Ok I know it all depends, but which do you consider the top of the line base
and handheld scanners and overall 'best'? Also which are best buys? The
BC246T looks like a good deal for the money. What do you like? Will the best
of the digital scanners also do as well as the non digital scanners for non
digital listening? Or are there pitfalls to avoid? I'm not sure if I want a
base or handheld for a starter.

Bill

Suggest you visit RadioReference web site. Membership is FREE! Visit their
forums, and you will find more information than you could imagine! Also be
sure to check out their frequency database for the entire U.S.!
http://www.radioreference.com/
http://www.radioreference.com/modules.php?name=RR

Bill Crocker

"Bill" wrote in message
. ..
Ok I know it all depends, but which do you consider the top of the line
base and handheld scanners and overall 'best'? Also which are best buys?
The BC246T looks like a good deal for the money. What do you like? Will
the best of the digital scanners also do as well as the non digital
scanners for non digital listening? Or are there pitfalls to avoid? I'm
not sure if I want a base or handheld for a starter.

Bill

On 2005-10-26 21:28:57 -0700, "Bill" said:

Ok I know it all depends, but which do you consider the top of the line
base and handheld scanners and overall 'best'? Also which are best
buys? The BC246T looks like a good deal for the money. What do you
like? Will the best of the digital scanners also do as well as the non
digital scanners for non digital listening? Or are there pitfalls to
avoid? I'm not sure if I want a base or handheld for a starter.

Bill

Hi Bill

Please allow my "two cents" worth...

Just yesterday I purchased a Uniden BC796D. This unit will sit on the
shelf and be strictly for base station use. For a hand-held I have an
Icom IC-R20, which is really an all-mode communications receiver.

After first powering up the BC796D, I was able to immediately enter
frequencies into memory channels and start the scanning function. This
scanner will require a bit of a learning curve because of all the
features it has to offer. The operators manual was downloaded first to
become familiarized with it's operation and to discover what features
it actually had.

Features which are most important may include:

1. A "VFO" control. This will allow the frequencies to be tuned very
easily, as opposed to using the "up & down" controls used on most
scanners. On the BC796D, this control will also allow quick memory
channel selection. So far, the VFO knob is way to small on the BC796D,
as opposed to the VFO control knob on the BC898T. That is about the
only negative issue so far, but then I've only been playing with it
less than 24 hours!

2. Selectable tuning steps instead of the default tuning step ranges
which may be off a few KC's from where you want to listen. Also the
option of selecting the mode, AM - FM - WFM - NFM.

3. "NLD" Nice Large Display. This is something the BC796D excels in.

4. Since my vision isn't what it used to be, I've found the newer
units, wether it be Radio Shack or Uniden, to name just a couple, now
have the complete front panel and push-buttons backlit. I would have
to say that this alone is the main reason I chose the BC9796D. In a
dimly lighted room the controls are very easy to navigate. Plus, it's
looks way cool!

5. Continuos frequency coverage! This is a very handy option. Even
though the Uniden BC796D has a few gaps, the range is sufficient for my
needs. The Icom IC-R20 covers everything from 100KHZ - 3Ghz, except
800Mhz cellular. The R20 is a receiver with complete control over
tuning steps, modes etc. Plus it has dual VFO's. This will allow the
reception of both the input and output frequencies for repeater
systems, very handy!

6. Radio Shack as well as some of the other manufactures have a feature
called "Signal-Stalker" which could be of interest. The "Pro-2051" has
this feature and it's a close-out at $149.95. In my opinion, including
that and the display is about the only thing it has going for it.
Reduced frequency coverage, non-selectable frequency steps, however it
does have good audio.

7. Good sensitivity, rejection to intermod, adjacent signal rejection,
the list goes on.

8. Is the reception of digital modes of importance?

So far I'm very impressed with this radio. It is connected to a Icom
AH-7000 Discone antenna outside at about sixteen feet above ground.
This unit hears very well and should provide many years of reliable use.

Well I hope this information will be of some use in your decision and
hopefully not add to any confusion you may have already had.

Best regards

george

"Bill" wrote in message
. ..
Ok I know it all depends, but which do you consider the top of the line
base and handheld scanners and overall 'best'? Also which are best buys?
The BC246T looks like a good deal for the money. What do you like? Will
the best of the digital scanners also do as well as the non digital
scanners for non digital listening? Or are there pitfalls to avoid? I'm
not sure if I want a base or handheld for a starter.

