After watching 'The Swiss with the funny accent' test BF and REtevis, I went with a Retevis. I have my TinySA, now I need that attentuator. Thanks for all the content you provide!
One thing you should do (after adding the initial attenuator) is to take a measurement, then add another 10dB of attenuation. If the delta (fundamental vs. 2nd harmonic) between the original measurement and the new measurement is the same, then you can be sure you didn't overload the SA frontend. If the delta is different, then the SA is overload and what you're seeing is the SA generated harmonics and not your transceiver harmonics. Old school trick...
Thanks, Just purchased my Tiny SA, and was a bit hesitant about blasting the front end. I have a nice 40DB attenuator like yours, now I'm comfortable about hitting the TinySA with the output of my old baofeng's, and my uSDRs...that are about a bit less than 5watts out. keep 'em coming.
I just tested two new UV-5R radios (one was labeled as a plus model) and they both had the nearly identical resposnes. Both had only a peaks at the second harmonic. I tested at the bottom, middle and top of 2m and 70cm bands (433 was the lowest in 70cm) and the worst case was 53dB below the findamental. So, all in all, I was pleasantly surprised. A uv-17 was similar. Tested on a Rigol analyzer with 30kHz RBW up to 1.5GHz. These were all purchased in the last month, so maybe Baofeng is starting to get their stuff together.
Hello, I don't understand how you can have a signal of only -21dBm with a 40dB attenuator and a TX output of about 5W (36dBm). You should be measuring a fundamental of about -4dBm. Where are the missing 17dBm? Regards, David F4HTQ.
The test setup is sketchy at best, using uncharacterized attenuators and test leads of unknown quality. My assumption would be that the transmitter is folding back power due to impedance reflections. I'd like to see return loss measurements on that test setup. You need an exceptionally good load to do absolute power measurements. I'd Venture a bet that he's barely seeing 17 DB of return loss he should be seeing closer to 48 DB of return loss for an accurate measurement. The problem with this test setup is there's no way to normalize or characterize test fixtures. Normally when I see numbers that don't Jive with what I expect to see then it's time to perform a sanity check which was not done here. It's very easy to overload the front end of these hobby grade Spectrum analyzers has such a pretty much take everything you've seen in this video with a grain of salt. Had a very minimum he should have added another 10 DB of attenuation and compared the results. If the Delta on all the measurements were reduced by 10 DB then that's a pretty good sanity check, if they weren't it indicates overloading of the SA input. The bottom line is the reliability of your measurements is only going to be as accurate as the quality of your test fixtures and set up allows.
I forgot to mention in my original post that the red baufeng also gets the green light even though it's harmonics weren't down by 40 DB it's maximum harmonic power didn't exceed 0.3 microWatts which again is far below the permissible 8 microwatts for transmitters of 25 watts or less.
I just got the TinySA Ultra today and although I dont plan on using the Baofeng radios, I figure I would test them. Both of the UV5’s passed with flying colors. FYI, I noticed in one video you set the attenuation on the TinaSA for this same test. But on this video you dont have it set. Any reason for the difference or does that invalidate one of the videos?
Have you ever checked out the Baofeng DM-1701? I'm just curious. I have one, and had a friend of mine at a 2way radio shop check mine out. After loading the OpenGD77 software on it. My DM-1701 tested at -43 db at high power, which was < 5w, and hardly any deviation. Needed no alignment.
@@cmarchi128 it’s gonna take more than a ring, you need a filter. Here’s a video I did: 2m Low Pass Filter for Ham Radio ruclips.net/video/wbkERjEVpqg/видео.html
@@TheSmokinApe Ok, I really like the little Baofeng radios. Is it true that BTech takes the Baofeng radios and reworks them to get them in proper spec?
My recent B "Fang" experience is they can generate Stonger Harmonics output at Low Power setting !! .....That was Totally unexpected but Does Happen !! You might want to Include that on Future Chinesium radio Harmonic testing.....
Hey Ape ! ........Even some Newest UV-5R radios have Major Harmonic issues.....My fairly New UV-5R iii on Low power on 2 Meters puts out Over 1 watt on 2nd Harmonic in the 296 Mhz Business Band !! ......On Hi power the Same Harmonic is slightly Less than 1 watt.....The FCC getting a Spurious Emissions Complaint from a Business Band operator could be unexpected Bad news for a 2 Meter ham operator !! .....Big Thx for showing how to Measure this !!
