2m or 2m/70 cm mobile receiver

[mjac]

I am in the East. Southern Appalachia actually. Where Tn, GA, and NC meet.
I wheel in the mountains of all three states.
I would like to know which is more likely to be used in my area, a 2m or a 2m/70cm dual receiver.
I have a opportunity to buy either radio, used.
TIA

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

 

[DaveInDenver]

All things being equal, why would you not just get the dual band radio? If the question was 2m OR 70cm, that would boil down to which is more active in your area and within your intended use. Most group runs around here settle on a 2m frequency as the common one so 2m is basically a necessity from a 4WD perspective. But generally speaking both bands are used by the hams and the group of guys I rag chew with happen to be on UHF so I have radios for both bands.

 

[Frdmskr]

Best bet is ask the group you ride with what they use. I'd get a dual band radio no matter what but if you ask you'd know who to talk to and where.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Hilldweller]

2M is much more active but I'd get the dual band.
You'll be able to listen to a bunch of EMS in your area on 70cm and know when to avoid a road, etc.

 

[Airmapper]

Another handy use for UHF reception is you can plug in all the FRS/GMRS freqs for monitoring, even if it won't TX you can hear on the better speaker and pull it in with a larger antenna.

Overall I haven't seen much UHF (440) activity anywhere. But it is nice to have, I mean 2M/70cm antennas are easy to get, 2 bands for the effort of installing one. A lot of city repeaters use 440 as the signal does better around buildings.

But something else to think on, is there is kind of an important difference between a dual band radio, and a dual receive radio.

Dual band is great, it lets you use more frequencies, but dual receive is another animal and is quite handy at times.

For example my Kenwood is a true dual receiver, it is almost literally 2 radios in the same box. The only thing I cannot do is TX on both at the same time. So for example, I can monitor an FRS frequency for the guy who brought a walkie-talkie and still listen and talk on ham without scanning or needing to switch channels. I can also monitor one side, and scan on the other. I can even scan different frequency sets or memory banks on each side at the same time. (I sometimes scan local repeaters on one side, and local emergency services on the other.)

Now some dual receive radios get discombobulated between UHF-VHF, the newer Kenwoods and maybe some others don't. So on some you may be forced to use VHF on one side and UHF on the other, where some will let you do either on either side at any time.

 

[mjac]

All things being equal, why would you not just get the dual band radio? If the question was 2m OR 70cm, that would boil down to which is more active in your area and within your intended use. Most group runs around here settle on a 2m frequency as the common one so 2m is basically a necessity from a 4WD perspective. But generally speaking both bands are used by the hams and the group of guys I rag chew with happen to be on UHF so I have radios for both bands.

In my mind things are not equal. There is differences in cost and complexity. The Ham clubs north and south cite 2m as the one with the most activity but then again this is a rural area.

This will be a mobile rig and I don't see myself sitting in my truck outside the house talking. This computer is enough.

 

[mjac]

Best bet is ask the group you ride with what they use. I'd get a dual band radio no matter what but if you ask you'd know who to talk to and where.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Hands down, 2m.

 

[mjac]

2M is much more active but I'd get the dual band.
You'll be able to listen to a bunch of EMS in your area on 70cm and know when to avoid a road, etc.

That is something to consider.

 

[DaveInDenver]

In my mind things are not equal. There is differences in cost and complexity. The Ham clubs north and south cite 2m as the one with the most activity but then again this is a rural area.

This will be a mobile rig and I don't see myself sitting in my truck outside the house talking. This computer is enough.

You never mentioned cost, so yeah, if you want to spend the least you have to decide what matches intended budget and use. But if the question is single band or multiple band radio, why would you not want the extra spectrum? Cost is really the only reason. The radios are all about the same size, weight, power draw. They are about the same complexity inside and the buttons are going to be more or less the same.

 

[mjac]

Another handy use for UHF reception is you can plug in all the FRS/GMRS freqs for monitoring, even if it won't TX you can hear on the better speaker and pull it in with a larger antenna.

Overall I haven't seen much UHF (440) activity anywhere. But it is nice to have, I mean 2M/70cm antennas are easy to get, 2 bands for the effort of installing one. A lot of city repeaters use 440 as the signal does better around buildings.

But something else to think on, is there is kind of an important difference between a dual band radio, and a dual receive radio.

Dual band is great, it lets you use more frequencies, but dual receive is another animal and is quite handy at times.

For example my Kenwood is a true dual receiver, it is almost literally 2 radios in the same box. The only thing I cannot do is TX on both at the same time. So for example, I can monitor an FRS frequency for the guy who brought a walkie-talkie and still listen and talk on ham without scanning or needing to switch channels. I can also monitor one side, and scan on the other. I can even scan different frequency sets or memory banks on each side at the same time. (I sometimes scan local repeaters on one side, and local emergency services on the other.)

Now some dual receive radios get discombobulated between UHF-VHF, the newer Kenwoods and maybe some others don't. So on some you may be forced to use VHF on one side and UHF on the other, where some will let you do either on either side at any time.

Thanks for the detailed explanation. Way more stuff to think about that's for sure and I do already have a 2/70 antenna.
I am still smokin' on my choice but I keep coming back to complexity. I like simple.
Btw, which Kenwood do you have?

 

[mjac]

No, I didn't mention cost specifically, only that I have a chance to buy either, used. We both know one is going to be a bit spender than the other and being the thrifty, well ok, tightwad that I am, I just can't see spending for a feature I might never/won't be using.
Unless you have one you want to give away.

 

[prerunner1982]

Depends on what is being used where you are and where you plan on going.
When I was first looking at a mobile radio I thought 2m monoband would be fine as it was considerably cheaper (new). Then I found that there was a linked repeater system covering the eastern half of the state....on 70cm. A linked system that large can be quite handy. If it wouldn't have been for that I probably would have got a 2m only rig and likely have been happy with that. I do however like the dual receive but mostly the remote head that most dualband radios have, it certainly increases the mounting options.

 

[Airmapper]

Thanks for the detail explanation. Way more stuff to think about that's for sure and I do already have a 2/70 antenna.
I am still smokin' on my choice but I keep coming back to complexity. I like simple.
Btw, which Kenwood do you have?

I have the TM-D710GA. Overkill for most but I'm into APRS so I like all the packet hardware built in.

 

[wirenut]

If you just want 1 cheap radio then get a 2 meter. If you want a radio that has a removable face to make for an easy and clean installation you'll have to get a dual band since no single band radio offers that. If you want to be able to listen to public safety on the 450 Mhz band you'll need a dual band radio. If you want to use cross band repeat you'll need a dual band radio that does 2 bands at once. If you have a radio like that you can usually listen too two frequencies in the same band at the same time. Like maybe the local 2 meter repeater and the simplex frequency your using on the trail. If you want to get into APRS you'll need 1 radio for that and one for voice OR, just use a dual band radio with one function on each side.
My wife is also licensed and we often talk on 70cm simplex just because I'm sure there's nobody listening.
Can you tell my vote is for a dual band rig? The Icom 2370 would be my pick for new and cheap. Yaesu 7800 or 7900 would be my pick for one-band-at-a-time dual banders. Or, the Icom 207 and 208 are good too. Alinco's dual band rigs are also priced pretty low compared to the others. The 635 or 638 would probably work well.

 

[Counterpoise]

Does the power output differ on the two choices? You may want to go with the highest wattage. Not wanting to sound cb'ish but that area is very rural and if you are looking for range wattage and a good antenna and mounting location is key. If you just want vehicle to vehicle comm you may want to look at frs/gmrs or cb. They work great also. Good luck on your choice.