Hey everyone, im new to this forum, so please bear with me!
Currently I am a career EMS provider in a county that utilizes a low-band public safety radio infrastructure. The topography of the county is quite random - with valleys a few small mountains and a significant number of hills. Quite simply, the radio reception and coverage is horrid. Even when operating off base stations and mobile units the County 911 center has difficulty hearing our transmission and we have trouble hearing their transmissions. There are a number of towers across the county, with 3 in the general (within a 10 - 20 mile radius) vicinity of my station.
With that background - I did a search of low-band portables on this forum and found some good information. However, I think I am going to need further help. Right now, I utilize my personal low-band HT1250 as a portable. Problem is, the radio barely picks up dispatches in my general area and any dispatches on the other side of the county are inaudible or do not come in at all. Additionally, the 911 center has difficulty hearing me off the portable. Currently, I utilize the following frequencies:
Dispatch 46.38
Communications 46.54
I have had my radio re-programmed by the local Motorola dealer and purchased a new antenna - cut and tested to 46 Mhz, all with no change in the quality of tx/rx. After contacting the County, it’s unlikely that we will see a change in radio systems in the near future.
So, I need guidance on what to do.
I either stay with the HT1250 and hope that it works or
I can go with a Kenwood TK-190 (which I have heard good things about on here)
What do you suggest and what does (if you recommend it) the TK-190 has over the HT1250?
Thanks for the help ahead of time!
Low Band HT1250 - Does it make the cut?
Moderator: Queue Moderator
As much as I like Kenwood radios, I do not think you will see a significant improvement in your problem with any different brand or model of portable radio.
The fact is that handheld portable radio performance on low band in inherently poor due to inefficient antennas and low power compared to a mobile. A portable should be depended on only for incident scene communications or maybe a few miles back to your local base but not county-wide.
If mobile coverage is marginal, there is no way any portable is going to work.
The fact is that handheld portable radio performance on low band in inherently poor due to inefficient antennas and low power compared to a mobile. A portable should be depended on only for incident scene communications or maybe a few miles back to your local base but not county-wide.
If mobile coverage is marginal, there is no way any portable is going to work.
I like Kenwood radios for a lot of reasons but I don't think you will see any significant improvement with your particular situation between those two model radios or any other low band portable.
Unless you like a particular radio for other features, I think you will be disappointed in expecting any better coverage from a different radio.
I would not invest in a different radio unless you can try it first and see if you prefer it for some reason.
Unless you like a particular radio for other features, I think you will be disappointed in expecting any better coverage from a different radio.
I would not invest in a different radio unless you can try it first and see if you prefer it for some reason.
In your situation and many others,lowband 6 watt portables rx/tx just flat out is lousy in most areas of varied terrain.Upstate NY in this area has same problems.6 watt portable to dispatch center is scratchy at best.
Most on scene first responders use a mobile or vhf to lowband vehicle repeater set up with a RICK between the 2 different band mobiles in vehicle.Some have to carry two portables,1 lowband for on scene only,1 vhf for vehicle crossover repeater to dispatch.
Having tried both TK190 6 watt and HT1250 6 watt there was no noticable difference in rx/tx.PR860 6 watt had a better rx and slightly better tx.
good luck
Wayne
Most on scene first responders use a mobile or vhf to lowband vehicle repeater set up with a RICK between the 2 different band mobiles in vehicle.Some have to carry two portables,1 lowband for on scene only,1 vhf for vehicle crossover repeater to dispatch.
Having tried both TK190 6 watt and HT1250 6 watt there was no noticable difference in rx/tx.PR860 6 watt had a better rx and slightly better tx.
good luck
Wayne
Unfortunately, we do not have repeaters that link the low-band channels to higher bands in our ambulances (its something I’ve wanted, but I’m not in any position of authority). The paramedic "fly-cars" have UHF repeaters, which I could tie into - but their range is limited, at best which poses a problem when im not on scene with a medic. Looks like I’m $hit outta luck 
Thanks for the help guys.
Thanks for the help guys.I'm a bit of a low band buff, and here is some seat of the pants advice:
Get a mobile radio. Now!
