OK Upman I'm ready for a permanent fix for the time reset

[XTS3000]

UPMan has stated that sales of the remote head were dismal. Why would they make a product that does not sell? And how many people would purchase one to solve an issue that they believe should be solved in the scanner?

That aside, they HAVE the Siren app you can use as a remote head.

I had always wished Uniden had come out with a 996(X)T brick, no display or keypad. Just a blank face that came with the remote head. That way the price point would have been close to each other. Adding on the remote head just duplicates what's already on the radio.

 

[Boatanchor]

I had always wished Uniden had come out with a 996(X)T brick, no display or keypad. Just a blank face that came with the remote head. That way the price point would have been close to each other. Adding on the remote head just duplicates what's already on the radio.

Me too

 

[Voyager]

I had always wished Uniden had come out with a 996(X)T brick, no display or keypad. Just a blank face that came with the remote head. That way the price point would have been close to each other. Adding on the remote head just duplicates what's already on the radio.

Sort of like a new version of the CompuScan? (if you remember that model)

A BCD996RC? (Remote control)

 

[XTS3000]

Sort of like a new version of the CompuScan? (if you remember that model)

A BCD996RC? (Remote control)

No, actually don't remember that CompuScan, but had I know it had existed at the time, I would have bought one!

 

[Voyager]

For reference...

 

[JohnSC]

Add the dim screen to the list of failures that make the 536 an unacceptably bad experience mounted in a vehicle. Mine didn't dim over time, it was always dim. Absolutely cannot read it during daylight. At the very least, the LED should be brighter and stay on longer. I guess they were concerned about draining that pathetic battery. I guess the 536 works OK for wrecker drivers monitoring one channel.

Ask for a solution to the screen dimming problem too while you are at it. Maybe you will get a response of any kind. I can't.

Mark
536/996P2/HP1e/HP2e/996XT/
396XT/PSR800/PRO668/PRO652

 

[JohnSC]

Another thought. Why are these posts relegated to the "Tavern" -- like we're all unloading after a few beers. Why is it buried at the bottom of the forum stack? Personally, I don't drink and these comments are generally relevant, legitimate and often thoughtful. The comments are becoming increasingly acidic, but that's a product of frustration not alcohol.

 

[MStep]

Oh, what I would give for one of these now....

Wow--- several things come to mind:

* 73 Wortman Avenue in Brooklyn, New York, USA was where these units were manufactured by the Sonar Radio Corporation. This was the building that housed their production, repair, and sales offices. I visited them MANY times because of my involvement with receiver and scanner sales.

* The 6 channel, FR-105 crystal-controlled receiver pictured here on the left (as well as the 10 channel scanner shown on the right), had circuit boards that were built to military specifications.

* The FR-105 was the "workhorse" of the fleet, and now, nearly 50 years after its inception, you can still find working FR-105's sitting at housewatch desks in firehouses across the United States, dutifully receiving calls.

Occasionally, some of the older Sonar Radio gear will show up at hamfests and flea markets. They are collectors items for sure, but in terms of "operational capabilities", the days of crystal-controlled receivers have long past.

How many countless nights went by when a 14 year old boy in Brooklyn would be tuning around on his Regency MR-10 tunable receiver, dreaming of the day that he could finally afford to own a Sonar or Regency crystal controlled radio.

 

[ten13]

I totally agree about the 105....GREAT radio!

I knew a guy who put in an external crystal socket on the front panel along with a slide switch which allowed him to put crystals in that socket for frequencies used only occasionally. Worked perfect!

The 10 Channel scanner (FR 2517?) was another great radio. However, I bought mine from Stuart's and, of course, it was one of those "special ones" that only he sold. I had a problem with the first one in which when the car was running it wouldn't stop scanning, and would not pick up any signals. If the car wasn't running, it worked OK. After going back there several times and raising hell, I think he gave me another one, and never had a problem with it. It was also not unusual to to see two...or more..in some people's cars.

But if you grew up in NYC, all these radios we speak of had their beginning from their Great-Granddaddy of buff radios.....

Looking Back - Fire Geezer

<sigh>.....

 

[MStep]

............................. I bought mine from Stuart's and, of course, it was one of those "special ones" that only he sold...................................................

In fact, to give Peter at Stuart's some credit, at least in terms of the radios that he got from Sonar, they were tuned at the Sonar factory for maximum sensitivity in the 152 - 156 MHz range. Not that it would have mattered that much, but you will likely recall that most of the PD and FD frequencies in NYC at that time were around that range. Most of the folks looking for receivers were interested in police and fire. But yes, I remember getting that "pitch" many times.

