RadioReference Member “cbehr91” asked in a different thread: “Which did better for VHF-hi from that era? The Regency M series or BC210 series (or even another model from another manufacturer?) I know Bearcat 210s were popular among railfans, but I wonder if that was a matter of cost/availability/word of mouth and not how they performed vs. other brands.”
The general rule of thumb I found was that Bearcats were usually more selective than Regency and Radio Shack more selective than Bearcat. The opposite order was usually the case for sensitivity, Regency, Bearcat Radio Shack in that order. Generally, the more SELECTIVE a radio is the less SENSITIVE and vice-versa. If you are in an urban area you probably want to use a less sensitive but more selective radio while in a rural area a more sensitive radio will work better for you. These days however the noise floor is much higher with electronic devices spewing out hash all over the place that these rules rarely apply evenly.
Of course, like any rule, there are exceptions. Certain models seemed better than others and specific radios of a model often worked better than others of that model.
There is a thing for computer processers these days called "The Silicon Lottery" where some chips could handle more overclocking than others of the same model, that also applied (and still does) with scanners. I have had a couple radios that were total dogs and others that would receive like gangbusters. I had a pair of BCT15’s from the same production run with serial numbers only a couple apart, one of which was fantastic on VHF High and the other seemed to work much better on Air.
Testing of radios:
I, at one time, had 20 or so BCT15, BCT15X as well as some 996's (T and XT) scanners. I also had a bunch of RS, GRE and Whistlers over the years. I have cut down dramatically recently and now use a more reasonable 4 or 5 scanners at home. Deciding on which to use for what led me to devise a plan. It took an afternoon, but I had fun doing it.
I set up a file in programming software with a list of active frequencies that were NOT local but sort of on the fringes on my listening area. I loaded that file into all the radios. I then connected 8 to the same multicoupler and antenna and let them rip for a few days. I did the same for the other radios in the fleet later and then did the same for the other RS and GRE radios I had around.
I included the 7 NOAA frequencies. As they would hit, I noted the relative signal strength and locked them out. This would tell me which radios were particularly good or bad for rail and marine use as these were very close to the WX frequencies. I also found 2 radios that would occasionally hear some really distant WX stations when conditions popped up, these were noted as especially good performers in my notes.
I did the same with ATIS channels in the area on both the civil and mil-air bands to see what radios were best for those uses. For VHF and UHF PS freqs I had to be a little scientific. I had to use known PL codes for the distant stations I selected as most of these freqs had local users on them.
I also put in some low-band channels but didn't expect to hear anything on them. The solar cycle was at a low point and the local stuff was all but gone. I did have a few hits, but most were likely interference from computers or something. One day all the radios started hitting in a couple 33 MHz. fire channels from PA or NY someplace, there was a weird low band opening then.
Testing of antennas:
Let's turn this around a bit: I occasionally test my antenna farm in the same way. In my attic I have a couple ST-2’s, a couple Discones, an Omni-X and other antennas like dual-band (2M/440) and a few wire dipoles and end-feds for ham radio use.
I selected a batch of known frequencies that are either always on (WX, ATIS, Data etc.) or very busy (our local Valley-wide fire dispatch announcement channel and others) I program them all in my Icom desktop (now my IC8600, before it was my R8500 or R7000) and then cycle thru all the antennas in my attic. I plot which one works best on a specific frequency by giving it a score based on RSSI deflection from 1 to 5. 1 is barely moving, 3 is straight up and 5 is full deflection.
These are plotted on a pad and then scored. I separate the frequencies into 5 groups.
Anything below 108 MHz. is in Group 1. There were a couple 49 MHz. baby monitors still in use in the area and I found a data signal on 35 MHz. for a while. I would put in the 25.0 MHz. WWV station as it could sometimes be heard. I also used some CHP channels, the common 33 MHz. fire channels (in case skip was up) and whatever freqs I could find active there. I usually had to resort to measuring the lowest couple of FM stations due to the dearth of Low Band out here. Before TV repacking I used TV audio on Channels 2-6 as well.
For Group 2 I use the local ATIS channels in the civil air band as well as a couple really busy channels like the Unicom channels and the tower channel for PHX and DVT.
Group 3 is VHF High Band (144 to 174) This is of particular importance to me as it covers railroad and many public safety operations. While these days the VHF pager systems have pretty much gone away, I used some busy channels like the local railroad operations, the local fire dispatch and of course the 7 NOAA weather radio channels. 2 of the WX channels I can hear all the time at full-scale so I would use the attenuator on those, so they did not skew the results.
