Same model scanner

[JamesBrox]

I've been scanning for a few years now.... I'm a Uniden guy and by no means an expert. I monitor two 536s at once, both are workhorses. Very reliable. But I've noticed that each radio, over the years, has its own strength and weaknesses in sensitivity on the same modes. I use QKs so I've swope FLs monitoring a lot. Anyone else sense this. Thanks

 

[trentbob]

I've been scanning for a few years now.... I'm a Uniden guy and by no means an expert. I monitor two 536s at once, both are workhorses. Very reliable. But I've noticed that each radio, over the years, has its own strength and weaknesses in sensitivity on the same modes. I use QKs so I've swope FLs monitoring a lot. Anyone else sense this. Thanks

Not going to get too deep here, I'll leave it up to.. others. There was a time many years ago I would be more engaged.

Depends when your radios were made. If you are totally up to date on firmware there might be some differences between the radios regarding age.

The radios were developed over 10 years ago and have had their share of firmware and hardware updates. First thing to check, everything up to date regarding firmware?

This is just an initial comment, I haven't dealt with an x36 radio in many years and are no longer part of my fleet but when they first came out? learned them well. Great format developed by the same person who made100 and 200.

Hang in there you're going to get great replies and responses, Solutions I don't know.

 

[pb_lonny]

Do you use the same aerials of each of them?
Is it pretty consistent, with one being better on say VHF and the other UHF? Is the difference getting more pronounced?

Back when the BCD396T first came out, I imported one and a good friend, who knows more about radios than me got the UBCD396T (Australian version) and we did some side by side testing. His worked better on 800MHz, where mine was better on the airband. When I got the UBCD396T, we did some more testing and also found some differences between the performance of them.

As a side note, a few years later I ended up buying two of exactly the same radio scanner from a local supplier (these weren't Unidens) however they were literally two serial numbers one after the other.

I programmed both of them exactly the same, exactly the same frequencies, using exactly the same aerial and I found that over time one of them had slightly better performance than the other, to the point that one would open the squelch for a signal, where as the other one wouldn't, so I think that given the cost and production limitations of the scanners that we purchase, it is going to be some differences in performance between different versions of exactly the same model scanner.

 

[JamesBrox]

The radios were developed over 10 years ago and have had their share of firmware and hardware updates. First thing to check, everything up to date regarding firmware?

Hang in there you're going to get great replies and responses, Solutions I don't know.

Yes sir, I'm a little ocd (lol) on keeping my scanners up to date with both DB and firmware. My thread was just an observation, I've no problem with the performances. Thank you.

 

[JamesBrox]

Do you use the same aerials of each of them?
Is it pretty consistent, with one being better on say VHF and the other UHF? Is the difference getting more pronounced?

Yes, the same aerial (Diamond discone) going through Stridsberg MCA204M. My conversation was strictly out of curiosity from others that may can share their experiences. So, thank you for sharing yours.
James
WRXU693

 

[buddrousa]

All of my 996p2's and 536's are from the same 2 years and they all share the same antenna through Stridsbergs and all perform the same but each has its own area to cover as to not miss any traffic.

 

[Direwolf131]

All I know is I am still waiting for Uniden to address/fix the absence of an AGC on the SDS100/200 radios, lack of such on any model year results in appalling listening, particularly when a transmission involves two different channels running on same frequency!