Have you ever put those baofeng antennas on a VNA? uv82 here is 4.2:1 on ham bands, vhf it gets under 1.5:1 at 128 mhz, I thought I was going crazy, checked my yaesu antenna on 2mtrs its perfect, at 145 Mhz was 1:01:1 nothing wrong with my VNA cal, its the junk baofeng supply, thankfully they also dont reach 8 watts LOL on 2m its 4.9 and 70cm 3.5, on low pwr both are about 2.2w, so I guess using it on low power wont throw too much back into the PA stages (ant checked directly at VNA, not using leads etc)
Yes! Thanks Ape for doing this video! I really appreciate it. I'm not convinced the latest UV-5R's are much better. I'll test mine which was bought about a month ago and see how I go.
My UV-5R only has two peeks -7dbm (fundamental) and -35.9db down. The auto attenuation was 18db but I believe that's accounted for in the measurement. I'm a bit confused -7dbm is different from yours. I did the level Calibration. -7dbm is .2mw so allowing for 40db attenuation is 2W...
@@TheSmokinApe yep. I have the Becen sma 10w 40db attenuator bought off Amazon. I screwed the female end directly into the radio. A male to female adaptor (female both ends) into the other end. Then used one of the cables that came with the nanovna to go to the tinySA. I did the low to high port "Level cal" before hand without the attenuator. It's frustrating because until it arrives you don't know how good your baofeng will be. It gets me on the local repeater I wanted which it what I wanted it for so I guess no real complaints given the cost. I don't have a seperate RF power metre yet.
Just put together a filter to screw into the antenna connector to kill that harmonic. It can probably be built small enough so you hardly notice it. FT-50 toroid size would probably work fine. It would be a bit awkward, but functional. Or insert a T connector in your antenna jack and add a (slightly over) 1/4 wave stub of RG-174 (at the frequency of the harmonic,) to the side connector. Then plug your radio into your attenuator and your TinySA and snip down the RG-174 (while unkeyed,) then hit it again and watch that harmonic signal as it drops. Cheap, easy, and it will drop the harmonic down substantially. Not sure if it will attenuate it sufficiently using such small coax for the stub, (I haven't used any coax that small for a stub, the Q will be lower,) but it will be significant. Plus, the shield on the RG-174 will probably work as a counterpoise and improve the receive range on the Baofeng, because the Baofeng HT antenna system design sucks.
Would have liked just for giggles, to see what the UHF band would show. Also if it would make much difference to test on another freq in the VHF band, to see if some of that noise is the DDS or what ever they use to synth the osc freq. I had some tested years ago at the ARRL table in Dayton (at Hara) and even then one would pass and another would not. Also I had a couple that came out of a short custom run that were 2M/220Mhz. They were not clean. One other gotcha on these radios is that a number of them will not transmit all the DTMF tones, as one tone is the same for 2 buttons (I think the ones somewhere in the right hand column).
Because youtube algorithm wants you to help support this channel due to the fact it lined up things you've been watching and trying to suggest better things to watch and this guy popped up. Thumbs up and comments cause this channel to become popular and he can start on a runaway course to 100k subs. Keep watching video's and supporting your channel helps these guys generate revenue. I wish I wasn't so boring and annoying, I could make it big on youtube.
