I've tried to make sure that the test was properly done by flying at the same path, using the same TX settings (and also verifying that the output power was very similar), placing the RX and TX antennas and the same orientation and restricting the Mavic Air 2 to 5.8GHz frequency. My only explanation for these results I can think of (unless the 915MHz equipment was faulty) is that the Minimortal Style 915MHz antenna that I used wasn't tuned correctly or just didn't perform as good as a proper sized one. I am going to run the same test again using an Immortal T antenna soon.
Yep, I'd say that's a pretty good reason. It's a Dipole and needs to be set vertically, not horizontal as well. The difference in performance is very significant.
Ok... mini-mortal antennas are not fantastic... Here is what TBS is saying: "This specific variation is designed to be small, light, and easy to use. You CANNOT expect full range from this antenna." And they repeat this statement over and over until your ears are falling off. My take on it is that you probably lose 18dB compared to a full-size tuned dipole. According to signal budget calculators you should have something like 8.4 dB better signal from a 915MHz than from a 2.4 GHz because of the larger antennas of the 915MHz system.
@@Michael-nu6fb Depends. Lower frequency will always have better penetration (and thus range), but you can't send the same amount of data per time frame. Although ELRS 2.4GHz should work just fine for about anyone, anywhere for almost any range.
@@jackoneill8585 That's negative dbm, smaller number is better. He did say it was a mini T antenna, which those are bad. Even with optimum antennas 915 doesn't have that much more range than 2.4, the magic is in the LoRA tech, not the lower 915 frequency.
I conducted tests with T20S, T20G, Radiomaster Ranger (all at 2.4 GHz and Dipole), and R9m Lite (915 MHz+Moxon) and obtained similar results, experiencing a decrease of around 10 to 12 dB when operating at 915 MHz, just like you mentioned
For these expected low-freq ELRS to perform better over long range: the 915Mhz version only has slightly better penetration, while the 2.4Ghz has much wider bandwidth.
Hey guys I wish you all the very best sending my love to all the fpv pilots my life has been ruined by an employer and I worry that I will die with nothing I can do to save my life it's really Breaking Me Down and if you would keep me in your thoughts and your prayers and may all your builds fly high
I'm still confused. When I got into this hobby all of the good pilots were using Crossfire 915mhz control links because of the reliability and penetration. Now those same pilots are switching to 2.4ghz. Why? 2.4 still can't penetrate as well as 915 or 868 in Europe. It's my understanding that 2.4 is a faster link, so maybe for racing it's a good link. For penetrating walls it's better than 5.8ghz but not as good as 915. For penetrating water like trees, especially trees with water on the leaves 915 or 868 are better. Am I wrong with this? Something caused pilots to go from the old standard 2.4ghz to the newer more reliable 915/868.
LoRa it's that simple, with it you can have a 2.4ghz link that still outperforms your video and that's always been the golden rule in FPV, control link just needs to outperform video. Then with 2.4ghz you have the faster packet rate and smaller antenna which is nice. If you're planning on flying 10 miles out up a mountain behind some trees with a 2.5watt VTX then I would still recommend 915mhz but, for 99% of people 2.4 is more than enough with LoRa Wezley Varty flew 2.4 ELRS out 100km.
@@thirtythreeeyes8624 I remember outperforming the 5.8 analog video link wasn't that hard to do most of the time. Then DJI came on the scene and their 5.8 digital video link had some crazy penetrating abilities and suddenly Frsky rxsr receivers weren't cutting it. Has elrs 2.4 really gotten so good that it can last longer than a DJI 5.8 video link?
You start with 20dB worse on the 900... Must be something completely wrong. The 900 has bigger antenna and should have better signal from the beginning. If not, something is wrong and it needs to be fixed before testing.
900 MHz physically requires a bigger antenna :) it usually is something with a quarter wavelength, so only considering that a 900 MHz antenna would be ~ 2.7 times bigger
@@ChriFux I got the BetaFPV 900 Nano Rx and the small T antenna that comes with it performs very poorly. I swapped it for a CRSF Immortal T 900 Rx antenna and performance was day and night difference compared to the compact “900” little T that comes with the BetaFPV 900 Nano Rx.
