Sorry Whistler ..

[SCPD]

I put my Home Patrol 1 in the car and using the same small magnet mount external antenna it works GREAT. Same systems being monitored.

I can only conclude that the sensitive front end in the RS scanners gets overloaded by engine interference or car electronics.

As you will see in the thread listed above .. of all the radios tested, the Homepatrol models were the best performing.

I too use my HP1 and not my Whistler scanners as they cannot handle the signals .. but a good notch filter and I should resolve that issue and return the Whistler to happiness.

 

[scosgt]

Which thread?

 

[SCPD]

Which thread?

Very top post .. see the 2 links to other RR threads. The models tested were all the radios that were available at the time .. I did not have access to a 536HP for example as I do not own one.

 

[scosgt]

Got it. Thanks

 

[SCPD]

I am kinda sorry for giving Whistler a hard time re their scanners, but honestly .. a lot of it is warranted.

I have been testing my WS-1095 vs the HP1 and the HP1 totally kicks the 1095's butt. As long as the signals are relatively strong .. the 1095 is performing well.

But it is the weaker signals where the HP1 totally shines.

So .. to update, I have a FM Trap filter inline .. and that is for all my scanners so all the radios are using the exact same conditions.

Tomorrow night I will be adding a VHF notch filter .. to notch out my 3 strongest signals (in 162-164 MHz range) to see what a difference that makes. It is all tuned up and ready to go .. just getting it tomorrow night.

If I set the 1095's squelch level to 'Min' .. it may receive the same signal but it will not scan unless set to 8, so really what good is that. I will be looking to see if the sloppy squelch circuit on the 1095 can be fixed.

So the 1095 is missing transmissions that the HP1 is stopping on.
The two scanners are programmed with the identical frequencies and programmed exactly the same.

I am using some amateur 2m repeater and simplex frequencies for testing. However .. I have not heard any real weak signal simplex action yet, just repeaters .. though some of them are a bit on the weak side.

These are ALL conventional frequencies .. no trunking anything. So no funny business at play here.

The radios are on the same antenna .. so totally equal playing field.

I have also used some law enforcement frequencies .. and the HP1 is stopping on the weaker signals and the WS-1095 is just moving along like they were not there.

I will post more in the next couple days when I see how they perform once the notch filter is added to the mix.

Thanks ..
edmscan

 

[SCPD]

Added my notch filter and the intermod is 99% gone. It was only affecting a very very small group of frequencies but it was still annoying.

But in comparison to the nearby Homepatrol .. it pales in comparison. It just scans on by .. kinda sad.

I totally understand why a fellow RR member from Los Angeles returned 2 1095's before going back to his Unidens.

Time for Whistler to fix their front end issues. Even if they have excellent audio, if the scanner will not stop on signals, what good are all the bells and whistles. Oh .. or extra buttons.

 

[radio3353]

Added my notch filter and the intermod is 99% gone. It was only affecting a very very small group of frequencies but it was still annoying.

But in comparison to the nearby Homepatrol .. it pales in comparison. It just scans on by .. kinda sad.

I totally understand why a fellow RR member from Los Angeles returned 2 1095's before going back to his Unidens.

Time for Whistler to fix their front end issues. Even if they have excellent audio, if the scanner will not stop on signals, what good are all the bells and whistles. Oh .. or extra buttons.

Do you have any experience with the HomePatrol 2 and Phase 2 systems? Thanks.

 

[SCPD]

Do you have any experience with the HomePatrol 2 and Phase 2 systems? Thanks.

I only have a HP1 .. but one of my friends has a HP2 and I have played with it quite a bit, and borrowed one for a week.

But .. no P25 listening as there are almost no active P25 systems here within my listening area, something that will change in a year or two .. but for now I am very happy about that as I hate P25 due to the crappy audio. I will take good ole FM any day over that.

 

[sibbley]

Do you have any experience with the HomePatrol 2 and Phase 2 systems? Thanks.

I have the HP2. It works well on Phase 2, however, the 436 is better.

 

[AA6IO]

I totally understand why a fellow RR member from Los Angeles returned 2 1095's before going back to his Unidens.

Speaking as the "fellow RR member from Los Angeles" to whom edmscan is probably referring to,
I truly wish the situation with the 1095 would have been different. I think competition is good, including among scanner manufacturers. I now agree with edmscan that the 1095 issue is mostly one of "overloading." The 1095s I tried (both of them) just get wiped out by all the stuff here in Los Angeles and no combination of filtering (eg. with Par filters) gave me a satisfactory result. They were missing 30 to 40% of the traffic my Unidens were receiving, and I had to turn the squelch up to 8 or 10 to even get any real scanning action.
Although I prefer Uniden, I certainly have used GRE/RS scanners over the years. Yes, I have experienced desensitization problems with units like the PSR-600/PRO-197/PRO-106 and the newer corresponding Whistler/RS models, but nothing like with the 1095.Par filters in the FM or 152 Mhz range always solved the problem. My 1080, which is supposedly the same, is even better in this regard.
I hope Whistler takes a good look at this overload issue. If not, they likely won't be around too long in the scanner game. Perhaps they have no real desire to do so. Whatever they need to do, they need to change something if these 1095 and new keyboard models coming out are going to be useful alternatives.
We will all see what happens. Regards to all my fellow RR members.