“allegedly 5 Watts” 😂 yeah, my BaoFeng says, maybe in the manual, “has 2 modes: high-power is 4 Watts, low-power is 1 Watt” 😮 some shady marketting guy calls that “5 Watts” 🤣
So much inaccurate information here. Contrary to your assertion The first baofeng was well within FCC limits. Manufacturers are not required to reduce spurious emissions below 10 microwatts.. -33 dbm is 0 micro Watts Which is far below permissible level for spurious emissions of 25 watt or lower transmitters from 30 MHz to 225 MHz. You were assuming that the minus 40 dbm was an absolute, but the specifications specifically state that emissions don't need to be reduced below 8 microvolts so this transmitter was well within spec. Here is the relevant section of part 97.307 subpart e. "For a transmitter having a mean power of 25 W or less, the mean power of any spurious emission supplied to the antenna transmission line must not exceed 25 µW and must be at least 40 dB below the mean power of the fundamental emission, but need not be reduced below the power of 10 µW." With that said the measurement is not passing the sanity check. I don't understand how you're seeing a -21.8 dbm fundamental with an input power of 5 Watts or 36.99 dbm Simple math tells us that 37 dbm -40 dbm equals -3 dbm.. In other words the fundamental on your spectrum analyzer should be showing -3 dbm yet it's showing -21.8 dbm. When the numbers don't match what you expect to see then it's time to perform a sanity check. In this case I would have added an additional 10 DB of attenuation. If the Delta on all the measurements was reduced by 10 DB then it passed the sanity check. If they did not then your overloading the front end of the SA which is resulting in erroneous measurements. The -21.8 dbm measurement could also be the result of impedance reflections in the uncharacterized test fixtures or it could be the result of lower than expected output from the transmitter. Hey keep in mind that if the transmitter isn't seeing a pure 50 ohms it could be folding back power, most of these transmitters will begin folding back power at 1.7 to 1 SWR. Even with cheap Chinese test fixtures I wouldn't expect to see a 1.7 to 1 SWR at 140 MHz. At 440 and above it might become a questionable. It's one of the reasons why professionals don't use inline attenuators for transmitter testing. It's much more accurate to use a signal tap and a precision load. This ensures that the transmitter sees the highest possible return loss. It's extremely important when working with test equipment like this to keep the impedance Reflections to a minimum. Sometimes when using pl259's this is difficult to do as they are notorious for impedance reflections at anything above about 30 MHz. This is one reason why you want to keep the number of adapters to a minimum. SMA adapters are one of the better choices for these power levels.
I love this stuff. I never really understood it as much until you started doing these videos. Thanks for the great content.
Glad you enjoy it! Thanks for watching Max!
After watching 'The Swiss with the funny accent' test BF and REtevis, I went with a Retevis. I have my TinySA, now I need that attentuator. Thanks for all the content you provide!
Glad you like the videos Van, I appreciate you watching 👍
One thing you should do (after adding the initial attenuator) is to take a measurement, then add another 10dB of attenuation. If the delta (fundamental vs. 2nd harmonic) between the original measurement and the new measurement is the same, then you can be sure you didn't overload the SA frontend. If the delta is different, then the SA is overload and what you're seeing is the SA generated harmonics and not your transceiver harmonics. Old school trick...
That's a great idea, thanks Mark! I will add that to the back of tricks!
Excellent video! Now that I have a Tiny SA I need to test my Baofeng collection to see which ones are a no go.
You might be surprised! Thanks for checking out the video Craig
my 5e plus was within fcc rules when I tested it when I first got it also, it is the only feng I own.
Nice that you tested several of them.
Only one Feng? #hamcourt
Thanks, Just purchased my Tiny SA, and was a bit hesitant about blasting the front end. I have a nice 40DB attenuator like yours, now I'm comfortable about hitting the TinySA with the output of my old baofeng's, and my uSDRs...that are about a bit less than 5watts out. keep 'em coming.
Yeah, just make sure to use the attenuator, good luck with the tests and thanks for watching Vince!
I just tested two new UV-5R radios (one was labeled as a plus model) and they both had the nearly identical resposnes. Both had only a peaks at the second harmonic. I tested at the bottom, middle and top of 2m and 70cm bands (433 was the lowest in 70cm) and the worst case was 53dB below the findamental. So, all in all, I was pleasantly surprised. A uv-17 was similar. Tested on a Rigol analyzer with 30kHz RBW up to 1.5GHz.
These were all purchased in the last month, so maybe Baofeng is starting to get their stuff together.
I’ve seen some pass and some fail, glad to hear yours were clean 👍
@@TheSmokinApe ha! Not sure I'd call it clean...but seems to at least meet requirements. :)
Hello,
I don't understand how you can have a signal of only -21dBm with a 40dB attenuator and a TX output of about 5W (36dBm). You should be measuring a fundamental of about -4dBm. Where are the missing 17dBm?
Regards,
David F4HTQ.
The test setup is sketchy at best, using uncharacterized attenuators and test leads of unknown quality. My assumption would be that the transmitter is folding back power due to impedance reflections.
I'd like to see return loss measurements on that test setup. You need an exceptionally good load to do absolute power measurements. I'd Venture a bet that he's barely seeing 17 DB of return loss he should be seeing closer to 48 DB of return loss for an accurate measurement.
The problem with this test setup is there's no way to normalize or characterize test fixtures. Normally when I see numbers that don't Jive with what I expect to see then it's time to perform a sanity check which was not done here.
