing the 150 and 100 around the Lee/Collier County area.

Did you drive down there?
That would be a good test for the built in GPS...

 

[dmfalk]

I have, BCT15X, BCD996XT, BCD325P2, BCD396XT, BCD396T, HP2. I have never needed any external filters with any of them. Their internal RF front-end band filters have done quite well. Never needed FM traps or anything else. All of them have been used on an elevated amplified multi-band antenna.

Hopefully the SDS150 RF front end is designed like the other models using switched band filters before the first RF amplifier.

You see, you just proved my point! I was, of course, referring to the internal filters used by the SDS units, but still, whether hardware filters (internal or external) or software filters (as the SDS units are based on), they become necessary. But I've had radios that either had really cheap filters or no filters at all, that just didn't do their jobs.

But as others have noted, the filters didn't appear in the 150's menu, and thus my warning not to forego the filters. Even with the IF/RF stage improvements, you're gonna need them. Having them is not a sign of weakness, but actually one of the SDS system's better strengths. It ain't perfect (nothing is), but it's a great improvement to have selectable filters as a tool for greater reception.