It has TOO much power when that close😆 similar to when you fly close to your transmitter and you lose signal because the tx and rx are TOO close to each other😬
@@stickboyfpv4742 No he was using a mini antenna which is barely an antenna really. They have 10+ db of loss compared to a normal antenna meaning 10% the range.
ExpressLRS is not magic, but sometimes it does feel like it. Receiver 915Mhz antenna pops off.. you still fly around the park 200-300m.. unaware. Normally with FrSky, Spectrum, or FlySky, going behind bunch of leafy trees is no-no.. now RSSI barely drops. But ofcourse, as soon as you go over a hilltop, out of sight, you lose the signal.
2,4 is better than 900 in long range and penetration, tested on elrs and ghost not sure about tbs also it depends a lot where you fly. if there is a lot of antennas and interference 2,4 performance is way ahed and better than 900.
@@lucalive1302 Lower freq is better for long/penetration. Your 2.4ghz wifi goes further than your 5.8ghz even thought the 5.8 is faster for data transfers at close range.
Thank you Gal. Amazing video. I have a quick question. What could be valid reasons why I should switch from tbs crossfire to expresslrs? I just found out about express lrs today.
Thank you for sharing this. I’m just getting into ELRS with my new Radiomaster Boxer (with the built-in ELRS). I’m also in the process of buying an iFlight 😢Nazgul 5 V2. But in terms of the receiver protocol, I have a choice for an ELRS or ELRS 915mHZ. PLEASE advice and/or guide me in making the right selection. the right Thanks again!
what this tells me is one is not better than the other. they just give different numbers. it doesn't seem like comparing apples to apples, since you dont show the type or placement of antennas.
I’m having trouble binding my jumper t-lite v2 to my expresslrs 915 MH? Is it because my jumper is a 2.4? Do I have to get a different module to bind them?
I just get q geprc moz7 with elrs 2.4, I have a radiomaster boxer with internal elrs I havent failsafe but my rssi dbm isnt as good as this one, everytime I go past probably 200 to 300 meters my rssi dbm goes to -100, its not the more open area in the world but I dont feel it should be this bad. Do you think q new antena for my controller would help? Or is probably a bad receiver
I have a problem, my range is so bad with my r9 2019 900mhz. 400 meters and failsafe. A new reciever and antenna are helping nothing ( other reciever placement too). I flasht both new? My lq is most of the time high but the rssidb is so low i have after 300meters -90 at 50 mw ???? Can someone help me
hi what do you think about the happymodel ES24Tx PRO? It has 1000mw... do you think it is worth double the power, for losing the lcd? i like to upgrade my fs i6x, with an elrs 2.4 module, but im unsure which to choose..
It all depends on what tasks you plan to use! 1W is a lot for 2.4GHz, then it's easier to pay attention to 900MHz. 250-500mW is more than enough for 2.4GHz.
Hey there, I want to order my first fav drone and I absolutely do not know what is the difference between 2.4g and 915mhz... What are the main points? Thanks in advance!
@@PhillGraaf 915 will go a lot further. maybe 1.5 to 2 times further, but there are not many in use as most drones are 2.4 and 3.4 ELRS goes a long way already.
Interference maybe, 2.4 devices are all digital frequency hopping. I think most things on the 900 band are analog and I think 900 is more susceptible to spurious emissions from other things as well because of the lower frequency.
How are you managing to go this far, with my quad I can barely make 150m without it falling out of the sky and crashing. I've got a radiomaster zorro, bumped up the watts to 250mw and 50hz and yup, sure as anything, it'll RXLOSS 100-150m away :(
Are you using one of the PCB antenna receivers in particular the flat Betafpv ones? They suck but, even with them you should be getting 1-2km+ of range LOS so it sounds like something is wrong if you've tried a different receiver I would contact radiomaster and try to get a replacement TX module.
@@thirtythreeeyes8624 i've got a literadio 3 pro and a zorro, I'm wondering whether better antennas would help, but when using the flat antenna there is nothing to do, so just on the radio. I will maybe contact with radiomaster like you suggested, cause walking 500m to pick up a quad is annoying as hell...
