Why are trunking / digital SO large ??

Status
Not open for further replies.

rja1

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Dec 14, 2004
Messages
114
Location
NY / HUDSON VALLEY
I have a YAESU VX-3R that doesn't fill the palm of my hand. Receives DC-daylight & transmitts on 2 Meters & 70 cm. Weighs in at about 4 oz! Look at ICOM's R5.......years old technology & it's small.

How about it, UNIDEN & GRE ??

bob
N2OAM
 

SCPD

QRT
Joined
Feb 24, 2001
Messages
0
Location
Virginia
Yaesu Loves to Make them Small. I once met a Yaesu salesman and asked why they don't make a trunking radio. He said the trunking capability requires expensive licensing from the major manufacturers of the said technology. I suspect it's not an interest to them anyway.
 

BuiltonAsus

Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2007
Messages
123
Well, all scanners include many more buttons than the VX-3R, but I agree that most scanners could be slimmed down a bit. Uniden comes the closest, especially with the BC-246T, but even the BCD396T seems large.

I think scanners could be slimmed down to the size of the new Yaesu VX-8R. Of course that also might mean I would go blind too trying to figure out all the button and getting mad that my fat fingers would press 3 button at the same time.
 

SCPD

QRT
Joined
Feb 24, 2001
Messages
0
Location
Virginia
Yaesu isn't a a scanner?? its primarily a 2 way radio. 2 different things here
 
Last edited:

Chris-KH2PM

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 1, 2008
Messages
262
Location
Wake Co. NC
I have a YAESU VX-3R that doesn't fill the palm of my hand. Receives DC-daylight & transmitts on 2 Meters & 70 cm. Weighs in at about 4 oz! Look at ICOM's R5.......years old technology & it's small.

How about it, UNIDEN & GRE ??

bob
N2OAM
Yaesu does make a very small P25 radio for public safety consumption. Only problem is, it won't 'trunk track' like a scanner.

I'm looking for one of these for a Ham radio VHF/UHF transceiver.

http://www.vertexstandard.com/index...7882D59BFAD3475384&DivisionID=64&isArchived=0

It's about the same size as the VX-7, or so it appears.
 

Caesar

Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2005
Messages
258
Location
Cayce, SC
I have a YAESU VX-3R that doesn't fill the palm of my hand. Receives DC-daylight & transmitts on 2 Meters & 70 cm. Weighs in at about 4 oz! Look at ICOM's R5.......years old technology & it's small.

How about it, UNIDEN & GRE ??

bob
N2OAM
i've had the mini radios, VX=2, but as far as a scanner goes, i wouldn't want one smaller than the BCD396T, it is a perfect size, i admit the Radio Shack/GRE radios are extremely large but i think uniden has the perfect size down. and as another said, you need more keys on the scanner than the yaesu and you want a larger screen on the scanner that you care about on a ham radio....
 

talviar

Member
Joined
Dec 22, 2002
Messages
335
Location
Uniontown, PA
back to the original post. . . . why is my ham radio so tiny and can scan dc-daylight while the professional trunking radios so big and unibanded. . . . .

Until July '08 I carried an MTS2000 Motorola 800 Trunking radio which was in use on my belt daily approx 12 hours a day 5 days a week and around 10 hours on weekends on my belt since July '95. Radio plastic recased once in 13 years due to a fall from 15 feet to the ground. (Only reason I don't carry the MTS2000 anymore is I was issued an XTS2500, MTS2000 now sitting at house as a backup unit/scanner)

When the ham gear in the small package routinely holds up to 10-15 years of service with minimal to no repairs then I'll worry about why the trunking portables and such are so big.

Durability is one factor, receivers that work well in RF environments is probably another.

73,
Tony
 

LEH

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 23, 2003
Messages
1,453
Location
Yorktown, Virginia
As to size, the smallest scanner I have ever owned is the ICOM R-1. Yes it precedes trunk tracking and such, but it went from near DC to around 1 GHz.

Two major issues with it though. One, the buttons were so small I could hardly push one. Secondly, the audio was way too weak. But it was a good scanner.

I personally wouldn't want any thing much smaller than the 246 or 396 anyway. Not with all the 'info' we want to see on the display and other options. Technology probably could handle the size, I am not sure I could.
 

WX5JCH

Completely Banned for the Greater Good
Banned
Joined
Dec 7, 2004
Messages
941
Location
Elk City, Oklahoma
You want small? I have a samsung blackjack II, I can receive streaming scanner audio on it. now that's small...
 