It's very easy to overload the front end of these hobby grade Spectrum analyzers has such a pretty much take everything you've seen in this video with a grain of salt.
Had a very minimum he should have added another 10 DB of attenuation and compared the results. If the Delta on all the measurements were reduced by 10 DB then that's a pretty good sanity check, if they weren't it indicates overloading of the SA input.
The bottom line is the reliability of your measurements is only going to be as accurate as the quality of your test fixtures and set up allows.
@@dannelson8556
Thank you very much for your reply.
I totally agree with your comments.
So, sketchy serial numbers AND spurious emissions on the first one. Somebody is doing something shady.
Haha, right Fo Five 🤣
I forgot to mention in my original post that the red baufeng also gets the green light even though it's harmonics weren't down by 40 DB it's maximum harmonic power didn't exceed 0.3 microWatts which again is far below the permissible 8 microwatts for transmitters of 25 watts or less.
I have the 8W version, and in the city, I don't get 1Km of range.
It's because of the city, or I am doing something wrong???
It's going to depend on the terrain between the two radios, in city settings most folks use repeaters to help with range.
I just got the TinySA Ultra today and although I dont plan on using the Baofeng radios, I figure I would test them. Both of the UV5’s passed with flying colors. FYI, I noticed in one video you set the attenuation on the TinaSA for this same test. But on this video you dont have it set. Any reason for the difference or does that invalidate one of the videos?
Hey GRV, I did this video before I learn the Ext Gain setting. You can use simple math to determine the levels but the Ext Gain is much easier.
Have you ever checked out the Baofeng DM-1701?
I'm just curious. I have one, and had a friend of mine at a 2way radio shop check mine out. After loading the OpenGD77 software on it.
My DM-1701 tested at -43 db at high power, which was < 5w, and hardly any deviation. Needed no alignment.
I’ve never messed with the 1701. -43dbm is 0.0000000501w so something might be off. www.rapidtables.com/convert/power/dBm_to_Watt.html
Would a ferrite ring help reduce spurious emissions if you put it on a Baofang UV5-R HT antenna?
@@cmarchi128 it’s gonna take more than a ring, you need a filter. Here’s a video I did:
2m Low Pass Filter for Ham Radio
ruclips.net/video/wbkERjEVpqg/видео.html
@@TheSmokinApe Ok, I really like the little Baofeng radios. Is it true that BTech takes the Baofeng radios and reworks them to get them in proper spec?
That’s what they say but I have no idea 🤷
I'd like to test my UV-5R. Is it that simple the way you have it set up with the attenuator and meter?
Yeah, it’s a pretty easy test 👍
I really like that you explained this.
Fantastic video my man.
I'm still fuzzy on power out of the radio in watts vs Db?
Thanks for the upload
Thanks No Code, glad you liked it. Maybe a video on watts and db will be forthcoming 👍
@@TheSmokinApe Much appreciated
what's the fcc rules on harmonics and spurious transmissions. I've been trying to look it up but it's not easy to find.
Hey Neal, I think you are looking for this: www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/47/97.307
@@TheSmokinApe yes thank you
Hi, Tks for the great video. Now you have a Tinysa Ultra, time to test the 2nd 3rd and 4th harmonics (where most of the troubles will lie). :)
I think I tested this one in a newer video and it was bad 👀
@@TheSmokinApe Thanks and keep up the great work, love your vids.
Thanks man!
My recent B "Fang" experience is they can generate Stonger Harmonics output at Low Power setting !! .....That was Totally unexpected but Does Happen !! You might want to Include that on Future Chinesium radio Harmonic testing.....
Thanks for the info Tom 👍
Hey Ape ! ........Even some Newest UV-5R radios have Major Harmonic issues.....My fairly New UV-5R iii on Low power on 2 Meters puts out Over 1 watt on 2nd Harmonic in the 296 Mhz Business Band !! ......On Hi power the Same Harmonic is slightly Less than 1 watt.....The FCC getting a Spurious Emissions Complaint from a Business Band operator could be unexpected Bad news for a 2 Meter ham operator !! .....Big Thx for showing how to Measure this !!
