PDA

View Full Version : UHF Advice please...



Yorkshire_Jon
2nd May 2010, 11:24 AM
Hi All,
Since the 110 landed here weve been out with quite a few people on day trips etc and borrowed a hand-held radio. The time has come though for my to spend some $$$ and get my own setup. BUT I know nothing about them!

The radio's that seem to be 'common' or recommended are the GME TX3440 and the Icom IC-440. They both look very similar and the specs read similar also. Is one thought to be better than the other and whats the difference?

One question I have is where is the speaker located on these units? Does the mic act as a speaker or is it in the main unit? Clearly this affects where I could mount it.

Before I started to look into it in detail I thought the current GME combo pack sounded good value - it has the TX3440 and the AE4018K1 antenna bundled in. Is this a good all-round antenna?

Is it possible to use say the IC-440 with a GME antenna???


Antenna's
This seems to be a grey art from the reading Ive done! High-gain / low-gain / unity gain.... All confusing stuff. It seems that a 4.5dB gain is pretty common. Is a 4.5db antenna a good comprimise between range and radiating pattern?


Antenna Mounting:
I have an ARB winch bumer. Presume any antenna (GME??) will bolt straight onto the existing ARB brackets?

Sorry about the questions. As I say, I know next to nothing about them at the moment.


Thanks
Jon

one_iota
2nd May 2010, 06:35 PM
I can speak for the Icom IC-440:

The speaker is in the hand piece but there is a jack for an external speaker.

I have an ARB winch bar and there are two tabs on the top rail each of will accept the antenna unit.

The antenna I chose was:

Prestigecom.net.au 3 & 6.5db Ground Independant 4WD Antenna Package - $115.00 (http://www.prestigecom.net.au/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=372&products_id=56)

The 6.5db aerial is good for flat country/highway use and is also designed to resist bending at speed. The 3 db is good in hilly country.

Yorkshire_Jon
2nd May 2010, 07:25 PM
Thanks Mahn,
Since posting earlier Ive found the speaker is in the Mic on the Icom and not (I dont think, on the GME), so all other things being equal I think the Icom would be better for me.

As for the antenna(s), is there much real-world difference between the 3 & 6dB's? Im assuming you get more distance with the 6db on the flat highway?

What sort of distance can you get with the 3dB vs 6.5dB?? Presumably the 4.5dB is inbetween the 3 and 6.5 in terms of distance??

Also, do you simply unscrew one antenna from the ARB bar and screw the other one in?

Thanks
Jon

LowRanger
2nd May 2010, 08:37 PM
You will also find that the chassis of the Icom is a lot better than the GME.Making for a more solid and more robust unit.

one_iota
2nd May 2010, 08:58 PM
Hi Jon,

Think of the aerial as the center of a donut.

The higher the db the flatter the donut...therefore the horizontal range is greater.

The lower the db the more spherical is the distribution around the aerial.

In hilly country I change the antenna to the smaller one. It screws onto the top of the choke. Too easy.

I'll take a photo tomorrow.

slug_burner
3rd May 2010, 12:41 AM
The Icom units are a very solid unit, I don't have one but if I was going to upgrade that would be my choice.

The antenna questions you ask; does brand matter? No, if they are for the appropriate frequency band then they will work with any transmitter. Brand might be associated with different build quality but there is not much between them.

I went with a Mobile One, I am told they supply the antennas used on the police cars so they can't be a total dog.

http://www.mobileone.com.au/antennas/brochures%20477mhz/rf470fwss.gif

As for the gain vs distance question, 3 db extra gain is the equivelant of doubling the power output of the transmitter but only in the direction of maximum gain. UHF propagation is closely approximated by free space propagation where distance and power density are related by 1/r^2 (one on distance squared) law, therefore double the power (3db) will get you 1.4 the distance.

For bullbar mounting you will want to use a ground independet anntenna, the higher you mount the antenna the greater the line of sight distance to the horizon.

Yorkshire_Jon
3rd May 2010, 06:39 AM
thanks guys, thats of great help.

now why dont the manufacturers talk in donuts & 1/r^2 - easy peasy!

Jon

101RRS
3rd May 2010, 08:14 AM
I recently bought a IC 440 after looking at both the Icom and GME. As mentioned the ICOm has the speaker in the handset the GME does not. As my 101 is very noisy I have set up the Icom with an external speaker as well. This does not disable the handset speaker which means I have no problem hearing.

The Icom cradle is great - allows the radio to simply unclip for use in other vehicles (I bought a second cradle for my other car.

I have a 6.5/9.5 db GME aerial combo and it works great.

