Motorola Talkabout handheld radios for the farm.

[k0ua]

You'll shoot your eye out

Good one!:rotfl:

 

[/pine]

No cell service here so we use GMRS radios...

I have several sets...some cheapos I use for loaners...

Also have Motorola MaxTrac in the jeep...

 

[jenkinsph]

No doubt, you are correct.. I worked in a GE shop during the era of the Master II, and MVP's but we worked on a lot of Micors, Mocomm 70's and even the older stuff like Twin V's Motrac's etc too. And of course with my Amateur Radio background, it sort of irks me there is not reviews of specs. Just stupid stuff like "35 mile range". Amateur Radio gear is heavily tested spec'd out and reviewed, including handhelds like these. But I do realize they are selling to a different audience.

Sounds very similar to my experience, worked land mobile then marine vhf and radar to make a living but really enjoyed sound and lighting much more. Got my 1st phone and endorsements while still in high school, thought I had a "bright future" funny how things change so fast.:laughing: I always enjoyed working with tractors and have made the switch to this for almost full time work now. Doesn't pay a lot but at least I like what I do and that is more important than money.

 

[FatTire]

No doubt, you are correct.. I worked in a GE shop during the era of the Master II, and MVP's but we worked on a lot of Micors, Mocomm 70's and even the older stuff like Twin V's Motrac's etc too. And of course with my Amateur Radio background, it sort of irks me there is not reviews of specs. Just stupid stuff like "35 mile range". Amateur Radio gear is heavily tested spec'd out and reviewed, including handhelds like these. But I do realize they are selling to a different audience.

I share your opinion. If I had a little more spare time it would be interesting to buy several models of these GRS units and do some testing. My background is EE (analog) so when I look at most of the stuff available these days the documentation (or lack thereof) just seems ridiculous. And don't get me started on Windows 8.

 

[k0ua]

I share your opinion. If I had a little more spare time it would be interesting to buy several models of these GRS units and do some testing. My background is EE (analog) so when I look at most of the stuff available these days the documentation (or lack thereof) just seems ridiculous. And don't get me started on Windows 8.

I wish I had a service monitor (Motorola monitor, or Cushman, or IFR.) but I don't and they still cost a lot of money, even a used certified one, and I can't see how I can make money with it now a days or I would have one. I still remember how to use them, and I could tell you pretty quick what your radio amounted to. Of course with these little consumer "talkies" without antenna connectors, (so you cannot put external antennas on them) might take a bit to install one. so I could measure output power and receiver sensitivity.

 

[Daver1963]

No doubt, you are correct.. I worked in a GE shop during the era of the Master II, and MVP's but we worked on a lot of Micors, Mocomm 70's and even the older stuff like Twin V's Motrac's etc too. And of course with my Amateur Radio background, it sort of irks me there is not reviews of specs. Just stupid stuff like "35 mile range". Amateur Radio gear is heavily tested spec'd out and reviewed, including handhelds like these. But I do realize they are selling to a different audience.

During my time in the Air National Guard working with land mobile radios I had to explain multiple times to multiple colonels why he couldn't go buy some of those "Bass Pro walkie-talkies" with the 2, 7, or 35 mile range (they were illegal for military use) and instead had to use the $2.5k-5k narrowband, encryptable, and repeater accessible Motorola.
I basically told them that the advertised range was based on them being on a mountain top with no trees with a radio and the person they wanted to talk to was on another mountaintop without trees 35 miles away and they might be able to talk, but no promises and also asked them the question of why they needed that range on a facility that was, at max, a mile long by half mile wide.

 

[k0ua]

During my time in the Air National Guard working with land mobile radios I had to explain multiple times to multiple colonels why he couldn't go buy some of those "Bass Pro walkie-talkies" with the 2, 7, or 35 mile range (they were illegal for military use) and instead had to use the $2.5k-5k narrowband, encryptable, and repeater accessible Motorola.
I basically told them that the advertised range was based on them being on a mountain top with no trees with a radio and the person they wanted to talk to was on another mountaintop without trees 35 miles away and they might be able to talk, but no promises and also asked them the question of why they needed that range on a facility that was, at max, a mile long by half mile wide.

It is interesting that people want simple answers to simple questions. Like "how far will they talk".. of course there is no simple answer to this simple question. I have had people over looking at my HF amateur radio equipment. "how far can you get on that thing".. Well... 30 minutes of answer later, their eyes are glazed over. But when you spend a lifetime trying to understand radio propagation, and then come to realize you will never understand all of its nuances, no wonder the lay person has a bit of trouble understanding these things. However the public has some more experience now that they all have operated handheld cellphones now for a number of years. Some may not even realize they are radio's but they certainly know that if they walk into a tunnel, they may not "get a signal".

 

[Daver1963]

It is interesting that people want simple answers to simple questions. Like "how far will they talk".. of course there is no simple answer to this simple question. I have had people over looking at my HF amateur radio equipment. "how far can you get on that thing".. Well... 30 minutes of answer later, their eyes are glazed over. But when you spend a lifetime trying to understand radio propagation, and then come to realize you will never understand all of its nuances, no wonder the lay person has a bit of trouble understanding these things. However the public has some more experience now that they all have operated handheld cellphones now for a number of years. Some may not even realize they are radio's but they certainly know that if they walk into a tunnel, they may not "get a signal".

Ain't that the truth. There were a few times I had to brief higher ups on HF and while they could perceive the theory of "line of sight" with VHF/UHF radios all the possibilities of HF were mind boggling to them. When you got into ground waves vs. sky waves, the ionosphere going up and down, reflection and refraction of radio waves on various levels of the ionosphere, and ect. and ect. Even when put into the simplest terms possible after a few minutes the eyes would glaze over and start to roll back as if trying to do an inner examination of their own brains.
I always found that pilots, having used HF somewhat, were more receptive, but ground officers, unless they were former enlisted maintainers, had no idea. Most suggestions for better reception/transmission from them was to "put up a bigger antenna." I always found that if propagation confounded folks that the antenna theory behind propagation had even worse results for keeping an audience awake. For the most part the only people that understand radio are maintainers and operators.

 

[k0ua]

Ain't that the truth. There were a few times I had to brief higher ups on HF and while they could perceive the theory of "line of sight" with VHF/UHF radios all the possibilities of HF were mind boggling to them. When you got into ground waves vs. sky waves, the ionosphere going up and down, reflection and refraction of radio waves on various levels of the ionosphere, and ect. and ect. Even when put into the simplest terms possible after a few minutes the eyes would glaze over and start to roll back as if trying to do an inner examination of their own brains.
I always found that pilots, having used HF somewhat, were more receptive, but ground officers, unless they were former enlisted maintainers, had no idea. Most suggestions for better reception/transmission from them was to "put up a bigger antenna." I always found that if propagation confounded folks that the antenna theory behind propagation had even worse results for keeping an audience awake. For the most part the only people that understand radio are maintainers and operators.

Yes it is not an easy subject, and I have over 40 years of doing it.. but when the physicist's get in to explaining some things, sometime my eyes glaze over too!

The good news is, even they do not understand a lot of things. No-one does. There is still mystery in radio, I guess that is why I like it!

 

[houstonscott]

Anyone put old fashion CB in the tractor and base station at house. I have been looking at that idea vs using sporting type FM radios. HS