Pro97 more sensative than Pro2096?

[jeffrey420]

Although the specs are identical for the 97 vs. 2096 on sensitivity in the 800mhz band. I have noticed a bit more sensativity from my 97 vs. 2096 as for reception. This based on Mot trunking percentages ( 2096 = 20% to 42% on control channel ) and ( 97 = 60% to 85% on control channel ) with identical conditions.

Anyone else do any comparisons with the other two siblings (2055, 96. etc.)?

Plus I get better reception with my RS 800mhz reception than with the RS discone at the same height.

 

[scanjunkie]

Although the specs are identical for the 97 vs. 2096 on sensitivity in the 800mhz band. I have noticed a bit more sensativity from my 97 vs. 2096 as for reception. This based on Mot trunking percentages ( 2096 = 20% to 42% on control channel ) and ( 97 = 60% to 85% on control channel ) with identical conditions.

Anyone else do any comparisons with the other two siblings (2055, 96. etc.)?

Plus I get better reception with my RS 800mhz reception than with the RS discone at the same height.

Even though the specs are supposed to be the same, that doesn't always mean that their actual settings are the same. It can vary from scanner to scanner.

Also, the RS scanners are known for their overloading...so you will most likely get better reception on a smaller antenna than on a big outdoor one.

 

[blinddog50]

Jeff, I've noticed the same thing awhile back also.
The 97 is by far my most sensitive scanner.
My 97 will be working it's tail off while my 96,2096 and various Uniden models just sit there.
As you said the specs are the same.
If they would just make a digital 97 with I-Call it would be the perfect handheld.

 

[jeffrey420]

I second that!!!

 

[scanjunkie]

If they would just make a digital 97 with I-Call it would be the perfect handheld.

Let us pray....

 

[RadioMarkW]

YES, I hope GRE and Radio Shack are reading all our post's because a Digital 97/2055 would sell like hotcakes!!!