Bill


I have a 246 that I love!! The Police here do not use digital so I have
never bought or tried one. I started with a Pro-95 and then bought a 246.
The 246 works just as well, and is MUCH smaller which is what I like so
much. Makes it much easier to carry.
The 246 is about $200.00 including the AC adapter and PC cable. Well worth
it.
--
Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy.
--Benjamin Franklin

On Fri, 28 Oct 2005 10:46:52 -0700, George said
in rec.radio.scanner:

2. Selectable tuning steps instead of the default tuning step ranges
which may be off a few KC's from where you want to listen.

If the frequency is "a few KCs off", someone should notify the
licensee, because they're operating illegally. If it's 5 KHz off,
you're probably trying to receive the wrong frequency. A lot of PS
frequencies found on the internet were found by people who had their
scanners on the wrong frequency, and when you try to match that
frequency with a better scanner, you think that the transmitter is off
frequency. No, it's the knowledge of the person reporting the
frequency that was off. Most technicians know how to keep the
transmitters on frequency - it's what they were hired for.

5. Continuos frequency coverage! This is a very handy option. Even
though the Uniden BC796D has a few gaps, the range is sufficient for my
needs. The Icom IC-R20 covers everything from 100KHZ - 3Ghz, except
800Mhz cellular.

It covers 1.8 GHz cellular? Or did you just forget to mention that?
(Not that receiving it would do any good - there are NO analog
services in the "PCS" band.)

7. Good sensitivity, rejection to intermod

Not in any receiver ever made, if the intermod is external to the
scanner. If it's on the frequency you're receiving, you'll receive
it. GRE, Uniden or a Motorola G-strip (which was probably the
tightest receiver ever made - the thing had cavities for front end
filters).

You may mean a receiver that doesn't suffer much from front end
overload. Typical of Uniden, NOT typical of GRE. (You're almost
assured of overloading the front end of a GRE scanner if you put on an
external antenna, unless you don't live anywhere near any
transmitter.)

adjacent signal rejection

Also not with almost any scanner ever made. Most scanners have a
fixed IF bandwidth. It's difficult to be wide enough to not distort
on an 11 KHz channel and still not pick up adjacent channel
interference with 5 KHz channel spacing.

Hi Al

Having just purchased this unit last Thursday, I'm still getting use to
the way a scanner works, and believe it or not, this Uniden BC796D is
my very first scanner, and the very first time I've ever responded to
something in the newsgroups.

Thanks for the correction on the "few KC's off" line. What I should
have said is "five or ten KC"s off frequency". By "off frequency", the
scanner itself is unable to tune in finer steps, and only has "default"
steps, which get close but not right on the frequency I'm trying to
receive.

While looking at just some the various scanners, I noticed that at
least one did not tune the UHF Ham repeater sub-band correctly, and I
was unable receive some of the repeaters in that portion. It would
only tune in 15KC increments. In Northern California the UHF 440 - 450
repeater sub-band has 25KC spacing and in Southern California they use
20KC spacing. This is just one example.

Just went through the entire range on the IC-R20 and apparently the
800Mhz cellular portion is the only area with any gap in it. My
IC-R100 receives the entire range from 100Khz - 1854Mhz continuously
and without any gaps. However, the IC-R100 is probably the slowest
radio around when it comes to scanning. This is the reason for finally
getting a scanner, and the BC796D rips right along at this function!

"Good sensitivity, rejection to intermod and adjacent signal rejection".

Well perhaps I now live in an area where this isn't really an issue.
When I lived up in Northern California, Mt. Diablo produced a fair
share of undesired signals, and then again some were of considerable
interest too!

Best regards

george




On 2005-10-29 11:34:48 -0700, Al Klein said:

On Fri, 28 Oct 2005 10:46:52 -0700, George said
in rec.radio.scanner:

2. Selectable tuning steps instead of the default tuning step ranges
which may be off a few KC's from where you want to listen.

If the frequency is "a few KCs off", someone should notify the
licensee, because they're operating illegally. If it's 5 KHz off,
you're probably trying to receive the wrong frequency. A lot of PS
frequencies found on the internet were found by people who had their
scanners on the wrong frequency, and when you try to match that
frequency with a better scanner, you think that the transmitter is off
frequency. No, it's the knowledge of the person reporting the
frequency that was off. Most technicians know how to keep the
transmitters on frequency - it's what they were hired for.