Getting somewhat back to the subject of this thread, radios were much simpler at that time; perhaps all to had to worry about was a crystal going bad at some point, or, as in your case with the 10 channel scanner you got, getting an occasional lemon. The scanners today have become much more complex and the cost of manufacture has apparently overtaken the pride in quality. So issues like the dimming displays and the RTC problem become more apparent.

I've had the HP-1 now for several years and have not had any problems with the hardware, although I will say that some the firmware upgrades left much to be desired. I've had the 536 for about a month, and I'm keeping my fingers crossed. I'll reiterate something that I've said in these threads before--- the 536 is a great scanner and a true design marvel in it's flexibility of operation. It's a shame that Uniden can't get their act together with the wifi operation, but even more disheartening is that 25 cent batteries and bulbs are the root of many of the complaints seen here in the forums.

 

[ten13]

The scanners today have become much more complex and the cost of manufacture has apparently overtaken the pride in quality. So issues like the dimming displays and the RTC problem become more apparent.

Frankly, I think the scanners today suffer from one, big, problem in the design and development....: they are designed by computer people, not public service people or buffs. The computer "geeks" cram as much "tech" into the radio, and then say, "Hey, look what we made!," but don't listen when the ultimate users say, "Yeah, so how are we supposed to use it all if we're not sitting at home in a controlled atmosphere?"

They give you all the "bells and whistles" for a radio, but God Forbid you have to deal with any of those things while driving a car or standing in a dark street. Not only is it impossible, it's down-right dangerous!

Someday, a Uniden-type company will take an old design, like even the 105, and make the guts into a P252 radio, with the ability to assign TGs to a multi-position KNOB (and NOT an up/down push button). To be able to reach over to a radio like the 105 while driving, and turning the knob three "clicks" to a TG you want (without having to pull the car over and putting on your reading glasses!), would be, in my opinion a GREAT development!

I even had one of those 24-channel crystal radios. Despite it's number, I found that putting a busy channel in one position (or even the #1 position) allowed me to find a channel that I wanted while on the road. You would put the constantly-talking weather channel in, say, position one, and you would know that Bronx Fire was,say, four "clicks" from the weather.

I think they are trying to re-invent the wheel.....

 

[MStep]

.........................They give you all the "bells and whistles" for a radio, but God Forbid you have to deal with any of those things while driving a car or standing in a dark street. Not only is it impossible, it's down-right dangerous.............................................

Perhaps the Whistler 1095 will fill the void for something that is easier to operate in a mobile environment. I happen to like all the "bells & whistles" on the 536, but i agree that attempting to do anything with the radio while mobile does require a pull off to the side of the road.

And while some folks love the 536 in their vehicles, I happen to use mine more for base operation, and those extra features come in handy for certain types of monitoring and "discovery" of interesting new things to listen to. I've also posted a few suggestions here on the forums to add some features to the 536 which would make it more mobile-friendly.

I'm toying with the idea of the 1095 for my Jeep, but I'm waiting for a few more reviews to come in on the Whistler threads. Most of my GRE radios run 24/7 without problems, so I'm hoping that heritage was carried over to the 1095.

 

[K2KOH]

Perhaps the Whistler 1095 will fill the void for something that is easier to operate in a mobile environment. I happen to like all the "bells & whistles" on the 536, but i agree that attempting to do anything with the radio while mobile does require a pull off to the side of the road.

And while some folks love the 536 in their vehicles, I happen to use mine more for base operation, and those extra features come in handy for certain types of monitoring and "discovery" of interesting new things to listen to. I've also posted a few suggestions here on the forums to add some features to the 536 which would make it more mobile-friendly.

I'm toying with the idea of the 1095 for my Jeep, but I'm waiting for a few more reviews to come in on the Whistler threads. Most of my GRE radios run 24/7 without problems, so I'm hoping that heritage was carried over to the 1095.

The one reason I like the Uniden over the Whistler in the car is the GPS. It beats Whistler hands down.

 

[garys]

Who would that company be? Think about it. Uniden is a large company that makes all sorts of consumer electronics. That includes CB, FRS, and Marine radios, among other things like baby monitors. Which are all RF centered products, so Uniden has experience with that.

Whistler was best known for their radar detectors and some other electronic products. They bought the intellectual property of the defunct GRE America scanner company. They have yet to release or even announce a new from the ground up product. It took them two years to get the WS 1095 to the market and that design is now 4-5 years old.

That's it right now for scanner companies.

OTOH, Yaesu, Icom, Kenwood, all have significant amateur and commercial two way radio lines. Yet, none of them have ever built a scanner per se. They have some receivers with scan capability along with most of their VHF and UHF ham radios.