@@KremerFPV that's the weird thing, it's a new mmcx to sma cable, the connector isn't damaged, the antenna on the sma is new foxeer stubby and it's set to a 200mw vtx (unlocked). So it's just a huge puzzle. I have no idea what it could be. But I keep trying to find out. But I do like watching your videos and seeing what people can do :)
Please tell me, I took Betafpv elrs 915mhz and 2.4, so on 2.4 through the lua script, you can turn on the power below 100mw, that is, 10,25,50. and on version 915 below 100mw, it does not turn on, i.e. the minimum power is only 100mw. is everyone like this?
I get great connection with the Zorro around town flying low. I at least get a 1/2 mile of range i never flew it to his limits Don't want to go looking
Sorry i didnt get why the 900 MHz was the "worst" when the only "weak Signal" error came in the 2.4 GHz, can someone explain? Dont be mad at me, im really new in this hobby thx.
Whoever said that is wrong. This really was a faulty test because neither were pushed to their limits. It's like testing a 10km drone vs a 6km drone and only going 4km. This test is almost useless.
Something is completely wrong with your 900 receiver. If you used the “900” compact T antenna that comes with the BetaFPV 900 Nano Rx then your test is not accurate at all. I got the BetaFPV 900 Nano Rx and the small T antenna that comes with it performs very poorly. I swapped it for a CRSF Immortal T 900 Rx antenna and performance was night and day difference compared to the compact “900” little T that comes with the BetaFPV 900 Nano Rx.
Being on the sticks has no effect on the signal. Now mounting it on a mavic could have caused interference especially on 900mhz because it's more susceptible.
What the heck does being on the sticks have to do with it? He's checking the range of a receiver, and its transmitting it's signal quality back. What do you think is missing here? He could walk with it and it would still give the data.
Yeah I saw that little weak signal warning there with the 2.4. If youre testing distance with no interference then both drones with same powered transmitters will go just as far obviously lol, test is useless. Where the 900 would make a big difference is in urban setting transmitting through buildings like I fly my Evo 2 pros. 900 goes through walls better period. But this kind of a test would be illegal because you dont have line of sight and would also make the Mavic 3 look really bad. Again, with same transmitter power, both will go as far without interference, and even there you saw a little weak signal warning, probably some 2.4 local interference passing by. I expect great results with the Evo 2 Pro Enterprise V3 that I just ordered.
@@jeffparisse4202 i know they have it but how bout 20mhzh 1mhz etc if nasa can talk to voyager on with 20 watts and lowe ham freq we should have super good control but we dont
If you all would please say a prayer for me I am terrified I will die from a negligent employer who didn't control silica dust I feel trapped with no way out
I wish you all the very best my life was taken from me for no reason I had no idea my employer was giving me a fatal disease I wish everyday I would left
I've tried to make sure that the test was properly done by flying at the same path, using the same TX settings (and also verifying that the output power was very similar), placing the RX and TX antennas and the same orientation and restricting the Mavic Air 2 to 5.8GHz frequency. My only explanation for these results I can think of (unless the 915MHz equipment was faulty) is that the Minimortal Style 915MHz antenna that I used wasn't tuned correctly or just didn't perform as good as a proper sized one. I am going to run the same test again using an Immortal T antenna soon.
Yep, I'd say that's a pretty good reason. It's a Dipole and needs to be set vertically, not horizontal as well. The difference in performance is very significant.
Ok... mini-mortal antennas are not fantastic... Here is what TBS is saying: "This specific variation is designed to be small, light, and easy to use. You CANNOT expect full range from this antenna." And they repeat this statement over and over until your ears are falling off. My take on it is that you probably lose 18dB compared to a full-size tuned dipole.
According to signal budget calculators you should have something like 8.4 dB better signal from a 915MHz than from a 2.4 GHz because of the larger antennas of the 915MHz system.
@@Siamect Yes, this... exactly.... TBS covering themselves with an alternate, smaller more convenient antenna...for 915mhz...🤔
Do you use the DJI TX for fly de mini 2 or use the Expresslrs and the 915Mhz system for fly the drone?
@@R.B_B DJI TX (Mavic Air 2).
Thanks for attempting the test. You are a great resource in the FPV community.
