Low band vs. VHF & UHF

[motastro1]

I wanted to check with all the radio folks out there to see what would perform better for simplex (car to car) communications. So what works better Low band,VHF or UHF. Right now we are using the simplex side of a UHF repeater (when we are not on the repeater) with 35 and 25 watt radios but they don't get as far as we would like,they do pretty well but I would like to get maybe 5-10 miles (closer to 10) if possible. I have access to both VHF and some low band equipment if needed but I wanted to see what everyone thought first. The biggest thing on VHF and Low band is that the radios I have access to are 100-110 watt units so with that kind of power and the terrain here is pretty flat how many miles should we be able to get? Any input would be appreciated.--Thanks

[Grog]

Are you licensed for the frequencies and power output you are wanting to use? That's the first (and biggest) issue. After that, what areas are you wanting to use these radios in? Big cities are much different from the desert, and that's different from the mountains.

[motastro1]

Licensing wont be an issue. The area is mostly city but is is fairly flat,no mountains or desert anywhere close. We are not talking 20 miles of skyscrapers here either. Any more help or recommendations would be appreciated.

[RKG]

While no answer to this question is meaningful without a detailed local study, using 110W lo-band mobiles and proper installation, assuming sufficient electrical power, max. range can vary from 10 miles to 75 miles.

However, lo-band installations don't get away with #10 power wire and slapping an end-fed quarter-wave on the trunk deck. You'll need some fairly ugly antennas, some really good installation techs, and some alternator/battery modifications. And then, the range will decay rapidly if the mobiles are in motion.

Not to mention the licensing issues.

[johnhenre]

Works good in the foot hills of western NC. range around 30 miles plus. no big antennas's an [[old cb antron,base]] BUT the Cost of the license"s??? that'll might have a Big factor about low band vhf.Bob can't find the for sale link here help

[motastro1]

Well so far it sounds like I should just use higher power radios on the UHF frequencies I already use. The biggest reason I was checking is because I recently had someone tell me you could easily get 20 miles or more using low band. Any more info would be helpful.--thanks

[Grog]

Licensing wont be an issue.

Please explain, I could use a laugh Really, you either have it or you don't, no use planning a lot until you know what you'll really be able to use frequency wise.

[motastro1]

The licensing is already taken care of for what I am currently using is what I meant.If I need to get a license for another frequency I will take care of that. This seems to be getting away from what I want to know. I simply was asking if I should stay with what I have or go to another frequency to get the farthest distance from simplex communications. I am not asking about licensing and I am well aware of what needs to be done regarding that. Any more info regarding the original posting would be appreciated.--Thanks

[Satelite]

Hello :
Yes i agree = The postee asked a qeustion and thats all we really should be concerned with as to answers.
Every now and then i read a post where someone seems to think they are the FCC enforment .
As a NABOR FCC CORDINATOR member i believe a statement as to getting the license is valid but to go further with it is out of our juristiction and best left up to the FCC enforcement division.
Im not saying that using a freq unlicensed is ok but more than a friendly mention of it when the postee has not written anything to admit wrong doing is not worthy of pursuing it as it sorta accuses him of wrong doing. ( Enough said)
Mine by the way is out of Kansas City and yes i do know them personaly from a friendly contact.
As to an answer i too have wondered but think i from experience can answer this one.
Im still at times testing my experieces but it seems to come back reliably to this conclusion.
Higher power does not normaly decide the best mileage.
It usualy boils down to the longer wave legth with the lower freqs having the abilty to bend over and around/behind hills/mountains better than the higher freqs.
How ever VHF/UHF freqs do seem to penetrate concrete structures inside buildings better than lower freqs such as 42 mhz ect.
At this point my experience indicates UHF penetrates buildings the best because i believe the signal bounces around and finds it way into the building better than lower freqs which tend to stop if they try to go through concrete / steel ect and dont seem to bounce around as the UHF freqs seem to do. ( My opinion only and not gospel)
But as stated above the rules do get busted depending on the conditions.
As a majority of the time though with conditions favorable the lower freqs such as 42 to 50 mhz do seem to win out more than not.
Now if you add wattage to the lo freq and high gain antenaes you will notice improvements on rx/tx range.
But again as stated above it can be the lesser choice if conditions are favorable for other bands but as i stated lo band wins more than not in my experience. ( Not saying this is gospel but its my experience)
As a general rule lower freqs will travel further and bend over the terain best which will give you the better mileage in most day to day operation if you dont get buildings such as concrete/steel entered into the conditions.
My experience and opinion only but there you have it.
Satelite

[PETNRDX]

You didn't say if the inquiry is for deciding to change to a different system, or add a mobile.
So, I am going to make a couple of suggestions kinda shooting in the dark.
If you are "sharing" a UHF system, and want more range in the "talkaround" mode (simplex on the ouput), you might want to try higher gain antennas on your mobiles.
I REALLy like the old Motorola 5 dB gain antenna, tle6152 over a 1/4 wave when working simplex. It is a standard NMO mount.
The aperture is "flatter" so a mobile talking to a mobile where they are on a similar elevation works much better.
And I am one that really prefers the basic 1/4 wave antenna on all bands when using repeaters normally.
And this would be a cheap and easy thing to try.
Buy or borrow a pair, and see if it helps enuf.
Antenna placement on the vehicles makes a bigger difference on simplex also.
That said, mobile to mobile, with antenna mounted high and in the middle of the vehicle, its hard to beat low band.
Local noise can limit reception tho, and Sporadic E and F2 skip can clobber you when the sunspot cycle is right.
You wind up not hearing the station 10 miles away, but a school bus dispatcher in Atlanta GA instead.
In my experience, VHF HI with 3 dB gain antenna center of the roof, is the most bang for your buck.
But as others posted gettin a freq can be a problem.
Its the most popular band for a reason.

[MT2000 man]

Out of the Low Band, VHF and UHF, IMO, you will find UHF much better for talkaround use. This all depends on the TX wattage as well. For example, if you have two UHF 110 Watt Spectras hooked up on Simplex, that would hear MUCH farther then . . . . . say two Gm300's at 20 Watts. Others have also recommended excellent antenna choices as well. It all boils down to HOW you want to use your system. But, as stated, I would go with UHF (which you already seem to have).

[W2MB]

Maybe one of the engineering types can provide the formula that shows the maximum theoritcal distance a usable signal can travel based upon line of sight, power and wavelength. I know that it exists, and that the greatest distance attainable would be low band.

[motastro1]

I really appreciate all the input regarding this post and it's looking like I will stay with the UHF that I already use and get some higher power radios.Batlabs members always come through--Thanks Again!