Group 4 includes UHF from 400 to 470 (here in AZ) and when I lived in Illinois, I included the 470-782 range in use there. There are a few ham links in the 420-440 range, a couple active repeaters from 440 to 450, some trunking and other data channels in the 450 and 460 range and a couple IFB stations.
Group 5 is 700, 800 and 900 MHz. using data channels from trunking systems. I would select sites that are close enough to be heard but not so close as to skew the results.
I usually had 40 or 50 channels altogether programmed into the radio and would connect antenna #1, run thru the channels and note the meter deflection of the channel, if any, on the log sheet. I would then do the same for each of the other antennas. Then it was a simple task of adding up the numbers. Each antenna would get a group score for that particular band as well as an overall score by adding up each Group.
The results then lead me to decide what antenna would be used for what radio. I made a few interesting discoveries. The ST-2, as expected performed the best on what little Low Band I could hear. The overall best scanner bands antenna for the rest of the ranges turned out to be my Comet GP-1 dual-band antenna. This little gem was suggested to me by my friend Matt, so I got one and replaced a discone with it. It worked so well that I bought a second to put up in the attic, actually using it for a dual bander… I am thinking of getting a third to use on the 7100 I just got but that will have to wait until this winter when I can get into my attic without melting.
I also found out that my 20M dipole actually worked really well on UHF for some reason, I have no explanation of why.
I rerun these tests from time to time. I found that one of my ST-2’s had gone deaf. I had read about someone getting new 75-ohm baluns from Channel Master for these so I ordered a couple. I replace the baluns on both ST-2s in my attic and noticed much better performance. In another test I found one of the discones performing poorly. I traced it to a bad connector at the close end of the coax.
Nowadays I have an antenna analyzer (RigExpert AA650) that allows me to measure the resonance of antennas on specific frequencies and ranges, but I still prefer my tried-and-true method of real-world testing. The analyzer does not consider directionality caused by external factors like other antennas in the attic, the other metal stuff up there and external things like mountains and buildings. It is great for tuning a band-specific antenna but for wide-coverage scanner use real-world testing wins out.
While most people don’t have dozens of scanners and multiple antennas there is a benefit to doing some periodic testing even if you only have one. Perhaps not as intense testing as the ones above but keep an eye on performance on known systems. Decreased performance can be gradual and not readily noticeable. This can be due to component degradation or antenna or feedline issues.
The general rule of thumb I found was that Bearcats were usually more selective than Regency and Radio Shack more selective than Bearcat. The opposite order was usually the case for sensitivity, Regency, Bearcat Radio Shack in that order. Generally, the more SELECTIVE a radio is the less SENSITIVE and vice-versa. If you are in an urban area you probably want to use a less sensitive but more selective radio while in a rural area a more sensitive radio will work better for you. These days however the noise floor is much higher with electronic devices spewing out hash all over the place that these rules rarely apply evenly.
Of course, like any rule, there are exceptions. Certain models seemed better than others and specific radios of a model often worked better than others of that model.
There is a thing for computer processers these days called "The Silicon Lottery" where some chips could handle more overclocking than others of the same model, that also applied (and still does) with scanners. I have had a couple radios that were total dogs and others that would receive like gangbusters. I had a pair of BCT15’s from the same production run with serial numbers only a couple apart, one of which was fantastic on VHF High and the other seemed to work much better on Air.
Testing of radios:
I, at one time, had 20 or so BCT15, BCT15X as well as some 996's (T and XT) scanners. I also had a bunch of RS, GRE and Whistlers over the years. I have cut down dramatically recently and now use a more reasonable 4 or 5 scanners at home. Deciding on which to use for what led me to devise a plan. It took an afternoon, but I had fun doing it.
I set up a file in programming software with a list of active frequencies that were NOT local but sort of on the fringes on my listening area. I loaded that file into all the radios. I then connected 8 to the same multicoupler and antenna and let them rip for a few days. I did the same for the other radios in the fleet later and then did the same for the other RS and GRE radios I had around.
I included the 7 NOAA frequencies. As they would hit, I noted the relative signal strength and locked them out. This would tell me which radios were particularly good or bad for rail and marine use as these were very close to the WX frequencies. I also found 2 radios that would occasionally hear some really distant WX stations when conditions popped up, these were noted as especially good performers in my notes.
I did the same with ATIS channels in the area on both the civil and mil-air bands to see what radios were best for those uses. For VHF and UHF PS freqs I had to be a little scientific. I had to use known PL codes for the distant stations I selected as most of these freqs had local users on them.
