SDS200 or 536hp

[scannerman200]

Just looking for opinions. Is it worth it to go ahead and get the SDS200 over the 536 HP for $100 difference both brand new? I know about the simulcast on the 200, but I only sometimes monitor a couple of neighboring counties that use it. My county uses P25 conventional right now and I do monitor some conventional and a couple of non simulcast systems as well.

 

[J-Wrock]

The SDS 200 has a larger screen that you can customize which I like since I can make it easier to see the information I want to see. Since you aren’t worried about simulcast, the screen is the only major difference I can think of.

 

[Bob1955]

Just looking for opinions. Is it worth it to go ahead and get the SDS200 over the 536 HP for $100 difference both brand new? I know about the simulcast on the 200, but I only sometimes monitor a couple of neighboring counties that use it. My county uses P25 conventional right now and I do monitor some conventional and a couple of non simulcast systems as well.

I'd purchase a Bearcat BCD996P2 over a 536HP as it is MUCH better in performance as I have had both, and no SD card to get corrupt either.

 

[scannerman200]

Thanks for your reply. What do you not like about the 536 versus the 996 other than the SD card?

 

[bkantor]

I have both - reception seems identical (or pretty darned close) - I am a big fan of the WiFi dongle on the 536, but also love the color display on the SDS200. If I had a choice today, I would spend the extra $ on the SDS 200 (just my opinion)

 

[eaf1956]

I for one had a 536 actually more than 1, I hated the screen and the WiFi dongle. The 996P2 which I also had does better on VHF at least the ones I had.

 

[scannerman200]

Is the display/battery/clock still an issue on the 536? I know they had the issues years ago and was resolved, but wasn’t sure about the newer production units if they were having issues or not.

 

[Chris0516]

The BCD996p2, and. The BCD536HP, can't do Simulcast out-of-the-box.

 

[hiegtx]

Is the display/battery/clock still an issue on the 536? I know they had the issues years ago and was resolved, but wasn’t sure about the newer production units if they were having issues or not.

I don't have one of the "newer" 536HPs. There were problems with the earlier productions, which Uniden addressed with a service campaign, as well as (based on comments by the late UPMan) changes in the production process. The few comments I've seen since then, regarding fading display or battery issues, were from early production units that never were sent in for the repair process. I don't recall any battery, or 'fading display', complaints for units actually produced since that time.

The 996P2 is, from all comments, a solid performing scanner. I've had zero problems with my 536HP nor SDS200.

If, at some point, you might want to connect your scanner to your network, the SDS200 would be a better option than using the WiFi dongle on a 536HP. Also, while you indicate that you don't have problematic simulcast systems to deal with at this time, that could change, Fir thise reasons, if allowed by your budget, I would lean toward the SDS200.

 

[noaim]

Id take the 200 hands down, I have had both and the 200 is just amazing to me

 

[Nascar18]

If you don't need to listen to simulcast systems I would look at 996P2 or a Whistler scanner.
The SDS200 is one of the worse UHF analog scanner I have ever heard.
Check with listeners in your area before you buy.

 

[K4EET]

Hi @scannerman200. I have the Uniden BCD536HP scanner and use it on a simulcast system with no problem. Whether or not you have simulcast distortion is based on location, location, location. In my case, I am receiving just one site of the multisite simulcast system. I have a “minimalist” antenna system (800 MHz quarter-wave mag-mount on a pie pan in the basement which is below ground level — LOL 😂). I can receive everything that I want to listen to with that setup. If I ever put up an antenna outside, I will probably upgrade to the Uniden SDS200 (or whatever is current). In your case, if I were you, I would purchase the SDS200. That way you will be covered for simulcast systems.

 

[rf_patriot200]

After having the SDS200 for 5 years now, I'd never go back to anything less, and possibly even buy a second SDS in the future. I've Never removed the SD Card, and Always done updates using a cable. Mine was new in 2019.