Much appreciated!
this is great, we are so lucky to have all this fantastic systems in our hobby.
maybe a penetration test 2,4 vs 900?
up
Wow I'm impressed with the 2.4ghz link. Very consistent and fantastic rssi throughout the test. Great video Gal. Stay safe out there.
did you notice the rssi though 75 where 89 for 900
So, in short, what should one use?
@@Michael-nu6fb Depends. Lower frequency will always have better penetration (and thus range), but you can't send the same amount of data per time frame. Although ELRS 2.4GHz should work just fine for about anyone, anywhere for almost any range.
Stay safe out there... that's the covid propaganda still going strong going strong 😵💫
@@jackoneill8585 That's negative dbm, smaller number is better. He did say it was a mini T antenna, which those are bad. Even with optimum antennas 915 doesn't have that much more range than 2.4, the magic is in the LoRA tech, not the lower 915 frequency.
I conducted tests with T20S, T20G, Radiomaster Ranger (all at 2.4 GHz and Dipole), and R9m Lite (915 MHz+Moxon) and obtained similar results, experiencing a decrease of around 10 to 12 dB when operating at 915 MHz, just like you mentioned
For these expected low-freq ELRS to perform better over long range: the 915Mhz version only has slightly better penetration, while the 2.4Ghz has much wider bandwidth.
i want to fly a lot in the city, so you think it is not worth getting 915mhz over the 2.4hz?
@@nlluke5207 Cell towers will knock 915 out of the air, heavy wifi access point density will hurt 2.4ghz. Both will easily far exceed your video link.
Hey guys I wish you all the very best sending my love to all the fpv pilots my life has been ruined by an employer and I worry that I will die with nothing I can do to save my life it's really Breaking Me Down and if you would keep me in your thoughts and your prayers and may all your builds fly high
Hang in there bro. As long as you have life you have hope! You'll overcome this.
I'm still confused. When I got into this hobby all of the good pilots were using Crossfire 915mhz control links because of the reliability and penetration. Now those same pilots are switching to 2.4ghz. Why? 2.4 still can't penetrate as well as 915 or 868 in Europe. It's my understanding that 2.4 is a faster link, so maybe for racing it's a good link. For penetrating walls it's better than 5.8ghz but not as good as 915. For penetrating water like trees, especially trees with water on the leaves 915 or 868 are better. Am I wrong with this? Something caused pilots to go from the old standard 2.4ghz to the newer more reliable 915/868.
I have the same questions.
LoRa it's that simple, with it you can have a 2.4ghz link that still outperforms your video and that's always been the golden rule in FPV, control link just needs to outperform video. Then with 2.4ghz you have the faster packet rate and smaller antenna which is nice. If you're planning on flying 10 miles out up a mountain behind some trees with a 2.5watt VTX then I would still recommend 915mhz but, for 99% of people 2.4 is more than enough with LoRa Wezley Varty flew 2.4 ELRS out 100km.
@@thirtythreeeyes8624 I remember outperforming the 5.8 analog video link wasn't that hard to do most of the time. Then DJI came on the scene and their 5.8 digital video link had some crazy penetrating abilities and suddenly Frsky rxsr receivers weren't cutting it. Has elrs 2.4 really gotten so good that it can last longer than a DJI 5.8 video link?
Fantastic flying and testing, Gal! 😃
Really impressive system!!!
Stay safe there with your family! 🖖😊
Fantastic flying and testing, Gal!
Really impressive system!
Thank you!
Good afternoon!
Thanks for the test.
It is very good to carry out the test in industrial areas and residential areas. Where 2.4 GHz is used
Thanks for your feedback. I will try to provide you with better range tests soon :-)
You start with 20dB worse on the 900... Must be something completely wrong. The 900 has bigger antenna and should have better signal from the beginning. If not, something is wrong and it needs to be fixed before testing.
Yep, considering the record of ELRS is about 40km on 10mW 915MHz, there is something wrong with his antenna
900 MHz physically requires a bigger antenna :) it usually is something with a quarter wavelength, so only considering that a 900 MHz antenna would be ~ 2.7 times bigger
@@ChriFux I got the BetaFPV 900 Nano Rx and the small T antenna that comes with it performs very poorly. I swapped it for a CRSF Immortal T 900 Rx antenna and performance was day and night difference compared to the compact “900” little T that comes with the BetaFPV 900 Nano Rx.