Dang! Thanks for watching Tom 👍
I'm curious what your cable loss is because your getting -21.7 dBm from the first one with a 40dB pad. thats only 18.7 dBm or 74 Milliwatts
Have you ever put those baofeng antennas on a VNA? uv82 here is 4.2:1 on ham bands, vhf it gets under 1.5:1 at 128 mhz, I thought I was going crazy, checked my yaesu antenna on 2mtrs its perfect, at 145 Mhz was 1:01:1 nothing wrong with my VNA cal, its the junk baofeng supply, thankfully they also dont reach 8 watts LOL on 2m its 4.9 and 70cm 3.5, on low pwr both are about 2.2w, so I guess using it on low power wont throw too much back into the PA stages (ant checked directly at VNA, not using leads etc)
Hey @Ressy6, I have testing some and like you said they are hot garbage. Thanks for checking out the video!
I have question if 30dB@10W attenuator is OK for 5W or should I get 40db one
I went with the 40, you can us this table to help you decide: www.rapidtables.com/convert/power/Watt_to_dBm.html
i have 2 and they are UV-5RA are they same as the UV-5R? UV-5R5?
Nope, all of them are different models with different firmware 👍
Possible same results?
Yes! Thanks Ape for doing this video! I really appreciate it. I'm not convinced the latest UV-5R's are much better. I'll test mine which was bought about a month ago and see how I go.
Hey Michael, looks like you did the test based off the other comment.
I bought Retevis RT85 HTs and no disappointments.
Awesome 👍
My UV-5R only has two peeks -7dbm (fundamental) and -35.9db down. The auto attenuation was 18db but I believe that's accounted for in the measurement. I'm a bit confused -7dbm is different from yours. I did the level Calibration. -7dbm is .2mw so allowing for 40db attenuation is 2W...
Were you using the physical attenuator? Also, check your power level and last, sometimes these don't put out the advertised power.
@@TheSmokinApe yep. I have the Becen sma 10w 40db attenuator bought off Amazon. I screwed the female end directly into the radio. A male to female adaptor (female both ends) into the other end. Then used one of the cables that came with the nanovna to go to the tinySA.
I did the low to high port "Level cal" before hand without the attenuator.
It's frustrating because until it arrives you don't know how good your baofeng will be.
It gets me on the local repeater I wanted which it what I wanted it for so I guess no real complaints given the cost. I don't have a seperate RF power metre yet.
@@moozoowizard Ah, I was going to ask about the power meter until I got to the end of the post.
Please check the A36.
I will see if I can get one...
@@TheSmokinApe I'll send you mine if you send it back. Lol. I only have one but I'm curious how well it checks out.
I have a GT5R that claims to meet spectral purity. Have you tested that model by chance?
As a matter of fact I have: Testing Baofeng Spectral Purity with the TinySA - Ham Radio
ruclips.net/video/3BlESqsNOwg/видео.html
Just put together a filter to screw into the antenna connector to kill that harmonic. It can probably be built small enough so you hardly notice it. FT-50 toroid size would probably work fine. It would be a bit awkward, but functional.
Or insert a T connector in your antenna jack and add a (slightly over) 1/4 wave stub of RG-174 (at the frequency of the harmonic,) to the side connector. Then plug your radio into your attenuator and your TinySA and snip down the RG-174 (while unkeyed,) then hit it again and watch that harmonic signal as it drops. Cheap, easy, and it will drop the harmonic down substantially. Not sure if it will attenuate it sufficiently using such small coax for the stub, (I haven't used any coax that small for a stub, the Q will be lower,) but it will be significant. Plus, the shield on the RG-174 will probably work as a counterpoise and improve the receive range on the Baofeng, because the Baofeng HT antenna system design sucks.
That's an interesting idea, thanks John!
@@TheSmokinApe, I think it might make an interesting video for you. Have fun.
Now we just need that HF Feng so we can TX on 7/14/21/28 all at once and see which one is open for DX!
The UV-7300!
Very good scooter! Feng class
Lol , thanks man 👍
Would have liked just for giggles, to see what the UHF band would show. Also if it would make much difference to test on another freq in the VHF band, to see if some of that noise is the DDS or what ever they use to synth the osc freq. I had some tested years ago at the ARRL table in Dayton (at Hara) and even then one would pass and another would not. Also I had a couple that came out of a short custom run that were 2M/220Mhz. They were not clean. One other gotcha on these radios is that a number of them will not transmit all the DTMF tones, as one tone is the same for 2 buttons (I think the ones somewhere in the right hand column).
Hey Arnold, somewhere I saw the QST article they published about the tests. That would have been cool to watch that.
Very good video.