As others have mentioned, low band portables are horrid performers. Even wth a rubber duck on the top end of the band (45 MHz and up), you can't create enough of a "human body ground plane" through hand capacitance to make the antenna system efficient.
Assuming your base stations are operating properly and actually have a good antenna system there, mobile to base communication using an honest to goodness 60-110 watt mobile radio should be a walk in the park. The problem with low band bases is that many folks use ground plane antennas on telephone poles and expect to cover entire counties. Now, you CAN communicate base to mobile in most situations with that set-up, but don't expect to get full quieting on a low band portable 10 miles from the "tower".
The best base antenna for county-wide public safety coverage is a four bay DB212, where a series of "trombones" are side mounted on a two or three hundred foot metal tower. Those things just blow smoke! A more reasonable alternative is a folded monopole arrangement (like a DB201) top mounted on a tower of substantial height.
I would NEVER spec low band portables in any system anywhere. They just don't perform as stand-alone units. If you're interested, Pyramid makes a great mobile repeater. If you're looking for cheap, try and find a Motorola PAC-PL or PAC-RT on eBay or from a used two way company. Of course, you'll need a mobile radio to leech. Mitreks and Maratracs are still fairly easy to find and they're reasonably priced. Mitreks are cheaper but you'll need to buy crystals and get the correct PL reeds. Maratracs are fully programmable and might be worth the extra $50. GE Rangrs, Deltas, and Orions are also awesome low band performers, if you're a meatball man.
Get a mobile radio. Now!
As others have mentioned, low band portables are horrid performers. Even wth a rubber duck on the top end of the band (45 MHz and up), you can't create enough of a "human body ground plane" through hand capacitance to make the antenna system efficient.
Assuming your base stations are operating properly and actually have a good antenna system there, mobile to base communication using an honest to goodness 60-110 watt mobile radio should be a walk in the park. The problem with low band bases is that many folks use ground plane antennas on telephone poles and expect to cover entire counties. Now, you CAN communicate base to mobile in most situations with that set-up, but don't expect to get full quieting on a low band portable 10 miles from the "tower".
The best base antenna for county-wide public safety coverage is a four bay DB212, where a series of "trombones" are side mounted on a two or three hundred foot metal tower. Those things just blow smoke! A more reasonable alternative is a folded monopole arrangement (like a DB201) top mounted on a tower of substantial height.
I would NEVER spec low band portables in any system anywhere. They just don't perform as stand-alone units. If you're interested, Pyramid makes a great mobile repeater. If you're looking for cheap, try and find a Motorola PAC-PL or PAC-RT on eBay or from a used two way company. Of course, you'll need a mobile radio to leech. Mitreks and Maratracs are still fairly easy to find and they're reasonably priced. Mitreks are cheaper but you'll need to buy crystals and get the correct PL reeds. Maratracs are fully programmable and might be worth the extra $50. GE Rangrs, Deltas, and Orions are also awesome low band performers, if you're a meatball man.
I can sympathize! Our county operated 46mhz until recent years when they switched to high band. We kept adding repeaters to improve low band coverage and never came close to 100%.
We tested numerous ht's and we found that the bigger the radio the better the signal. We had MT1000's but found that probably the best rx and tx was from an MT500 with Centurion antenna (you might try this as they are low priced). Several of ours had the monitor switch converted to do dual pl for repeater access.
Good luck.
Ken
We tested numerous ht's and we found that the bigger the radio the better the signal. We had MT1000's but found that probably the best rx and tx was from an MT500 with Centurion antenna (you might try this as they are low priced). Several of ours had the monitor switch converted to do dual pl for repeater access.
Good luck.
Ken
Mobile extender is your only choice from what you describe. There are a lot of surplus midland syntech IIs with the 42 to 50 Mhz 100 watt mobile radio and the 1 watt VHF high band link for around 25 bucks on flea bay.
We bought several for use on our local low band SAR channel only to have the SO dump their low band channel soon after.
We cut the output back to 50 watts on the low band radios and ended up using them for ham 6 meters with execellent results.
Mike
We bought several for use on our local low band SAR channel only to have the SO dump their low band channel soon after.
We cut the output back to 50 watts on the low band radios and ended up using them for ham 6 meters with execellent results.
Mike