Question on using Baofang UV-5R for frs, gmrs and murs, it is recieve only or can i transmit too?

[Akuriko]

Hello all I have a question, I have a brother who has a Baofang UV-5r or 2 of them, and programmed it for FRS, gmrs and Murs frequencies, can it be used to transmit in FRS, gmrs or murs or is the transmitter in it for hams only? im curious if it reciveves those frenquencies only and if he uses it it transmits in ham frequencies only, i was told once you program it in with frs, gmrs and murs you can transmit in it as well, please let me know, im curious if he transmits if it's illegal or breaking the rules or laws, he claims it isn't I want to clarify it.

 

[mmckenna]

Transmit? Not legally. Receive only is OK.

It has to do with FCC type certification. That's a complex subject, but it's basically an approval given by the FCC that says the radio meets the specific technical requirements for specific radio services.

The UV-5R transmitter doesn't meet any of those requirements, so it is ONLY legal to use on the amateur radio bands. The FCC has no transmitter requirements on the amateur radio bands, other than some nebulous requirements in the Part 97 rules about not causing harmful interference.


Yeah, we know, tons of people use them on FRS, GMRS, MURS, Marine VHF, public safety, etc. That isn't the same as it being legal. And no, the FCC doesn't have roaming SWAT teams in black helicopters that are going to swoop in and haul him off to lock up.

If your brother wants to be totally legal, the only place he can transmit with them is on the amateur radio bands. Not FRS, not GMRS, not MURS, not anywhere else. There are plenty of radios that DO meet the requirements and have the type certifications that are required.

Baofengs are essentially the scum on the bottom of the barrel after all the other radios are removed. I know they are attractive to some as a low buck entry into the amateur radio hobby, but they should not be confused with suitable radios for any other radio service.

 

[mmckenna]

Interesting thing.
The Baofeng UV-5R -had- an FCC certification at one time, but I'm having trouble finding it on the FCC page. I can get it to come up if I search on it. Sometimes the FCC site acts up, so not unheard of….

https://apps.fcc.gov/oetcf/tcb/reports/Tcb731GrantForm.cfm?mode=COPY&RequestTimeout=500&tcb_code=&application_id=Zyd11TBHk949eULqKGjNmA%3D%3D&fcc_id=2AJGM-UV5R

If you look a the "Rule Part" column, you'll see "15B" as the only entry. FCC Part 15B only applies to the receiver and NOT the transmitter. That means that the transmitter was not certified for any radio service, which makes it only legal on the amateur radio bands.

Also look at "Equipment Class". It shows "Scanning Receiver".
If you look at the "notes" it says: Amateur Radio.

 

[Akuriko]

Thank you so much, I'm glad you told me, it's valuable info to me, I am learning allot from all you great people.

 

[mmckenna]

Thank you so much, I'm glad you told me, it's valuable info to me, I am learning to allot from all you great people.

Glad to help, and thanks for accepting what I said.

A lot of people will tell you that "it doesn't matter," that "everyone does it", that "they've been doing it for years", that it's "fine", that "no one will ever know".
It's up to your brother to make that decision.
However, the FCC rules are abundantly clear about type certifications. While some may not understand why those rules exist, they do exist for a very good reason. It's not possible for a person using a radio to know when their radio is causing interference to someone else. That can be an issue in some applications. There are also requirements that limit specific settings, specific emissions, and specific frequencies. That's some of the reasons the FCC has these requirements in place. It's not always something that end users will understand, so they often ignore it.

Unfortunately the Chinese manufacturers don't care about FCC rules and they don't care if their product cause issues to radio users in the USA. They just want to sell as many radios as possible as fast as they can.

 

[Akuriko]

Thanks, I won't buy one, I thought about it, but the big brother has to buy one and thinks it doesn't matter if it breaks rules or not it's his toy, I just saw this on amazon someone was saying and I screen captured, which I think goes with what you're saying it doesn't matter in the eyes of people sell as many radios as possible and there posting how to unlock it to use it as a radio for all 3 other uses, I have a feeling the maker of the Chinese radio is the one posting this reply as well, again thank you for clearing it up.

 

[mmckenna]

Yeah, it's a well known modification.

For what it's worth, I had one of my sites try to use a few of these. They complained pretty much non-stop about issues with them. I got them to purchase some Kenwood radios that were right for the job. Huge difference. They came to me a month later and ordered 7 more.

For kicks, I took several of the Baofengs and put them on my service monitor ($40K test equipment that analyzes the performance of the radio). Out of the several radios I tried, one met spec. The rest of them were off frequency quite a ways, over deviating, and a few other maladies. That sort of stuff is fine on amateur radio bands, but it doesn't fly anywhere else.