It has TOO much power when that close😆 similar to when you fly close to your transmitter and you lose signal because the tx and rx are TOO close to each other😬
@@stickboyfpv4742 No he was using a mini antenna which is barely an antenna really. They have 10+ db of loss compared to a normal antenna meaning 10% the range.
ExpressLRS is not magic, but sometimes it does feel like it.
Receiver 915Mhz antenna pops off.. you still fly around the park 200-300m.. unaware.
Normally with FrSky, Spectrum, or FlySky, going behind bunch of leafy trees is no-no.. now RSSI barely drops.
But ofcourse, as soon as you go over a hilltop, out of sight, you lose the signal.
How is apparently 2.4Gz better than 900Mz, same power? This does not make sense. Any idea why?
it's freak programing magic
2,4 is better than 900 in long range and penetration, tested on elrs and ghost not sure about tbs also it depends a lot where you fly. if there is a lot of antennas and interference 2,4 performance is way ahed and better than 900.
He was using a poor antenna for the 900mhz test.
@@lucalive1302 Lower freq is better for long/penetration. Your 2.4ghz wifi goes further than your 5.8ghz even thought the 5.8 is faster for data transfers at close range.
Loved this test brother
Amazing
Как всегда отличный сравнительный тест, все честно и предельно наглядно!
Thanks Gal!!!
Really tough to tell which one is “better” they both seem to work great!
2.4g is the way to go unless you want to fly to the moon. Better latency antenna size and this video looks like 2.4 maintains packets better as well.
@@thirtythreeeyes8624 plus 900 tends to interfere with GPS.
you can see somethings wrong from the start when the 900mhz starts at 20db worse than the 2.4ghz you got something faulty.
Please check my pinned comment.
Could you explain the top and bottom "signal indicators" please? It looks like there isn't much practical difference out to 4km?
RSSi, LQ and dB
RSSI is kind of useless with ELRS, LQ is how much of the data is being heard and db is how loud it is.
Why does the osd say 700 for link quality one of my drones say that also but others got a number then 100
Very impressed with both….
Thank you Gal. Amazing video. I have a quick question. What could be valid reasons why I should switch from tbs crossfire to expresslrs? I just found out about express lrs today.
new, smaller, lighter
i want to fly a lot long-range in the city, so you think it is worth getting 915mhz over the 2.4hz for penetration?
wait wait did you slap a receiver on a mavic or dji drone and fly iut out? no fpv drone uses dji apps lol seems 900 is the best one for long range
How abought 2.4ghz vs 900mhz penetration of elrs for fpv
@@sthightech860 llower frequency have better penetration thru the objects.
@@lubosschejbal9258 that pretty important. you know how much better? becouse i want to fly in the city a lot.
Thank you for sharing this. I’m just getting into ELRS with my new Radiomaster Boxer (with the built-in ELRS). I’m also in the process of buying an iFlight 😢Nazgul 5 V2. But in terms of the receiver protocol, I have a choice for an ELRS or ELRS 915mHZ. PLEASE advice and/or guide me in making the right selection. the right
Thanks again!
My pleasure. I would go with ELRS 2.4ghx RX / TX simply as it’s more popular than the 915mhz version.
what this tells me is one is not better than the other. they just give different numbers. it doesn't seem like comparing apples to apples, since you dont show the type or placement of antennas.
I’m having trouble binding my jumper t-lite v2 to my expresslrs 915 MH? Is it because my jumper is a 2.4? Do I have to get a different module to bind them?
Yes - you need to use the same frequency.
What abaout penetration? Would you expect similar results for 915MHz and 2.4GHz?
915Mhz should be better as far as I know.
I just get q geprc moz7 with elrs 2.4, I have a radiomaster boxer with internal elrs I havent failsafe but my rssi dbm isnt as good as this one, everytime I go past probably 200 to 300 meters my rssi dbm goes to -100, its not the more open area in the world but I dont feel it should be this bad. Do you think q new antena for my controller would help? Or is probably a bad receiver
I have a problem, my range is so bad with my r9 2019 900mhz. 400 meters and failsafe. A new reciever and antenna are helping nothing ( other reciever placement too). I flasht both new? My lq is most of the time high but the rssidb is so low i have after 300meters -90 at 50 mw ???? Can someone help me
why does this say 1year old video, its been 4 years
Nope, just over a year :-)
What frequency is better for freestyle in big field areas?