Radio was $410 and aerial $79 from Prestige.

The only down side is that you need to carry the manual with you to use the Icom for its fullest functionality but basic functions such as search, vol, squelch and change channels are easy to use - however I think the GME is the same.

I think the main advantage of the Icom over the GME is the speaker in the handset - works well even in my 101 so you really do not need to worry about an additional speaker. I could have got a GME on Ebay for about $375 delivered.

Garry

Yorkshire_Jon
3rd May 2010, 05:04 PM
Garry, thats helpful. The mic in the speaker is a great plus for me but it also means that with the icom I can use one of the spare external inputs on the back of the stereo for extra speaker if need be.

Bushwanderer
4th May 2010, 08:40 AM
Hi Jon,
Not wanting to sway you, but the GME TX3440 also has provision for an external speaker.

Further, I don't know of the ruggedness of the ICOM units but the GME TX3440 has been shock and vibration tested to MIL STD 810.

Best Wishes,
Peter
PS: I suspect that you're being subjected to the UHF equivalent of the Ford .vs. Holden wars. Make your own mind up and I believe that you'll be happy with the result.

101RRS
4th May 2010, 09:21 AM
Hi Jon,

PS: I suspect that you're being subjected to the UHF equivalent of the Ford .vs. Holden wars. Make your own mind up and I believe that you'll be happy with the result.

Icom Rules :p

PhilipA
4th May 2010, 10:44 AM
Just to put the reliability into perspective , I have had a uniden UH11 for 20years with no problems.

Like the Engel of UHF Cbs.

Regards Philip A

trobbo
4th May 2010, 11:23 AM
I have used gme for the last 20 years or so and never had any issues with reliability. Having said that I am changing to icom for my D3 as I wanted a unit with everything including the speaker in the mic.

JLo
4th May 2010, 11:29 AM
Just to put the reliability into perspective , I have had a uniden UH11 for 20years with no problems.

Like the Engel of UHF Cbs.

Regards Philip A

Every uniden I have owned has been returned with faults - more like a Waeco ! :D

ADMIRAL
4th May 2010, 09:15 PM
I recently bought a IC 440 after looking at both the Icom and GME. As mentioned the ICOm has the speaker in the handset the GME does not. As my 101 is very noisy I have set up the Icom with an external speaker as well. This does not disable the handset speaker which means I have no problem hearing.

The Icom cradle is great - allows the radio to simply unclip for use in other vehicles (I bought a second cradle for my other car.

I have a 6.5/9.5 db GME aerial combo and it works great.

Radio was $410 and aerial $79 from Prestige.

The only down side is that you need to carry the manual with you to use the Icom for its fullest functionality but basic functions such as search, vol, squelch and change channels are easy to use - however I think the GME is the same.

I think the main advantage of the Icom over the GME is the speaker in the handset - works well even in my 101 so you really do not need to worry about an additional speaker. I could have got a GME on Ebay for about $375 delivered.

Garry

GME are currently advertising a package complete with antenna through trade sites, at $385.00 plus GST. The model advertised has a speaker in the handset/mike.

101RRS
4th May 2010, 09:55 PM
GME are currently advertising a package complete with antenna through trade sites, at $385.00 plus GST. The model advertised has a speaker in the handset/mike.

I would be surprised as the relevant models are the GME Tx 3340 and Tx 3440 and neither has the speaker in the handset. Some models that do not have the radio controls on the handset may have a speaker in the handset so maybe it is one of these that were advertised.

Garry

KarlB
5th May 2010, 11:34 AM
I have been following this thread with some interest as I am in the market for a UHF. What is not clear to me is why people want a speaker in the handset (which I suspect would be generally smaller and inferior to the alternate) and why people want 'all' the controls in the handset. Any explanations fellas? :confused:

Cheers
KarlB

one_iota
5th May 2010, 12:01 PM
I have been following this thread with some interest as I am in the market for a UHF. What is not clear to me is why people want a speaker in the handset (which I suspect would be generally smaller and inferior to the alternate) and why people want 'all' the controls in the handset. Any explanations fellas? :confused:

Cheers
KarlB

I'll explain why I chose the Icom IC-440:

I have a Puma Defender and there are not many places to put a unit so that the display and controls can be seen easily. I could have installed an overhead console but for the money spent on that and a "traditional" CB unit the cost of the Icom was much less. The Icom had the features I wanted plus some.

The main unit sits neatly and out of the way mounted to the side of the centre cubby box. This location was easy with regards to getting the power and aerial to the unit.

I'm still working on the best position for the handset when travelling, for the moment it sits in a cradle suction cupped to the windscreen.

