PSR-800 EZ Scan Ver Home Patrol

[bfpdb]

I would like an honest comparison, I realize that this is the GRE site, but I have a HP-1 and it is dissapointing to say the least, even with the Extreme upgrade . I guess my question is does anyone have both and would care to share your comparrisions. Thanks

 

[torontokris]

GRE is bare bones radio antenna usb cable and belt clip only..
HP-1 has all the accessories included.

One downside of the GRE was no zip code input (you had to select each system you want to monitor).. harder for newbies... BUT it looks like they have closed that gap with the new firmware

the GRE is far more sensitive / recieves weaker signals.

What is disapointing with the hp-1e?

as you noted the replys here will eb biad being a GRE forum..

 

[bfpdb]

Very Poor reception and you must be a computer geek to make it fly. Most of all for a $500 scanner it just dont receive like i think it should., it goes for hours without saying a word have fav set and service types turned on. the psr-88 is being advertised to be able to input zip code and go just like the HP1 but they dont tell you that there is much more.

 

[BoboPinky]

On looks alone, that "Home Patrol" is just ugly - sorry to say. Must stuff from Uniden is, CB's with "chrome" knobs and face plates? Scanners molded in silver plastic? The stuff from GRE isn't much better. At least with the 800 its a mat black and feels somewhat substantial when you hold it.

Now, if only the battery life was longer than 5 hrs (or if they used a battery pack, vs. AA's under a plastic cover).

 

[troymail]

I would like an honest comparison, I realize that this is the GRE site, but I have a HP-1 and it is dissapointing to say the least, even with the Extreme upgrade . I guess my question is does anyone have both and would care to share your comparrisions. Thanks

Here's the thing -- you really need to ask yourself "what do I want in a scanner?" -- everyone has different needs/wants - usually based on where you live and what you want to listen to -- and, with the complicated systems and programming, how much help do you need vs. willing/want to do more manually programming of the systems.

I think the GREs have been working much better on digital systems (my last Uniden was the 396 but I've "test driven" the HP-1). The PSR800 provides the same nice quality listening coupled with simplified programming, recording or what you want to record, and LOTS of space for systems, scanlists, and recordings. On the other hand, you still have a tremendous amount of flexibility in manually programming options.... and it's very portable, handheld... mine go EVERYWHERE.

Is it perfect? No. But I believe you can say the same about the HP-1 and others as well.

Like I said - it really depends on what you've have and what you want/need.

 

[ratboy]

So far, I like the HP-1 a lot better than the PSR-800, and I've had scanners since the beginning. I like my PSR-500 fine, but the 800 is proving to be a huge disappointment, both in performance, and ease of use.

 

[rwier]

I would like an honest comparison, I realize that this is the GRE site, but I have a HP-1 and it is dissapointing to say the least, even with the Extreme upgrade . I guess my question is does anyone have both and would care to share your comparrisions. Thanks

I have two of each. The positives (in my opinion) of each are many and varied, and are beyond my ability to gather together in a comprehensive report. The downsides (in my opinion) are negligible.

I believe that by using the analytic functions of the HP-1 (E) I have proven (even if only to myself) that all reports such as "Radio ____ receives better (or worse), decodes better (or worse), works best on _______ System, or doesn't work on ________ System, etc., are completely the result of OPERATOR ERROR!!!!!!

I have a roof antenna that feeds a splitter/booster that then feeds up to four scanners. The HP-1 (E) allows me to test the "signal" strength and quality at the four ends that connect to any four scanners. This will show up any loose connections, shorts, etc. in the set-up.

Months of experimentation, often against the advice of Forum posters, as to the settings of the individual scanners, has resulted in scanners, side-by-side, four at a time, that lock onto, and stay locked on to, extended transmissions (some over a minute).

This experimenting, testing, and setting manipulations were carried out on transmissions involving the RWC simulcast, multi-site, nightmare, that I reside in the middle of. These results were not conceivably possible before acquiring the (E) part of the HP-1 (E).