5. Continuos frequency coverage! This is a very handy option. Even
though the Uniden BC796D has a few gaps, the range is sufficient for my
needs. The Icom IC-R20 covers everything from 100KHZ - 3Ghz, except
800Mhz cellular.

It covers 1.8 GHz cellular? Or did you just forget to mention that?
(Not that receiving it would do any good - there are NO analog
services in the "PCS" band.)

7. Good sensitivity, rejection to intermod

Not in any receiver ever made, if the intermod is external to the
scanner. If it's on the frequency you're receiving, you'll receive
it. GRE, Uniden or a Motorola G-strip (which was probably the
tightest receiver ever made - the thing had cavities for front end
filters).

You may mean a receiver that doesn't suffer much from front end
overload. Typical of Uniden, NOT typical of GRE. (You're almost
assured of overloading the front end of a GRE scanner if you put on an
external antenna, unless you don't live anywhere near any
transmitter.)

adjacent signal rejection

Also not with almost any scanner ever made. Most scanners have a
fixed IF bandwidth. It's difficult to be wide enough to not distort
on an 11 KHz channel and still not pick up adjacent channel
interference with 5 KHz channel spacing.

In article ,
says...
On Fri, 28 Oct 2005 10:46:52 -0700, George said
in rec.radio.scanner:

2. Selectable tuning steps instead of the default tuning step ranges
which may be off a few KC's from where you want to listen.

If the frequency is "a few KCs off", someone should notify the
licensee, because they're operating illegally. If it's 5 KHz off,
you're probably trying to receive the wrong frequency. A lot of PS
frequencies found on the internet were found by people who had their
scanners on the wrong frequency, and when you try to match that
frequency with a better scanner, you think that the transmitter is off
frequency. No, it's the knowledge of the person reporting the
frequency that was off. Most technicians know how to keep the
transmitters on frequency - it's what they were hired for.

5. Continuos frequency coverage! This is a very handy option. Even
though the Uniden BC796D has a few gaps, the range is sufficient for my
needs. The Icom IC-R20 covers everything from 100KHZ - 3Ghz, except
800Mhz cellular.

It covers 1.8 GHz cellular? Or did you just forget to mention that?
(Not that receiving it would do any good - there are NO analog
services in the "PCS" band.)

7. Good sensitivity, rejection to intermod

Not in any receiver ever made, if the intermod is external to the
scanner. If it's on the frequency you're receiving, you'll receive
it. GRE, Uniden or a Motorola G-strip (which was probably the
tightest receiver ever made - the thing had cavities for front end
filters).

You may mean a receiver that doesn't suffer much from front end
overload. Typical of Uniden, NOT typical of GRE. (You're almost
assured of overloading the front end of a GRE scanner if you put on an
external antenna, unless you don't live anywhere near any
transmitter.)

adjacent signal rejection

Also not with almost any scanner ever made. Most scanners have a
fixed IF bandwidth. It's difficult to be wide enough to not distort
on an 11 KHz channel and still not pick up adjacent channel
interference with 5 KHz channel spacing.



LOL. Al, Only in your universe are Uniden radios more resistant to
overload than most GRE built scanners. Uniden is FAMOUS for overloading.

In our universe, that is..

They have gotten better though, the BC8500 was hands down the worst
scanner I ever had. It was a total disaster, and was sent back right
away. They seemed to partially learn their lesson after that train
wreck, but their low end radios are pretty bad. Worse than most of the
GRE radios I've had here over the years..

And I've owned, and repaired a large number of scanners from both
manufacturers and most of the ones I buy, or keep, tend to be GRE, for
RF performance, if not for quality control issues, like non soldered
speaker leads, antennas, loose screws, loose BNC connectors, etc...

That's in my universe..

BDK

On Sat, 29 Oct 2005 14:10:13 -0700, George said
in rec.radio.scanner:

Thanks for the correction on the "few KC's off" line. What I should
have said is "five or ten KC"s off frequency". By "off frequency", the
scanner itself is unable to tune in finer steps, and only has "default"
steps, which get close but not right on the frequency I'm trying to
receive.