 

[StoliRaz]

I'd purchase a Bearcat BCD996P2 over a 536HP as it is MUCH better in performance as I have had both, and no SD card to get corrupt either.

I've owned both, my biggest knock against the 436/536HP models is the scan speed seems rather slow. That said, I've never had a microSD card go bad in one, including a the cheapo Walmart ONN card I'm running right now.

That said, the "HP" models have more useful features than the 996P2 (like recording) and are much easier to program.

As for SDS vs 536HP- are you planning on listening to a digital simulcast system? If yes, get the SDS. Otherwise, a 536HP will work fine.

 

[mass-man]

The BCD996p2, and. The BCD536HP, can't do Simulcast out-of-the-box.

Not to be rude, but yes they can. The deciding factor is the system, and the users location. I put a 996P2 in the car, drove down to a newly installed simulcast system, and things worked fine the entire time I could receive the system. Sold a 536HP to a fellow who plans to stream the same system, who tells me, from his house at least, no decoding probems.

 

[K9KLC]

Not to be rude, but yes they can. The deciding factor is the system, and the users location. I put a 996P2 in the car, drove down to a newly installed simulcast system, and things worked fine the entire time I could receive the system. Sold a 536HP to a fellow who plans to stream the same system, who tells me, from his house at least, no decoding probems.

Agreed. All depends on the system and location. I've had both a 996xt and 536 here and they worked pretty well "here". They both struggled at a friends house at a different location on the simulcast system here. My son has the 996 now and it works well flat his place in the extreme south end of the system.

I no longer monitor simulcast with the 536, I've switched to Unication Pagers for that.

 

[ofd8001]

SDS 200 without a doubt. A whole lot better on simulcast, which I have to contend with. Display is much improved. I have a 200 sitting beside a 536, with the 200 being my "go to" scanner.

I would not consider a 996 series scanner. They have certain memory limitations which are not friendly to large statewide systems. (I do traveling with the scanner in the car.) On the positive side for them, they are less costly.

Yeah, SD cards have been known to get corrupted. I've never had the experience, but just in case I have several spares.

 

[I_Am_Infinite]

Just looking for opinions. Is it worth it to go ahead and get the SDS200 over the 536 HP for $100 difference both brand new? I know about the simulcast on the 200, but I only sometimes monitor a couple of neighboring counties that use it. My county uses P25 conventional right now and I do monitor some conventional and a couple of non simulcast systems as well.

I'd get 200. U never know ur neighboring county's having a simulcast system, a trunking system might want to get one themselves. I'd never thought our county wud built out a new 700 MHz p25p2 simulcast system. Here we are thou now, out county is Live on the new system now, for Lil over 3 weeks.

Lake county, a bigger county bordering on our northern border built a very similar system about 9-11 years ago or so. They built a 700 MHz phase 2 p25 simulcast back years ago. Probably different brand, ours is Kenwood not sure theirs.

Nonetheless u cud really cud get the 536HP, if all u listen to really is conventional p25 with occasional simulcast. If it were me I'd be prepared if they change,and get a 200. Is there a state trunked system in your county already?

 

[Ubbe]

If you need to sometimes receive those distant simulcast systems I would recommend a cheap $25 SDR dongle, the same receiver that are used in SDS scanners to be able to receive simulcast, if you can monitor from home using a computer. But there's also $50 Raspberry Pi mini computers that can be used mobile.

If you don't need all the extra in a BCD536 like database, WiFi, recording and so on, then the 996P2 will do as it's receiver are based on the very solid BCT15. The BCD536's receiver are a bit different but its performance are very close.

In my area people buy SDS100E and SDS200E but get disappointed with their performance and then I can pick them up at half price. They are really only designed to handle simulcast systems and even Unidens project manager for them, Upman, stated that he recommended another model if you do not suffer from simulcast issues.

/Ubbe

 

[scannerman200]

I’ve heard on the 200 that a lot of people are having issues with it going silent and some having to send it in for repair for the circuit board. Is this a common issue on the newer production units? I know sometimes that the SD card can be the issue as well.