The speaker in the hand set works well, I haven't had any difficulty either with volume or sound quality.

:)

101RRS
5th May 2010, 12:09 PM
Karl - depends on the layout and of your vehicle - some are noisy so having the speaker in the handset which is up near your face when communicating is a bonus (you can still have a remote speaker as well). Some do not have the space for a radio so it has to be mounted remotely or out of sight so have all the controls on the handset. Those with a remote face still have to have it mounted somewhere, as well as the main unit.

If I could mount a radio within reach, still hear it and it was easy to move from vehicle to vehicle I would have bought a basic layout radio. I find it convenient to have everything in the one spot - works great for me.

Garry

ADMIRAL
5th May 2010, 09:52 PM
I have been following this thread with some interest as I am in the market for a UHF. What is not clear to me is why people want a speaker in the handset (which I suspect would be generally smaller and inferior to the alternate) and why people want 'all' the controls in the handset. Any explanations fellas? :confused:

Cheers
KarlB

The speaker in the handset has a few advantages, in that it is generally placed for easy access, and most times, that corresponds with easy to hear. If the main unit is half hidden, in a console or under the dash, it can be difficult to hear. The handset mike is also very handy when answering a radio call outside of the vehicle.

I had an overhead console in my last vehicle. While it was perceived initially as handy ( and looking good ) I could not hear the internal speaker, and eventually mounted an external speaker on the console above my head level. My radio had a conventional setup, std mike, all controls on the radio. I had to take my eyes off the road to check channels, change frequencies etc. Not good. These controls in a mike, can be held up to read and operate without taking the eyes off the road.

I would not go for an overhead console again. The mike has to be easy to unclip and access. This invariably meant it copped you in the ear, or swung across the vehicle when in rough terrain. Distracting to say the least.

stig0000
5th May 2010, 10:29 PM
i have a icom, iv sunk it into the dash under the headunit, on the td5s there is a sorta unused slot there, so cut that out and put in there, very accessible adn easy to read and use, then have the speaker mounted on the roof, can get pics if you wont,

as for the radio,, never had a problem, the only problem iv had its i try playing with the settings:D yer never do that, :wasntme: all so with the icom its computer programmable with RX stations from 41 to 128, and including your normal 1-40 uhf chans

SVX37
8th May 2010, 04:35 PM
I have had both:
GME TX3400
ICOM IC440

The GME was fantastic. Sold it when I sold the car.

So, it was no surprise which brand I was favouring when I needed an new one.

When I got my new 4WD, I asked Peter Dwyer who owns Telstat which one would he get and why.

He said both brands are excellent units. But he would recommend the ICOM IC-440 with a GME aerial.

That's what I bought and have in my Deefender and I have no requirement at all for an external speaker - it simply does not need it.:)

Very happy with it.

Mulgo
16th May 2010, 08:17 PM
While reading quite a bit on UHF land communication over the past few days, I came across this document:

http://www.gme.net.au/public/pdf/brochures/land_b.pdf

Check page 13.

While I am in no way taking position on which UHF brand produces the 'best' unit. I think GME has managed to sum up and illustrate the antenna selection criteria pretty well.

Cheers,
Daniel

incisor
18th May 2010, 09:25 PM
cb60ch (http://www.mncarg.org/cb60ch.html)

123rover50
19th May 2010, 05:37 AM
With the speaker to your ear on the highway, couldnt a copper pick you up for using a mobile phone?

Yorkshire_Jon
19th May 2010, 02:49 PM
cb60ch (http://www.mncarg.org/cb60ch.html)

Thanks for this. In reality though, does it make any diffrence to what set to buy? I'm guessing that there will be a significant overlap of operating new / old units. Ie just because new sets are available, whilst the old ones work there will be some reluctance to change over just for changing over sake.

Bushwanderer
20th May 2010, 01:38 PM
Hi Jon,
I agree with you.

I bought my UHF radio knowing that the channel change was proposed.

I can't predict the specifics of the change, but believe that it will incorporate the current 40 ch system.

Best Wishes,
Peter

incisor
21st May 2010, 12:23 PM
the old sets will work okay but the clarity will suffer because of the splits they seem to believe.

programmable units such as the icom 400 pro etc are easily adapted which ever way it goes..

ACMA - IFC 11/2010 (http://www.acma.gov.au/WEB/STANDARD/pc=PC_312108)

Bushwanderer
21st May 2010, 02:59 PM
Thanks Incisor. :BigThumb:

ThorneGator
16th November 2011, 05:45 AM
After searching through the forum, I still haven't quite found the answer....

