Pro-164 vs Pro-163

[Brandenburg]

So, I bought the Pro-164 a couple of days ago and have been having a lot of fun learning how to use it, program it, etc., Thanks to this site, I've managed to go quite far in my understanding. However, I keep having this nagging feeling that maybe I should've purchased the Pro-163 -- but, admittedly, I'm not sure how they differ other than one is hand-held and the other isn't.

Are there reasons, other than mobility, that one would choose one radio over the other? Does the Pro-163 possibly have better reception or processing or something? Since I picked up the radio at RadioShack, I can take back my mobile and swap for the 163.....so this just has me thinking.

Anyway, I've love to hear your thoughts. I've scoured RadioShack's site to see if I could find a difference....and I've read a zillion pages on this site, but haven't really found my answer (but sorry if this is a repeat question).

After I settle on my radio, I'm soon going to be reaching to antennae...probably for amateur radio reception. Maybe I'll try to rig my own Anyway, this has been fun learning all about this. Three days ago, I was clueless.

 

[N8IAA]

As you have mentioned, one is a handheld, the other a mobile. They program the same way, they do the same thing...........scan. I have the 163 because I looked for a base/mobile to replace my aging 895. I've liked GRE radios for quite a while. I wanted something simple to operate and program. The 898 which replaced the 895 only had 500 channels. The BC15 had way too many features than I needed. The fact that it went on sale in June of 2008 and I had a coupon made the decision a whole lot easier. Still had the Pro-97, the earlier version of the 164. It ended up sitting until I sold it. Got a Pro-106 for my handheld. Again, the basic difference is how and what you want out of a scanner and space in the vehicle when you go mobile. Otherwise, they are the same.
Larry

 

[Brandenburg]

Thanks for the info. I'm in Kentucky at the moment and, unfortunately, there's a mobile law here stating we can't have scanners in our automobiles.....so other than walking around the house, there's not much of a use to be mobile.

Since I'm hooking my radio to the computer for programming and recording purposes (and just to hear the audio out of my computer speakers), I'm beginning to think the 163 might be better. The 164 wants to tip over and isn't very handy when there are cables connected to it.

I guess my question was whether the reception quality was different between the two radios. Based on what I've read so far, they're essentially the same.

 

[KC5EIB]

One way around the scanner law in KY is to become a Amateur Radio Operator.

Since you are not using the radio other that in the house, the 163 would be a better choice. If you plan on going to any airshows or want to listen to weather info while out of the house or go to the Indy or stock car races, the 164 is the better radio.

 

[gmclam]

PSR-400/PRO-163 vs PSR-300/PRO-164

I am using the GRE equivalents of these scanners; PSR-300 = PRO-164 and PSR-400 = PRO-163. There are some subtle differences in addition to the obvious ones.

PSR-400/PRO-163 does not have the ability to run from batteries. Now since you're running it at home/etc, you might think that is not an issue. What do you do when the power goes out? Many people use these for weather reports and to be in touch during storms and/or power outages.

Since there is no battery operation, the PSR-400/PRO-163 does not have the power save feature. A feature many people would rather be able to turn off on their hand-helds.

The PSR-400/PRO-163 has a jack for external speaker in addition to the headphones jack. The headphone jack does not have a ground. When using the scanner to feed your computer, this can cause issues like a hum, ground loops, etc. The external speaker jack does have a ground and works better to feed a computer (I use isolation transformers in addition to connecting to the ext speaker jack).

The LCD display backlight on the PSR-400/PRO-163 has 3 modes; off, dim and bright. It is nice to run it in dim mode for use next to your bed or other dark location. You get enough scanners sitting next to each other all at bright and it can be quite the light source.

This one bugs me a bit. The power transformers for the PSR-400/PRO-163 are much larger than provided with the PSR-300. The base model scanners want 13.8 volts instead of 9 volts. I can't imagine why the difference. If anything, the base models should use a lower voltage since they don't have to charge batteries. Unless that extra voltage is to run the display backlight.

That's a few of the differences.

 

[Brandenburg]

I might like to consider becoming an Amateur Radio Operator at some point in the future...but as of right now, I'm just learning this. I think I will swap to the other radio, though. Just a few minutes ago, I bought an antenna from RadioShack and clearly it'll connect to the 163 much more conveniently.

I just hooked up that antenna, btw, and I'm not overly impressed. I don't seem to be picking up anything I wasn't already getting before. Time will tell

 

[mikey60]

This one bugs me a bit. The power transformers for the PSR-400/PRO-163 are much larger than provided with the PSR-300. The base model scanners want 13.8 volts instead of 9 volts. I can't imagine why the difference. If anything, the base models should use a lower voltage since they don't have to charge batteries. Unless that extra voltage is to run the display backlight.

That's a few of the differences.

13.8 V is the standard reference voltage when used in a vehicle in the US. Since the scanner is designed to be used as a mobile or a base radio, it needs to be able to handle the voltage found in an automobile.

Mike

 

[gmclam]

13.8 V is the standard reference voltage when used in a vehicle in the US. Since the scanner is designed to be used as a mobile or a base radio, it needs to be able to handle the voltage found in an automobile.

Funny that the "base" scanner is for an automobile and the hand-held scanner is not.