 

[AA6IO]

I have the HP2. It works well on Phase 2, however, the 436 is better.

I concur with Sibbley. My HP2 is good, but both my 436HP and 536HP are better on P25, both phase 1 and 2, in my experience.

Steve AA6IO

 

[prcguy]

I want to upgrade soon from my PRO-96 and am looking at the 1088 when it comes out. Is the Intermod problem being discussed apply to GRE/Whistler hand held scanners with stock rubber duck? I'm also in Los Angeles with lots of potential strong interfering signals but so far the PRO-96 has been very good with the stock antenna.
prcguy

 

[AA6IO]

My WS1080. does not seem to have this issue. So perhaps the new keyboard version will be good.
Steve

 

[SCPD]

I want to upgrade soon from my PRO-96 and am looking at the 1088 when it comes out. Is the Intermod problem being discussed apply to GRE/Whistler hand held scanners with stock rubber duck? I'm also in Los Angeles with lots of potential strong interfering signals but so far the PRO-96 has been very good with the stock antenna.
prcguy

It is just my experience .. but if you just use the rubber duck, you should be good. The biggest problem is when people add 'more antenna' hoping to hear more, or hoping to hear anything when their radio is pretty much already struggling with the signals it has.

The outcome is often that they in fact make the problem worse .. and yes, hear less. This is cause .. they do not understand the problem they are having. It is almost never a problem with not enough sensitivity with these scanners .. they are very good in that regard.

I have it on my list to measure the actual sensitivity of the HP1, HP2 and 1095 as I think that would be a good addition to the thread linked above.

I concur with sshermanmd in that the squelch on the 1095 has to be set very high and as a result, you may be missing weaker signals. Although I think the bigger issue is often not the squelch but likely that the radio is still struggling with the strong signals that remain.

Unless you have another scanner with the same programming to compare to (and I do) .. it is pretty hard to tell that it is not picking up all that it maybe should.

Sure the Whistler scanners have a very good interface and great audio, I think the buttons will be a good addition, but unless they fix their front end issues .. they can add all the buttons in the world, it is still a bit of a failure.

That does not mean that you will not enjoy your new Whistler scanner .. but you have to be cautious about what you do with it. Adding that new super antenna .. may be just enough to make things worse and not better.

Overall I am much happier with my 1095 than I was .. but it is still not my go to scanner.

Probably the only real fix .. add some attenuation (or in my case a notch filter, after determining the problem frequencies that are overloading your radio) until the front end becomes linear again.

If attenuation is the only answer .. you are just shooting yourself in the foot. So are you really winning ? Probably not.

For those that are interested .. I had issues with 3 frequencies. 162.1500, 163.2300 and 163.6200. My notch is centered on 162.1500 as it was the strongest. It is down -20 dB ... and -8 db and -3 db for the other 2. It was just enough to get rid of the intermod on my HomePatrol and make my WS-1095 perform better.

 

[SCPD]

My WS1080. does not seem to have this issue. So perhaps the new keyboard version will be good.
Steve

Is that on the same antenna as the WS-1095 ?

I imagine that you are just using a duckie on that handheld and from what I have seen .. you are usually fine with such a setup.

Just my personal opinion .. but I do not like to put more than a 'rubber duckie' on any handheld, period.

 

[stingray327]

Speaking as the "fellow RR member from Los Angeles" to whom edmscan is probably referring to,
I truly wish the situation with the 1095 would have been different. I think competition is good, including among scanner manufacturers. I now agree with edmscan that the 1095 issue is mostly one of "overloading." The 1095s I tried (both of them) just get wiped out by all the stuff here in Los Angeles and no combination of filtering (eg. with Par filters) gave me a satisfactory result. They were missing 30 to 40% of the traffic my Unidens were receiving, and I had to turn the squelch up to 8 or 10 to even get any real scanning action.
Although I prefer Uniden, I certainly have used GRE/RS scanners over the years. Yes, I have experienced desensitization problems with units like the PSR-600/PRO-197/PRO-106 and the newer corresponding Whistler/RS models, but nothing like with the 1095.Par filters in the FM or 152 Mhz range always solved the problem. My 1080, which is supposedly the same, is even better in this regard.
I hope Whistler takes a good look at this overload issue. If not, they likely won't be around too long in the scanner game. Perhaps they have no real desire to do so. Whatever they need to do, they need to change something if these 1095 and new keyboard models coming out are going to be useful alternatives.
We will all see what happens. Regards to all my fellow RR members.

I was not aware that the 1080 and 1095 Whistler scanners had probelms? Any other problems besides missing weak signals?

 

[BenScan]

Yes, missing strong signals. Specifically from P25 simulcast trunking systems.

I was not aware that the 1080 and 1095 Whistler scanners had probelms? Any other problems besides missing weak signals?

 

[bigcam406]

i just picked one up and im not having any issues whatsoever with phase2 lsm.location location location folks.....

 

[stingray327]

i just picked one up and im not having any issues whatsoever with phase2 lsm.location location location folks.....

Perhaps antenna also. I am using the ST-2 base antenna and with great results.

 

[Voyager]

That's because decode issues will vary from system to system. Some people think that because they have issues, everyone must have them. That is not the case. Some systems will work fine, and others will have issues. Usually the ones with the issues everyone will have issues with.