I will be in the U.S. In a few weeks and am curious if purchasing a CB, UHF over there is worth while, price. Would they use the same frequency? I am new to CB so look for your advice on this.
I have been looking around and the more I read the more questions I have.
First, are we using our 80 channels in the 27mhz or 400 MHz range?
Secondly, I have a 2005 110 and have the little (apprx 2cm x 8 cm) recessed area under the radio that looks to accommodate for a radio there. Is this for a DIN size? I'm not sure yet which size is which.

Thanks for your help on this, and feel free to give me any advice that I havent asked for..... That maybe I don't know that I don't know;)

Cheers,

Lotz-A-Landies
16th November 2011, 07:08 AM
After searching through the forum, I still haven't quite found the answer....

I will be in the U.S. In a few weeks and am curious if purchasing a CB, UHF over there is worth while, price. Would they use the same frequency? I am new to CB so look for your advice on this.
I have been looking around and the more I read the more questions I have.
First, are we using our 80 channels in the 27mhz <AS/NZS 4355:1995:> or 400 MHz range <AS/NZS 4365:2011>?
Secondly, I have a 2005 110 and have the little (apprx 2cm x 8 cm) recessed area under the radio that looks to accommodate for a radio there. Is this for a DIN size? I'm not sure yet which size is which.

Thanks for your help on this, and feel free to give me any advice that I havent asked for..... That maybe I don't know that I don't know;)

Cheers,Some comments in red above.

CB can only be used in Australia if it's emissions and performance and labelling complies with the standards specified above which equipment purchased overseas is unlikely to be certified as.

33chinacars
17th November 2011, 12:39 AM
Not many people use HF 27 Mhz CB anymore
UHF 477 Mhz is the most popular now. New ones should have 80 channels.
Don't know if US uses came Channels as Australia.

Gary

HowardSmall
17th November 2011, 09:45 PM
I will be in the U.S. In a few weeks and am curious if purchasing a CB, UHF over there is worth while, price. Would they use the same frequency?

The frequencies used for Australia's UHF CB are unique and a US set will not be of any use here.
80 Channels are for the UHF and basically will be using less deviation (12.5KHz instead of 25KHz) so they can fit more channels into the UHF CB Band. You want a programmable set so you can load the old 40 Channels with 25KHz deviation and the new Channels with 12.5KHz deviation. later, when 40 channel sets are all in the scrap heap you can then change the original 40 Channels to 12.5KHz.
In an nutshell, while 12.5 and 25 can work together, transmitting with 12.5 will sound low audio on a 25 set. On the other hand 25 will splatter over the 12.5 channels that are in between the current channels.

KarlB
19th November 2011, 12:19 PM
The frequencies used for Australia's UHF CB are unique and a US set will not be of any use here.
80 Channels are for the UHF and basically will be using less deviation (12.5KHz instead of 25KHz) so they can fit more channels into the UHF CB Band. You want a programmable set so you can load the old 40 Channels with 25KHz deviation and the new Channels with 12.5KHz deviation. later, when 40 channel sets are all in the scrap heap you can then change the original 40 Channels to 12.5KHz.
In an nutshell, while 12.5 and 25 can work together, transmitting with 12.5 will sound low audio on a 25 set. On the other hand 25 will splatter over the 12.5 channels that are in between the current channels.

What you say may be right in theory but having done several trips with mixed radios in the groups (40 and 80 channel sets) I haven't experienced any significant issues.

Cheers
KarlB

HowardSmall
19th November 2011, 05:41 PM
Probably because in practice, as well as theory, it shows itself in the audio from a 12.5KHz transmission coming out at a lower level on a 25KHz receiver. However, depending on who programmed the 80 channel sets, the original 40 channels may be set at 25KHz to avoid that problem. Further, if one person uses a 40 channel set and the other uses an 80 channel set to talk to each other it will not be noticed as the user with the 40 channel set will just turn the volume up a bit more...

Also, it is unlikely that you were working on one of the new channels while someone within range was working on an old channel adjacent to the new one. Hence the splatter problem would not show up - it is more likely in the overcrowded cities where no one wants to use UHF CB anyway...

Howard


What you say may be right in theory but having done several trips with mixed radios in the groups (40 and 80 channel sets) I haven't experienced any significant issues.

Cheers
KarlB

SuperMono
23rd November 2011, 02:41 PM
Google: australian uhf cb frequencies

Then grab something like this which spells out the local UHF CB channels.

80 Channel UHF Information (http://www.uhfcb.com.au/80-Channel-UHF-Information.php)

My guess is that unless you can reprogram it a USA purchased CB is probably not that workable for Australia.