Stick0413

Member
Joined
May 16, 2005
Messages
1,118
Location
Hopewell, VA
They are big because that is the way I like them. :lol:

Seriously though I do like them the size they are. I really do not care for something smaller. It would be a toss up among everyone here on the size they like. So the manufacturers are sticking to what works best for them.
 

Chris-KH2PM

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 1, 2008
Messages
262
Location
Wake Co. NC
The smallest transceiver I have is a Yaesu VX-1R. I've had it since new. Still haven't found anything smaller.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yaesu_VX-1R
It's a great 'scanner' too, but won't do trunking of course.

As for the MOTOROLAs, Tony 'talviar' hit it right on. The big radios hold up to the abuse of daily carry and have a long lasting battery. I love my big Johnson....heheheh

http://www.eham.net/reviews/detail/6736

http://www.efjohnson.com/

As for scanners and their sizes, I have a PRO96 and BCD396T. To me, the '96 has better receive qualites and audio. Yet I find that I carry my 396 with me all the time due to it's smaller size. The '96 stays in my vehicle or in the house.
 
Last edited:

n1das

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Feb 17, 2003
Messages
1,510
Location
Nashua, NH
As to size, the smallest scanner I have ever owned is the ICOM R-1. Yes it precedes trunk tracking and such, but it went from near DC to around 1 GHz.

Two major issues with it though. One, the buttons were so small I could hardly push one. Secondly, the audio was way too weak. But it was a good scanner.

I personally wouldn't want any thing much smaller than the 246 or 396 anyway. Not with all the 'info' we want to see on the display and other options. Technology probably could handle the size, I am not sure I could.
EXACTLY. There are several factors that have to be considered. One of the biggest is the human interface. I also have a Yaesu VX-1R, but I practically NEVER use it. Although it's a cute and cool radio I consider it more a novelty radio instead of a workhorse radio for daily use and abuse. I recently saw someone with a wristwatch cell phone. It was kinda cool but I know I'd never want one....too small and cumbersome to use.

I like the size of my KENWOOD UHF commercial radios. They're smaller and do a LOT more compared to the commercial bricks of 20 years ago. They do what they need to do without sacrificing battery life, features, performance (including Rx audio), ruggedness, and user interface. I wish my handheld scanners were built like a commercial radio.

The commercial radios are the size they are for who is using them and the environment they're being used in.
 

n1das

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Feb 17, 2003
Messages
1,510
Location
Nashua, NH
The smallest transceiver I have is a Yaesu VX-1R. I've had it since new. Still haven't found anything smaller.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yaesu_VX-1R
It's a great 'scanner' too, but won't do trunking of course.

As for the MOTOROLAs, Tony 'talivar' hit it right on. The big radios hold up to the abuse of daily carry and have a long lasting battery. I love my big Johnson....heheheh

http://www.eham.net/reviews/detail/6736

http://www.efjohnson.com/

As for scanners and their sizes, I have a PRO96 and BCD396T. To me, the '96 has better receive qualites and audio. Yet I find that I carry my 396 with me all the time due to it's smaller size. The '96 stays in my vehicle or in the house.

I also have a Pro-96 and 396T. I love them both and use both. I like the better audio and battery life from the '96 but I like the 396T's smaller size. One thing I don't like about the 396T is the battery life. The 396T takes 3 AA cells and I wish Uniden had designed it to take 4 AA cells instead of 3. It would make the 396T about 3/4" taller but it would balance out the size and give it a better feel and maybe some better battery life due to more voltage headroom available.

OTOH, one thing I hate about the Pro-96 is the cheap crackerbox construction. The Pro-96 can be crushed a lot easier than the 396T can with how they are built (I've seen the inside of both). The larger size of the '96 doesn't automatically make it more rugged. I like my radios to be rugged and built like a brick $h!thou$e.

I think marketing may also have something to do with it. The Pro-96 definitely could have been made a lot smaller than it is. Marketing may have said that it has to fit a certain form factor to be viable in the marketplace.
 

Twister_2

Member
Feed Provider
Joined
Mar 1, 2008
Messages
547
Location
Dauphin County, PA
I am going to get a VX-170 sometime early next week in the mail. I will tell the size and how it fits in my hands. I could even post a picture or two in my hand or next to other popular transceivers. It is not a scanner, but it still is a radio.
 
Last edited:

N8IAA

Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
7,087
Location
Fortunately, GA
I am going to get a VX-170 sometime early next week in the mail. I will tell the size and how it fits in my hands. I could even post a picture or two in my hand or next to other popular transceivers.
This is the size that scanners should be. Even the 246. I would buy a Uniden in a heartbeat if they made a digital trunker the size of the 246/2 AA batteries. I have a 170 and love the audio and size...........now if it were a dualbander.............
Larry
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top