tvengr
Well Known Member
The BCD996P2 and BCD536HP are exactly the same size. I have both. The SDS200 is larger.
Which is the better scanner
- Thread starter Bonkk083
- Start date
Which scanner would you choose since you have both and are the scanners the same thing how they operate
The both hear they are both upgradeable.
The question is what do you want in a scanner?
Just to listen to traffic?
To listen to it and track data like what slot a TDMA system is using.
What if a NXDN or DMR trunking system pops up in your area with the 536 you can find the lcn's with the 996p2 someone has to tell what the lcn's are.
My SDSx00's are geek toys with all the data about systems they display.
The question is what do you want in a scanner?
Just to listen to traffic?
To listen to it and track data like what slot a TDMA system is using.
What if a NXDN or DMR trunking system pops up in your area with the 536 you can find the lcn's with the 996p2 someone has to tell what the lcn's are.
My SDSx00's are geek toys with all the data about systems they display.
Akuriko
Member
get the 536 hp that is perfect in my opinion
Maybe condsider a Home Patrol 2?
Looking at the OPs area, there are couple of DMR or NXDN channels in neighboring counties. And, as you've noted, the 536HP & 99692 can get the upgrade if needed.
I have the 536HP. While I don't have the 996P2, I have it's portable 'little brother', the 325P2.
While you don't (at this time) have simulcast issues in your county, there is some in your neighboring area. While the SDS series is the best for that, the x36HP scanners are better at dealing with it than the P2 or Home Patrol scanners. Since you are not in those specific counties, it might not be an issue for you at all. But the 536HP does have more features and capabilities than the P2 or HP scanners.
The 536hp be better at simulcast than the 996p2 is what you saying
Yes
When I got the SDS100, I took it, and 3 other scanners on a 'road trip', to areas locally where there have been numerous complaints about simulcast issues.
As expected, the SDS100 was the best, missing just almost nothing.
My 436HP (handheld equivalent to the 536HP) was good 75-80% of the time.
The 325P2 (handheld sibling to the 996P2) was in the 50 to 60% range.
Bringing up the rear was the TRX-1, in the 40-50% range.
Of course, as we've kicked this around, you do not have simulcast in your county. At least, not at this time.
A couple of your adjacent counties do have a simulcast site, but you might be far enough away from them there is no issue. (I'm surrounded by various simulcast sites on several systems. But, in general, the ones that I'm some distance away, but still can receive them, I don't have problems on those.)
But, for the umpteenth time, simulcast is location sensitive. Whether or not you might have an issue with neighboring counties is impossible to predict from my location. The 536HP is better at this than the P2 scanners, at least that's what I see in my area. That, of course, does not guarantee you'll see the same results,
If you want to try the 996P2, then order it from Amazon. Amazon has no-fault returns, no restocking fee. If it did not work, then return it & get the 536HP.
The 536HP does have some features not found on the 996P2, such as an LCN finder for DMR & NXDN trunked systems. There are none currently in the database for your immediate area, but odds are there are one or more systems used by businesses, but nobody has found them & gathered enough detail to submit to the database. Of course, even though there may be some of those, it's entirely possible that it's for a company you have no interest in trying to monitor.
If you want to stick with something that's more reliable and easier, get a SDS100 with the Remtronix 700-900 MHz Antenna (O-Ring Version). The Remtronix Antenna handles reception well with or without Simulcast. Not only that, it also works great on VHF/UHF too. Digital or Analog, this band is incredible on how great it performs.
Would the 536 pick up trunking towers 30 miles away that is simulcast that's how close those counties are
No way to answer that positively. Too many variables- How high is the transmit tower closest to you? Any hills, clusters of taller buildings, or other obstructions between your location & the transmitter? Are the antennas oriented to focus transmissions on their coverage area? What kind of antenna do you plan to use? A directional antenna, aimed at a specific site might pick it up better (and at least partially negate simulcast problems), but then you might lose coverage for systems in other directions.
There are some systems that are ~30 miles from me that I can hear. One, when I'm visiting a friend a hundred miles or so west of DFW, I can hear a site that's at least 50 miles out. On the other hand, Grand Prairie, a sizable Dallas suburb to my west, less than ten miles away, nada. Can't hear a peep. It's partially impacted by terrain, but when they upgraded from a Moto Type 2 system to P25 Phase II, part of their licensing request for the changes included reducing the power used, as well as lowering the antennas on their towers, & focusing the signal on their area. (Part of that was because one of their frequencies was adjacent to, & interfered with, one on a system operated by a different suburb.
The antenna I have covers 140-175mhz
The simulcast sites in your neighboring counties are 800MHz. The 140 to 175MHz range covers 2 meter Ham and Vhf-high. That's not a good antenna for an 800MHz system. That does not imply that it won't work at all, just that it's sensitivity is not in the frequency range used by thoase sites. That could work either way, good or bad. Good would be that, since 800 is not it's strong point, that conceivably would mean less interference from more distant simulcast sites in those counties. Or, it could be so bad at receiving 800MHz that it does not work. No reason that you should not try it out, just that your results are, at this point, are undetermined.
if you havent figured it out by now every body has their own opinion about what they like. well thats them, not you. do your own research and make up your own mind and how much you want to spend for your listening pleasure. another thing is they dont really tell you how problematic the newer scanners are which is really sad for their price. another consideration is what antenna are you or do you want to use and where are going to install it. if i purchase something i want to be satisfied with it, not regret it by listening to others.
So I guess you must have a wideband multi output antenna amplifier? Make?
I get my local digital 800 is good but I know it's not simulcast trying them out
Like I told you I have listed the differences between the 2 536 996p2. The only choice you have to make is what you want in the scanner as they both receive the same the 536 has a few more bell and whistles in the data that is displayed that has nothing to do with receiving radio signals its up to you what you want and how much you want to spend.
Is simulcast like towers linked together that has the same frequencies and that what causes distortion inference and confuse scanners that aren't capable am I explaining that right
Yes Simulcast is multiple sites linked together using the same frequencies at the sametime. Multiple signals arriving at you antenna at different times is what causes the distortion or loss of signals.
Links to Wiki pages with more information about Simulcast were posted in your 'recommendations between Uniden & Whistler' thread in the General Scanning forum.