Any. If you are in an open field doesn’t really matter. 5.6 has the least latency.
hi
what do you think about the happymodel ES24Tx PRO? It has 1000mw...
do you think it is worth double the power, for losing the lcd?
i like to upgrade my fs i6x, with an elrs 2.4 module, but im unsure which to choose..
It all depends on what tasks you plan to use! 1W is a lot for 2.4GHz, then it's easier to pay attention to 900MHz. 250-500mW is more than enough for 2.4GHz.
Hey there, I want to order my first fav drone and I absolutely do not know what is the difference between 2.4g and 915mhz... What are the main points?
Thanks in advance!
Hi, in general 915MHz will provide you with a better range than 2.4GHz and will have less interference as 2.4GHz is a very common frequency for WIFI.
@@KremerFPV thanks for your reply!makes sense! But is there any downside to 915Mhz? And how big is the difference? Like where does 2.4G normally end?
@@PhillGraaf np. Mainly regulation issues that can prevent users from using 915MHz.
@@PhillGraaf 915 will go a lot further. maybe 1.5 to 2 times further, but there are not many in use as most drones are 2.4 and 3.4 ELRS goes a long way already.
how could be 2.4 more reliable than 915
Interference maybe, 2.4 devices are all digital frequency hopping. I think most things on the 900 band are analog and I think 900 is more susceptible to spurious emissions from other things as well because of the lower frequency.
Yeah, 915 band is very narrow. I think it's more susceptible to interference.
How are you managing to go this far, with my quad I can barely make 150m without it falling out of the sky and crashing. I've got a radiomaster zorro, bumped up the watts to 250mw and 50hz and yup, sure as anything, it'll RXLOSS 100-150m away :(
Are you using one of the PCB antenna receivers in particular the flat Betafpv ones? They suck but, even with them you should be getting 1-2km+ of range LOS so it sounds like something is wrong if you've tried a different receiver I would contact radiomaster and try to get a replacement TX module.
@@thirtythreeeyes8624 i've got a literadio 3 pro and a zorro, I'm wondering whether better antennas would help, but when using the flat antenna there is nothing to do, so just on the radio. I will maybe contact with radiomaster like you suggested, cause walking 500m to pick up a quad is annoying as hell...
Yes this is very strange. I assume something is off with your antennas or radio receiver.
@@KremerFPV that's the weird thing, it's a new mmcx to sma cable, the connector isn't damaged, the antenna on the sma is new foxeer stubby and it's set to a 200mw vtx (unlocked). So it's just a huge puzzle. I have no idea what it could be. But I keep trying to find out. But I do like watching your videos and seeing what people can do :)
Thank you Gal for this test BRO
But low battery 4km no good
Hey gal,
Any recommendations on a full size jr module? I can only find the NAMIMNO VOYAGER
Thanks
Happymodel ExpressLRS 2.4Ghz Tranmitter Jr Module
I hear the Namimno TX has better build quality.
Please tell me, I took Betafpv elrs 915mhz and 2.4,
so on 2.4 through the lua script, you can turn on the power below 100mw, that is, 10,25,50. and on version 915 below 100mw, it does not turn on, i.e. the minimum power is only 100mw. is everyone like this?
It depends on the module. The minimum power of the BetaFPV 915MHz ELRS module is 100mW.
That DJI drone won't even begin to stretch the range of either band. It can't fly far enough...🤔😳🇬🇧
your drone have CE signal power limitation, if you need a more power then you need to use FCC hack or Fake GPS to switch on FCC mode
@@UncleFilo 13 Kms is a hard limit for DJI drones...Still nowhere near far enough...🤔🤔😳
@@EnglishTurbines hard limit is 17.9km with stock antenna/remote controller (only FCC + Boost?)