There are some other Chinese companies out there that have low cost radios, but none of them seem interested in the scanner market. At least not yet.

AOR has some very nice receivers, but no real scanners currently, let alone scanners with trunk tracking.

Yes, it would be nice, but I don't expect it soon... or ever.

Someday, a Uniden-type company will take an old design, like even the 105, and make the guts into a P252 radio, with the ability to assign TGs to a multi-position KNOB (and NOT an up/down push button). To be able to reach over to a radio like the 105 while driving, and turning the knob three "clicks" to a TG you want (without having to pull the car over and putting on your reading glasses!), would be, in my opinion a GREAT development!

 

[janetball1994]

So, if you want a half-donkeyed solution, file the lawsuit. If you want to get a complete solution, let Uniden do their job.

Well now, at the risk of the bloody obvious, if 'Uniden did their job,' as you so dutifully refrain, the piece of junk wouldn't have been released as the "full-donkeyed [sic]" junk that it is.

That stipend from Uncle UPMan keeping you in bubble gum?

 

[marcotor]

Perhaps the Whistler 1095 will fill the void for something that is easier to operate in a mobile environment. I happen to like all the "bells & whistles" on the 536, but i agree that attempting to do anything with the radio while mobile does require a pull off to the side of the road.

I have moved my 536 from the car into the rack (looks nice with the other one) in favor of a 1095. Not because it's a better scanner, but the remote head gives me (and only me) better options in tight space for mounting a remote device. I didn't use the GPS feature, as the area I drive is pretty straightforward, altho it does cover all the counties of Southern California.

So far, I have been happy with the 1095. I am in simulcast land tonight, and as it performed to it's well known issues, I turned the scanner off. In that case, the 436 comes to life and works not perfectly, but better. YMMV. As long as you know the limitations, and don't expect miracles just because it's "new", I think the 1095 is an excellent choice for mobile scanning.

 

[trentbob]

... if I could interrupt for a moment... thanks for a little latitude here Mods... phillydjdan, Septa 3371CSX1 and I will be making a video tomorrow (Sat) comparing smartzone, p1, p2 and LSM problems with 3-4 different systems on a 536, 668/800, 1095 and 996xtp2 starting in Bristol, Pa and ending up in Northeast Philly along the river... we will post it on a thread in equipment reviews (no eta)... we need a 325p2 and/or a HP2 to get involved if you want to have a little fun with us... if interested then don't reply here go to "best scanner for Philly" thread in the Pa forums... thanks again Mods...

 

[stingray327]

I have moved my 536 from the car into the rack (looks nice with the other one) in favor of a 1095. Not because it's a better scanner, but the remote head gives me (and only me) better options in tight space for mounting a remote device. I didn't use the GPS feature, as the area I drive is pretty straightforward, altho it does cover all the counties of Southern California.

So far, I have been happy with the 1095. I am in simulcast land tonight, and as it performed to it's well known issues, I turned the scanner off. In that case, the 436 comes to life and works not perfectly, but better. YMMV. As long as you know the limitations, and don't expect miracles just because it's "new", I think the 1095 is an excellent choice for mobile scanning.

Use the Uniden 436 in the car at your own risk. As mentioned it's downright dangerous.

 

[stingray327]

Frankly, I think the scanners today suffer from one, big, problem in the design and development....: they are designed by computer people, not public service people or buffs. The computer "geeks" cram as much "tech" into the radio, and then say, "Hey, look what we made!," but don't listen when the ultimate users say, "Yeah, so how are we supposed to use it all if we're not sitting at home in a controlled atmosphere?"

They give you all the "bells and whistles" for a radio, but God Forbid you have to deal with any of those things while driving a car or standing in a dark street. Not only is it impossible, it's down-right dangerous!

Someday, a Uniden-type company will take an old design, like even the 105, and make the guts into a P252 radio, with the ability to assign TGs to a multi-position KNOB (and NOT an up/down push button). To be able to reach over to a radio like the 105 while driving, and turning the knob three "clicks" to a TG you want (without having to pull the car over and putting on your reading glasses!), would be, in my opinion a GREAT development!

I even had one of those 24-channel crystal radios. Despite it's number, I found that putting a busy channel in one position (or even the #1 position) allowed me to find a channel that I wanted while on the road. You would put the constantly-talking weather channel in, say, position one, and you would know that Bronx Fire was,say, four "clicks" from the weather.

I think they are trying to re-invent the wheel.....

Yes downright dangerous. Not easy / safe like the old scanners.

 

[marcotor]

Use the Uniden 436 in the car at your own risk. As mentioned it's downright dangerous.

Works just fine for me