That's an older scanner that wasn't designed for current bandplans.
It's like an old scanner that can't tune to an 850 MHz frequency.
You're comparing apples to ducks, since there aren't any older tunable
scanners, unless you include ham gear.

While looking at just some the various scanners, I noticed that at
least one did not tune the UHF Ham repeater sub-band correctly, and I
was unable receive some of the repeaters in that portion. It would
only tune in 15KC increments.

At one time UHF equipment operated on 30 KHz channellization, so 15
KHz steps were just fine. (Actually, at one time, a mile was an
unreachable goal at 400 MHz. And frequency stability was so poor that
"frequency" was a courtesy, not a measurement. Look up "Vocaline" for
kicks, or look at
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=5813581566&category=29 6.
Using that today would probably get you free room and board, but I
used a pair of them in the early 60s. Frequency? Around 465 MHz.
Counters were no good up there, so the best we could do was Lecher
lines, so we got the frequency accurate to about 1/4" of wavelength -
as long as it didn't drift to rapidly.)

In Northern California the UHF 440 - 450
repeater sub-band has 25KC spacing and in Southern California they use
20KC spacing. This is just one example.

And modern scanners allow 5 KHz steps.

On Sat, 29 Oct 2005 20:48:06 -0400, BDK
said in rec.radio.scanner:

They have gotten better though, the BC8500 was hands down the worst
scanner I ever had. It was a total disaster, and was sent back right
away. They seemed to partially learn their lesson after that train
wreck, but their low end radios are pretty bad. Worse than most of the
GRE radios I've had here over the years..

And I've owned, and repaired a large number of scanners from both
manufacturers and most of the ones I buy, or keep, tend to be GRE, for
RF performance, if not for quality control issues, like non soldered
speaker leads, antennas, loose screws, loose BNC connectors, etc...

Pro-95 vs. BC246. Pro-96 vs. BCD396. 2 signal generators. Cross-mod
tests.

In article ,
says...
On Sat, 29 Oct 2005 20:48:06 -0400, BDK
said in rec.radio.scanner:

They have gotten better though, the BC8500 was hands down the worst
scanner I ever had. It was a total disaster, and was sent back right
away. They seemed to partially learn their lesson after that train
wreck, but their low end radios are pretty bad. Worse than most of the
GRE radios I've had here over the years..

And I've owned, and repaired a large number of scanners from both
manufacturers and most of the ones I buy, or keep, tend to be GRE, for
RF performance, if not for quality control issues, like non soldered
speaker leads, antennas, loose screws, loose BNC connectors, etc...

Pro-95 vs. BC246. Pro-96 vs. BCD396. 2 signal generators. Cross-mod
tests.


Funny, in OVER THE AIR tests here right where I'm typing, the Unidens
have problems with the nearby 155MHZ Police and Ch 24 TV, and sometimes
30 too, doing all kinds of stuff they shouldn't have been doing. The 93
and 95 don't have any real problems, at least on freqs where I need to
listen to, and the 96 has just a tad of ch 24 interference. This is the
usual pattern, going back to the period where the Pro-2004 came out.
Before that, they were both really bad. The first decent base scanner
that Uniden made was the BC9000XLT, and mine has issues with the 155mhz
PD tower directly across the river causing background hash everywhere
when they key up (nearly continuously) and they can be heard clearly on
many VHF, UHF, and 800 freqs, either in the background, or clear as if
they were on the correct freq. I have repaired several 9000s, mostly BNC
connectors and display lights, and they all do it, some worse than mine,
some a little better..

The GRE radios like the Pro 43,92 (one of the few duds they've made
recently) 93/95 are always better than the Unidens in about every way,
RF wise, but sensitivity, and audio output. Not perfect by any means,
but an easy choice.

Time after time, model after model, the GRE radios (not the really old
and real cheap ones) are better performers than the Unidens. It's not
even close most of the time. The 396 I had here a few days ago wasn't
horrible at all, but it stopped scanning on a lot of channels it
shouldn't have, and it annoyed the hell out of me. Not as bad as my 3000
was, but annoying enough to probably make me get a 96, it worked well
here.

I have bought many Uniden handhelds over the years, and they just don't
stay... My Pro 43 is a senior citizen now. Not used much, but works fine
when I take out at work when there's something big going on. Another
huge strike against the Uniden handhelds, until recently, was the damn
battery pack nonsense. At least they fixed that..

BDK