SDS200 vs 536

[MStep]

The x36 receivers are excellent, minus the issues with simulcast. In many respects, I like the *36 series, especially the 536, which (IMHO) has a better form-factor for mobile mounting as opposed to the SDS200. That having been said, the SDS is about all you can use in this type of scanning receiver if you must deal with simulcast, and if you are a sucker for pretty faces, the SDS series have killer displays.

 

[videobruce]

Keep in mind the BCD436 & 536's are real, true radios by design where as the SDS series are more like computers. The 436 & 536's overall are better radios in my opinion.

Is a 536 easier to program over a 200? I don't have much of a simulcast issue (not that I know of. I only have one trunking system and that is only one user. I have a 996P2 and was thinking about the 200 which brings the question are the 996P2 and the 536 similar?

 

[jtwalker]

Is a 536 easier to program over a 200? I don't have much of a simulcast issue (not that I know of. I only have one trunking system and that is only one user.

98% the same. Differences are filters and screen design are on the 200 and not 536, and 200 uses hardwired lan connection where 536 uses a WiFi dongle.

 

[videobruce]

Filters for the simulcast issue?

 

[jtwalker]

Filters for the simulcast issue?

Filters for dealing with RF interference. Handling simulcast is baked into SDS models.

 

[Ensnared]

To be fair, I must admit I was wrong about the SDS 100. I programmed the radio wrong. When I corrected the "hold time" on this radio, it worked very well. It keeps up with the 436HP, but when it does, it locks on like a rabid pit bull.