Up until a few months ago, I was hearing no more than 20% of the "Total" transmissions of this RWC System, with any of my scanners, and as little as 5% with some of them. It is obvious to me (if not others) that any reports I might have made earlier concerning the differing abilities of any of my scanners to decode the RWC System were, of course, completely subjective and in ERROR!!!

Take any four of my seven active scanners, hook them up to the spaghetti wires, lol, and they pull together like a well matched mule team, far better than any single one did prior to my acquiring the HP-1 (E).

Now, of course, when scanning for pleasure, my scanners are assigned different duties, such as agencies, and/or scanner location. But it a good feeling to know, that they all are EQUALS, and are doing VERY close to as well as possible!!

Your millage may vary, lol,
Rob

 

[rwier]

duplicate removed

 

[E-Man]

My 800 should be here at the end of the week, I look forward to running the HP-1 head to head with the 800. My biggest complaint with the HP-1 is the AGC, I have not heard of anyone else complaing about it. But for me, some channels are way too loud and others are way to low, cant seem to find a happy medium or a workaround yet, short of transfering those low audio channels to a GRE Scanner.

 

[ratboy]

rwier- I've never had scanners anywhere nearly as evenly matched as you have, there are always differences in sensitivity on different bands. Even different scanners of the same model vary due to parts tolerances and alignment. Some of them come out of the box seriously misaligned to the point they shouldn't ever have made it through quality control. This happens to all makes sometimes, but the old Pro-2004-5's and 6's were kind of famous for it. My 2006 came out of the box almost totally deaf. A few minutes with a freq counter and VOM and it was working like a champ.

 

[rwier]

rwier- I've never had scanners anywhere nearly as evenly matched as you have, there are always differences in sensitivity on different bands. Even different scanners of the same model vary due to parts tolerances and alignment. Some of them come out of the box seriously misaligned to the point they shouldn't ever have made it through quality control. This happens to all makes sometimes, but the old Pro-2004-5's and 6's were kind of famous for it. My 2006 came out of the box almost totally deaf. A few minutes with a freq counter and VOM and it was working like a champ.

I'm testing while stationary, with a good antenna, booster, splitter, set-up, with 4 final feeds to the radios. I can test all four feeds with the HP-1 (E) for strength and quality of signal. Any differences disappear with a good wire/connection check.

If the radios have led light options, I temporarily change them to solid (no flash). The HP-1 and HP-1 (E) have "chirps". This way I can set any 4 radios up (exactly the same) to scan a small number of TG's (let's say about 8) in my RWC Simulcast, 20+ Site, System, and tell reasonably accurately, exactly when they are "locking on".

I want to see four lights, or lights and chirps, all start at once. If one radio appears "dead" or "disabled", I (NOW) know that I need to change something in the radio, with the associated program, and reload that radio.

The radios are so well matched (when set up correctly), that they only rarely lock on different TG's at the same time. It's always only one radio (that get's out of line, lol), and it is not predictable which radio it will be.

It seems to take only a microsecond of slowness or delay for the "slow" radio to miss the "common" transmission and, instead, lock on another.

Also interesting, when it does this, it may not get back in line for some time. It has to finish the "lock-on" at a time of no activity. Then it gets back in line with the others.

The main result of these experiments on my part has been the ability, for the first time since the local PD went to the RWC, to have a radio lock on a conversation, between Unit and Base (or C2C), lasting as long as 90 seconds, with out a dropout. Six months ago the average for all radios would be 5-10 seconds before dropping out.

Finding that all seven of my current active radios, purchased over a ten+ year period (I think), are very, very, close to being equals, and that all of them are performing far better than any one of them did prior to six months ago, was a big surprise to me, as it flies in the face of "conventional wisdom".

The "all of them are performing far better than any one of them did prior to six months ago" is, in my opinion, not really a function of the radios. They haven't changed, I have just become far better at using them, lol.

Thanks
Rob

 

[bfpdb]

Thanks everyone for your thoughts regarding the comparrisons. I just heard about the PSR-800 and may try to get one, I have too much in the HP-1 with the EXT update to try to sell it.