 

[K4EET]

Hi @Akuriko, you asked a good question and @mmckenna gave you some great advice and answers. The one thing they didn’t talk about is the potential for transmitters to cause harmful interference to Public Safety and other radio systems since those transmitters are not FCC type accepted. This means the transmitters potentially do not meet a strict set of technical specifications. What that means since the transmitters are not FCC type accepted for GMRS, FRS, MURS and any other non-ham radio frequency that it can be programmed for is that it may cause unintentional harmful interference to radio systems such as Public Safety which can put lives at risk. I don’t think your brother wants to do that at least I hope he doesn’t.

As for the FCC flying around in black helicopters… Let me say this. I have several good friends that are FCC field technicians that do spend their time tracking down transmitters that cause harmful interference to licensed radio systems. Their equipment is very sophisticated and it doesn’t take long to identify the source causing the harmful interference. Once identified, the resulting fines can be like $10,000 USD and/or 10 years jail time for serious infringements. For cases with loss of life, well that is a whole different story.

So like @mmckenna said, yeah, “everybody” does it. But that does make it legal. Besides, some will get caught because they attract attention to themselves, knowingly or unknowingly. And it is not just the FCC out there on the “fox hunt” for sources of interfering signals to licensed radio systems. Agencies may have their own personnel to do some of the initial legwork for the FCC. There are also radio interference consultants for hire that do the same thing. Bottom line? If you are in-fact causing harmful interference to a licensed radio system, more than likely you will eventually be caught. System owners and the FCC do not take interference lightly and uncertified transmitters are the chief culprits causing that interference.

Just a word of caution to those willing to listen. Laws are there to protect lives. Do the right thing…

 

[RichardKramer]

But that does make it legal.

I think you meant: "But that doesn't make it legal"?

 

[K4EET]

I think you meant: "But that doesn't make it legal"?

You’re absolutely correct and I cannot change my brain failure now. 😡 And I proofread ✍️ it twice because I am disabled with a terminal illness that causes encephalopathy (MELAS to be specific). I wish the time to correct stupid mistakes were indefinite… 🙄

 

[RichardKramer]

You’re absolutely correct and I cannot change my brain failure now. 😡 And I proofread ✍ it twice because I am disabled with a terminal illness that causes encephalopathy (MELAS to be specific). I wish the time to correct stupid mistakes were indefinite… 🙄

I thought maybe you meant after you said "because everybody does it" does that make it legal; which would make sense to me; but I wasn't sure if that's how you worded it to refer to the everybody does it. Don't feel bad about it, I just wasn't sure which way you meant it. My wife has Parkinson, so I know what it's like with someone with any kind of disease. I enjoy reading your posts, you're a very informable guy. I often make mistakes after proofreading several times, so don't feel like I'm pick nicking your posts. But, thank you for clarifying your comments - much appreciated Keet!

 

[jaspence]

Great advice above. One other consideration is never trust one in any emergency situation or where dependable communications are important. The chance of operator lack of knowledge, interference by a cheap radio, and lack of reliability could make things worse. My church decided to buy some after I gave them reasons not too, and a few months ago, they were back asking for me to select something dependable. We now use Motorola DLR frequency hopping HTs. They have limited power and range but work well in a large two story building and to the edge of our property and beyond. They cannot be heard by any scanner or receiver except one of the same type with the same code.

 

[nd5y]

The Baofeng UV-5R -had- an FCC certification at one time,

It still does. The original UV-5R (and some other models) Part 90 certifications from FUJIAN NAN'AN BAOFENG ELECTRONICS CO.,LTD. are FCC IDs ZP5BF-5R and ZP5BF-5RA.

There are several other manufacturers that appear to make the same radios with different FCC IDs.
A few are Part 90, most are Part 15 "scanning receivers" and there are probably still some with no FCC certification at all or fake labeling.

 

[RichardKramer]

A friend of mine bought the UV-82; paid less than $40 - no fcc id for business use; I paid $60 for mine that has the fcc id for business use. A ham friend of mine put both radios on his service monitors; both performed the same.

 

[jaspence]

I had an UV-82. Ok radio, but I trust my 8 year old FT-60R before any CCR.

 

[RichardKramer]

I had an UV-82. Ok radio, but I trust my 8 year old FT-60R before any CCR.

I agree on the FT-60R; I have 5 of them - work great on the milair a/c vhf/uhf bands.

 

[jeepsandradios]

While the FT-60R is a nice radio it is not certified for GMRS either.....being this thread talks about that on the baofeng thought I'd point it out for the op

 

[mbnv992]

Notarubicon youtube channel guy loves these POS radios. Guess if he were to read this comment - I’d be one of the pinned ones haha

 

[Akuriko]

Notarubicon youtube channel guy loves these POS radios. Guess if he were to read this comment - I’d be one of the pinned ones haha

yeah my brother subscribed to him and spent like $44 on 2 of the pos radios and just bought bigger batterys and new antennas however in my humble opinion the 6 or 12 pack of the uvr-5 looks intresting but they still must be a pos even for a 6 pack, lol