Obvious question: How does the 15 compare to the 536?
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
If there is much of a difference, I
would say there is an issue with the 15.
S-meters, while they at one time were reliable indicators (pun intended), are largely useless as manufacturers make them more sensitive to make the signal appear stronger than it really is.
But an apples-to-apples (Uniden-to-Uniden) comparison seems in order.
On 12/12/2021 11:43 AM, Leslie Polt wrote:
Interim Report: I tried different multicoupler ports and even the
discone feeding 15X directly; as expected, the same results. A signal
must be at least S7 on the ICOMs in order to break minimum squelch on
the Uniden, and then it's received weakly until it is an S8 or 9 signal
on the ICOMs. Interestingly, the 15X "S Meter" shows 5 bars on */any/*
signal strong enough to break squelch, so it doesn't seem to serve any
purpose. The Uniden specs. indicate AM sensitivity at .3 mV, whereas
the ICOM specs are not better than 1.6 mV (the R7100), so I would expect
more from the 15X. On a lark, I compared the reception of the 15X with
a handheld BC125AT/Diamond RH77 whip sitting on the desk, and they
received about the same. I would expect far better reception with a
desktop scanner and attic discone configuration. With both the Close
Call and attenuation features disabled, is there any other setting on
the 15X that could be degrading the signal? I have several Uniden
handhelds (analog and digital) including the BCD436/536 twins and have
been very pleased with them, so this is the first time I've experienced
questionable performance in a Uniden.
Les Polt, Esq.