I also put in some low-band channels but didn't expect to hear anything on them. The solar cycle was at a low point and the local stuff was all but gone. I did have a few hits, but most were likely interference from computers or something. One day all the radios started hitting in a couple 33 MHz. fire channels from PA or NY someplace, there was a weird low band opening then.
Testing of antennas:
Let's turn this around a bit: I occasionally test my antenna farm in the same way. In my attic I have a couple ST-2’s, a couple Discones, an Omni-X and other antennas like dual-band (2M/440) and a few wire dipoles and end-feds for ham radio use.
I selected a batch of known frequencies that are either always on (WX, ATIS, Data etc.) or very busy (our local Valley-wide fire dispatch announcement channel and others) I program them all in my Icom desktop (now my IC8600, before it was my R8500 or R7000) and then cycle thru all the antennas in my attic. I plot which one works best on a specific frequency by giving it a score based on RSSI deflection from 1 to 5. 1 is barely moving, 3 is straight up and 5 is full deflection.
These are plotted on a pad and then scored. I separate the frequencies into 5 groups.
Anything below 108 MHz. is in Group 1. There were a couple 49 MHz. baby monitors still in use in the area and I found a data signal on 35 MHz. for a while. I would put in the 25.0 MHz. WWV station as it could sometimes be heard. I also used some CHP channels, the common 33 MHz. fire channels (in case skip was up) and whatever freqs I could find active there. I usually had to resort to measuring the lowest couple of FM stations due to the dearth of Low Band out here. Before TV repacking I used TV audio on Channels 2-6 as well.
For Group 2 I use the local ATIS channels in the civil air band as well as a couple really busy channels like the Unicom channels and the tower channel for PHX and DVT.
Group 3 is VHF High Band (144 to 174) This is of particular importance to me as it covers railroad and many public safety operations. While these days the VHF pager systems have pretty much gone away, I used some busy channels like the local railroad operations, the local fire dispatch and of course the 7 NOAA weather radio channels. 2 of the WX channels I can hear all the time at full-scale so I would use the attenuator on those, so they did not skew the results.
Group 4 includes UHF from 400 to 470 (here in AZ) and when I lived in Illinois, I included the 470-782 range in use there. There are a few ham links in the 420-440 range, a couple active repeaters from 440 to 450, some trunking and other data channels in the 450 and 460 range and a couple IFB stations.
Group 5 is 700, 800 and 900 MHz. using data channels from trunking systems. I would select sites that are close enough to be heard but not so close as to skew the results.
I usually had 40 or 50 channels altogether programmed into the radio and would connect antenna #1, run thru the channels and note the meter deflection of the channel, if any, on the log sheet. I would then do the same for each of the other antennas. Then it was a simple task of adding up the numbers. Each antenna would get a group score for that particular band as well as an overall score by adding up each Group.
The results then lead me to decide what antenna would be used for what radio. I made a few interesting discoveries. The ST-2, as expected performed the best on what little Low Band I could hear. The overall best scanner bands antenna for the rest of the ranges turned out to be my Comet GP-1 dual-band antenna. This little gem was suggested to me by my friend Matt, so I got one and replaced a discone with it. It worked so well that I bought a second to put up in the attic, actually using it for a dual bander… I am thinking of getting a third to use on the 7100 I just got but that will have to wait until this winter when I can get into my attic without melting.
I also found out that my 20M dipole actually worked really well on UHF for some reason, I have no explanation of why.
I rerun these tests from time to time. I found that one of my ST-2’s had gone deaf. I had read about someone getting new 75-ohm baluns from Channel Master for these so I ordered a couple. I replace the baluns on both ST-2s in my attic and noticed much better performance. In another test I found one of the discones performing poorly. I traced it to a bad connector at the close end of the coax.
Nowadays I have an antenna analyzer (RigExpert AA650) that allows me to measure the resonance of antennas on specific frequencies and ranges, but I still prefer my tried-and-true method of real-world testing. The analyzer does not consider directionality caused by external factors like other antennas in the attic, the other metal stuff up there and external things like mountains and buildings. It is great for tuning a band-specific antenna but for wide-coverage scanner use real-world testing wins out.
While most people don’t have dozens of scanners and multiple antennas there is a benefit to doing some periodic testing even if you only have one. Perhaps not as intense testing as the ones above but keep an eye on performance on known systems. Decreased performance can be gradual and not readily noticeable. This can be due to component degradation or antenna or feedline issues.
