Scanner w/ best VHF Low Sens??

[doctordave]

I currently have a 780, 796, 895, 248CLT and a few older RS scanners.....wondering what people have found to have the best sensitivity on VHF-Low (around 38-42 MHZ)? I've heard that the MS-200 Relm was outstanding in this regard....any others that are winners in this department?

 

[ka2mek]

I currently have a 780, 796, 895, 248CLT and a few older RS scanners.....wondering what people have found to have the best sensitivity on VHF-Low (around 38-42 MHZ)? I've heard that the MS-200 Relm was outstanding in this regard....any others that are winners in this department?

Hi Doc
I use an old BC895XLT on the low bands,I like the triple conversion receiver in it,Here is a link with some first impressions of it when it came out years ago-----

http://strongsignals.net/access/rev...splay&rtype=fi&class=recv&num=002

hope this helps.
73!
Robert-KA2MEK

 

[doctordave]

Robert,

Thanks for the reply. Yep - I sure am please w/ my 895 on VHF-Low, as well....had actually read the strongsignals review before buying a few years back - quite a nice review. Was curious if anything out there was even hotter on VHF-Low....I would suspect not....but you never know.

Thanks again for responding.

Dave

 

[N_Jay]

Robert,

Thanks for the reply. Yep - I sure am please w/ my 895 on VHF-Low, as well....had actually read the strongsignals review before buying a few years back - quite a nice review. Was curious if anything out there was even hotter on VHF-Low....I would suspect not....but you never know.

Thanks again for responding.

Dave

In general, VHF lowband is limited by the noise in the environment and not the sensitivity of the radio.

I would not spend a lot extra to get a few DB better sensitivity. I would be more concerned with adjacent channel and image rejection.

 

[Voyager]

Robert,

Thanks for the reply. Yep - I sure am please w/ my 895 on VHF-Low, as well....had actually read the strongsignals review before buying a few years back - quite a nice review. Was curious if anything out there was even hotter on VHF-Low....I would suspect not....but you never know.

Thanks again for responding.

Dave

In general, VHF lowband is limited by the noise in the environment and not the sensitivity of the radio.

I would not spend a lot extra to get a few DB better sensitivity. I would be more concerned with adjacent channel and image rejection.

Since the adjacent channel on Low Band is 20 kHz away, it's not nearly as much a problem as High Band or UHF, and I can't recall the last time I heard an image problem on Low Band (or adjacent channel interference).

I agree with the environment comment.

Joe M.

 

[INDY72]

On Lo Band you get more issues with skip than adjacent chan interference,... and as to the best Lo Band scanners,.. on the Radio Shack side the PRO-92/2067 is amazing.... and with the attenuater you can kill the sensitivity in saturated areas,.. but for rural areas where Lo Band is still used a lot,.. the 92 is as I siad amazing!

 

[ka2mek]

Hi folks
I was thinking about his thread and remembered that back in the 1970's I had this Regency 4 channel base low band scanner .It did not look like much at all and it was a real inexspensive radio in construction and even in looks.Well to make a long story short that radio had a set of ears on it in regards to low band reception.It only had a small telescoping whip,but the unit I had seemed to reach out and grab the county sheriff cars in OCEAN COUNTY ,NJ on 37.18 simplex.I wonder if anyone remembers those little 4 ch scanner radios?It finaly failed to function as I had left it near an open window (not to swift) and left the house,and then it rained hard and soaked the radio and small table it was on.I upgraded to the bc210 my first digital read out scanner with the "rolling zero's"after that.
73
Robert-KA2MEK

 

[ka2mek]

Robert,

Thanks for the reply. Yep - I sure am please w/ my 895 on VHF-Low, as well....had actually read the strongsignals review before buying a few years back - quite a nice review. Was curious if anything out there was even hotter on VHF-Low....I would suspect not....but you never know.

Thanks again for responding.

Dave

In general, VHF lowband is limited by the noise in the environment and not the sensitivity of the radio.

I would not spend a lot extra to get a few DB better sensitivity. I would be more concerned with adjacent channel and image rejection.

Since the adjacent channel on Low Band is 20 kHz away, it's not nearly as much a problem as High Band or UHF, and I can't recall the last time I heard an image problem on Low Band (or adjacent channel interference).

I agree with the environment comment.

Joe M.

I have to agree with you Joe and Jay,absolutely on the issue of the environment,BUT also with Joe in regards to that 20 khz spacing on the low band. Yes it would not be that much of an anoyance at all with imaging from an adjacent channel in regards to interference unless you lived right on top of the rf emmision source.I to can't think of one instance I ever copied an image coming thru on any low band transmissions I ever monitored.However The issue of SKIP (RF wave Propagation ) is another matter for disscusion.Many times in the past before depts swithed to VHF high or UHF or Trunked Systems,I have had local transmissions here in NJ wiped out by heavy skip conditions coming in from the MID and SOUTH WEST sections of the country and even sometimes as far as California! Now thats decent Skip for the 30 to 50 Mhz range.Since we are now out of sun spot cycle 23 and heading for a MINIMUM rate of eruptions on the sun the phenomina known as "skip" with be rare indeed.We can always hope for a tropospheric ducting event though :wink:
73
Robert-KA2MEK

 

[INDY72]

Actually when it comes to skip even with a lack of SunSpot events,.. you can be assured of it twice a year... fall and spring... and especially near coastal regions. The MUF won't be nearly as high as sunspot skip, but it does get up into the 46.0000 MHz range often, though not nearly as often as the CB through 36.0000 MHz range. As to tropo ducting... I seem to live in an area where this is a weekly event on VHF Hi Band, and at least once a month on UHF. The websight for judging tropo ducting is in my opinion off on its maps by at least one hundred miles. The actual area of reception is much larger than they indicate.