136-175mhz? 400-520? or 800-940?

The General forum is where users can discuss any topic regarding Motorola communications equipment - hardware, software, etc. There are also several focused forums on this board, so please take the time to ensure that your questions doesn't fall into one of those categories before posting here!

Moderator: Queue Moderator

Post Reply
CODE 4
Posts: 10
Joined: Wed May 29, 2002 10:03 pm

136-175mhz? 400-520? or 800-940?

Post by CODE 4 »

Hi I need to know whats the pro's and con's of 900mhz radios which is better all around 136-175mhz? 400-520? or 800-940? thanks
User avatar
FatBoy
Posts: 206
Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2001 4:00 pm

Which is better?

Post by FatBoy »

It all depends on what you are trying to do. Do you have mutual aid concerns? Be careful of 800 and 900 MHZ because nextel is actively putting systems on the air that may cause interference with anything you put there. Again, a very broad question, any more specifics? FatBoy.
......I understand what the package says sir, but you cannot talk 28 miles with 3 AA batteries.......
USGOVTECH
Posts: 230
Joined: Sat May 04, 2002 3:00 pm

Post by USGOVTECH »

There are pros and cons to each of the bands which you have provided. Listed below are the pros and cons to each.

136-175 Mhz VHF HIGH
The VHF band tends to travel longer distances which can be very useful in coveing larger areas without the addition of more sites of course geographical considerations must be taken into consideration as well. the VHF band tends to have a much higher ambient noise level throughout the band which can cause problems as well.

400-520 Mhz UHF LOW
The UHF band is a preferred band amongst commercial users. UHF tends to be extreemly reliable in all types of geography. UHF has tends to penetrate buildings and nooks and crannies better that VHF. The ambient noise level on the UHF band throughout the lower end of the band 400-470 is genarally low, now from 470-520 is has much higher ambient noise levels due to Television Translators and High Power TV.

800-940 Mhz UHF HIGH
The UHF HIGH band is OK. It penetrates buildings better than any other frequency band, but does not propagate very well. Users on this band tend to need more sites to cover the same areas where the usual VHF HIGH / UHF LOW types of system cover. I would recommend not putting anythin on this band or even consider using this band due to the fact that NEXTEL is putting up sites everywhere and it is beginning to cause problems te co-existing systems. Stay away from this band if NEXTEL is in your area!!!
User avatar
n5rwc
Posts: 31
Joined: Wed May 08, 2002 10:44 pm

Post by n5rwc »

I vote for UHF.
"I predict the Internet will soon go spectacularly supernova and in 1996 will catastrophically collapse."

-Bob Metcalfe
the Inventor of Ethernet
larryepage
Posts: 221
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2002 4:00 pm

Which Band?

Post by larryepage »

I agree that 400-520 MHz is an optimum band for most purposes. Compared to VHF, an antenna of the same overall length will give you between 4 and 5 dB more gain. Offsetting this is that transmission losses will be somewhat greater, and the power amplifier will be a little less efficient (more battery drain required for the same power out).

As mentioned above...the shorter wavelength generates better propagation into buildings but isn't absorbed by trees, rain, and the like as bad as 800/900 MHz.

LP
CODE 4
Posts: 10
Joined: Wed May 29, 2002 10:03 pm

Post by CODE 4 »

Thanks you guys you been a very big help!
:wink: I will go with uhf. I will be using the radio in the city.
RadioSouth
Batboard $upporter
Posts: 2884
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2001 4:00 pm

Post by RadioSouth »

This item might be of interest, radio range calculator with scales for different frequency bands. http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?Vi ... 1360641770
Post Reply

Return to “General Motorola Solutions & Legacy Radio Discussion”