@@EnglishTurbines ruclips.net/video/kq1HvBe2uKM/видео.html
@@ali3n24 Whatever, it's still nowhere near far enough for these long range systems....🤔😳😀🇬🇧
I get great connection with the Zorro around town flying low. I at least get a 1/2 mile of range i never flew it to his limits Don't want to go looking
👌
Hi, can you tell me where this telemetry comes from?? what kind of software do you use?
This is from dji app
can you explain which value is important and why? thanks for al the non pro
dBi value is probably the most important one on ExplressLRS.
can you please help me after downloading firmware on my betafpv elrs module it won't turn on
Hi, did you figure it out by now or you still need help?
Sorry i didnt get why the 900 MHz was the "worst" when the only "weak Signal" error came in the 2.4 GHz, can someone explain? Dont be mad at me, im really new in this hobby thx.
Whoever said that is wrong. This really was a faulty test because neither were pushed to their limits. It's like testing a 10km drone vs a 6km drone and only going 4km. This test is almost useless.
@@Hutch_Davenport its about the rssi dbm reading, not about going to full failsafe
Something is completely wrong with your 900 receiver. If you used the “900” compact T antenna that comes with the BetaFPV 900 Nano Rx then your test is not accurate at all.
I got the BetaFPV 900 Nano Rx and the small T antenna that comes with it performs very poorly. I swapped it for a CRSF Immortal T 900 Rx antenna and performance was night and day difference compared to the compact “900” little T that comes with the BetaFPV 900 Nano Rx.
Sorry but I wasn't aware of any issues with this antenna when testing it...
Does that mean 2.4GHz is more solid?
In this comparison at least.
It means that in a reality there is no practical difference.
In fact, only for line of sight, in conditions of a large number of walls, it is more sensitive to the reflected signal
So I'm trying to decide between 2.4ghz and 900mhz... I'm about to start my long range journey... Which should I choose? 🤔
Choose physics, and your noise floor.
So which is better. It’s a VS video but explain nothing about either just show flight video
and your doing this in the open try around homes or lots of cell toweers
What drone ?
im stupid where should i look? video is from mavic right? pls help im idioot and newbie
You are not stupid. Video is from the Mavic - I am testing the radio receivers.
@@KremerFPV noob question, I need to look at stats right? Also, if mavic system is so good why do we need to use anything else?
@ DIY drones can't use the Mavic system...
Wait, you placed the modules on a mavic? This doesn’t look very scientific since you are not actually on the sticks
cry
Being on the sticks has no effect on the signal. Now mounting it on a mavic could have caused interference especially on 900mhz because it's more susceptible.
What the heck does being on the sticks have to do with it? He's checking the range of a receiver, and its transmitting it's signal quality back. What do you think is missing here? He could walk with it and it would still give the data.
900 mhz needs 12cm long antenna
What kind of drone
That 900mhz must be getting cell phone tower interference
Different countries use different cellular channels
@@UncleFilo doesn't Europe use 900mhz
@@divingfalconfpv4602 915mhz I think, which is why the "900mhz" radio links there are 868mhz
Yeah I saw that little weak signal warning there with the 2.4. If youre testing distance with no interference then both drones with same powered transmitters will go just as far obviously lol, test is useless. Where the 900 would make a big difference is in urban setting transmitting through buildings like I fly my Evo 2 pros. 900 goes through walls better period. But this kind of a test would be illegal because you dont have line of sight and would also make the Mavic 3 look really bad. Again, with same transmitter power, both will go as far without interference, and even there you saw a little weak signal warning, probably some 2.4 local interference passing by. I expect great results with the Evo 2 Pro Enterprise V3 that I just ordered.
what we need is like 400mhz stuff ham freq
Immersion RC has been selling 433MHz gear for almost 15 years now… There is a discontinued 2W TX module on the market.
@@jeffparisse4202 i know they have it but how bout 20mhzh 1mhz etc if nasa can talk to voyager on with 20 watts and lowe ham freq we should have super good control but we dont
If you all would please say a prayer for me I am terrified I will die from a negligent employer who didn't control silica dust I feel trapped with no way out
Were you in the trades concrete. Is cement dust very bad to breath
👌
Yes!! 2.4 FTW!!!!! 😊
3 minutes of video and not one tank is worthless
：００
I wish you all the very best my life was taken from me for no reason I had no idea my employer was giving me a fatal disease I wish everyday I would left