Thanks UGR 👍
How about Model GT-5R? 73 DE W8LV BILL
I have that one ruclips.net/video/3BlESqsNOwg/видео.html
Science!♡ 👍
Right! Thanks for watching Aname 👍
Ok what does harmonics do
Create harmful interference on unintended frequencies
@@TheSmokinApe harmful like to us?
No, not physically harmful
"We can enjoy this moment together" 😆
Haha, and it was wonderful 😄
Should have tested a yaesu to see how much "better" they are to the fengs.
Testing the Yaesu FT-70D for Harmonics with the TinySA
ruclips.net/video/yIkYuwV6DqE/видео.html
The more important question is why did RUclips recommended this video to e. And why am I watching it at 3 AM? 🤔
LOL! Thanks for watching TFM!
Because youtube algorithm wants you to help support this channel due to the fact it lined up things you've been watching and trying to suggest better things to watch and this guy popped up. Thumbs up and comments cause this channel to become popular and he can start on a runaway course to 100k subs. Keep watching video's and supporting your channel helps these guys generate revenue. I wish I wasn't so boring and annoying, I could make it big on youtube.
Just try the Japan-made.
Ok
Sure, double serial numbers is normal!😆👍
Lol, thanks for watching Don 👍
“allegedly 5 Watts” 😂 yeah, my BaoFeng says, maybe in the manual, “has 2 modes: high-power is 4 Watts, low-power is 1 Watt” 😮 some shady marketting guy calls that “5 Watts” 🤣
Most likely
I guess it IS true... Not ALL Baofengs are "dirty".
Yeah, the market is flooded with; fakes, phony’s, counterfeit’s and clone’s.
So much inaccurate information here. Contrary to your assertion The first baofeng was well within FCC limits. Manufacturers are not required to reduce spurious emissions below 10 microwatts..
-33 dbm is 0 micro Watts Which is far below permissible level for spurious emissions of 25 watt or lower transmitters from 30 MHz to 225 MHz.
You were assuming that the minus 40 dbm was an absolute, but the specifications specifically state that emissions don't need to be reduced below 8 microvolts so this transmitter was well within spec.
Here is the relevant section of part 97.307 subpart e.
"For a transmitter having a mean power of 25 W or less, the mean power of any spurious emission supplied to the antenna transmission line must not exceed 25 µW and must be at least 40 dB below the mean power of the fundamental emission, but need not be reduced below the power of 10 µW."
With that said the measurement is not passing the sanity check. I don't understand how you're seeing a -21.8 dbm fundamental with an input power of 5 Watts or 36.99 dbm
Simple math tells us that 37 dbm -40 dbm equals -3 dbm..
In other words the fundamental on your spectrum analyzer should be showing -3 dbm yet it's showing -21.8 dbm.
When the numbers don't match what you expect to see then it's time to perform a sanity check. In this case I would have added an additional 10 DB of attenuation. If the Delta on all the measurements was reduced by 10 DB then it passed the sanity check. If they did not then your overloading the front end of the SA which is resulting in erroneous measurements.
The -21.8 dbm measurement could also be the result of impedance reflections in the uncharacterized test fixtures or it could be the result of lower than expected output from the transmitter. Hey keep in mind that if the transmitter isn't seeing a pure 50 ohms it could be folding back power, most of these transmitters will begin folding back power at 1.7 to 1 SWR. Even with cheap Chinese test fixtures I wouldn't expect to see a 1.7 to 1 SWR at 140 MHz. At 440 and above it might become a questionable.
It's one of the reasons why professionals don't use inline attenuators for transmitter testing. It's much more accurate to use a signal tap and a precision load. This ensures that the transmitter sees the highest possible return loss. It's extremely important when working with test equipment like this to keep the impedance Reflections to a minimum. Sometimes when using pl259's this is difficult to do as they are notorious for impedance reflections at anything above about 30 MHz.
This is one reason why you want to keep the number of adapters to a minimum. SMA adapters are one of the better choices for these power levels.
Inadequate loudness in your voice.. very difficult to hear without external audio setup..
Sorry about that
Love my UV-5R's and do not care about their spectral purity.
Why not?
I use them for listening and only plan to transmit in an emergency so the price point and flexibility meet my needs. @@TheSmokinApe
So, if two radios were the same price and one was clean and the other wasn't, you would choose the clean one?
I already had the U5-V's when I learned of this, if I buy another radio and the price is the same I would choose the clean one.@@TheSmokinApe
Gotcha, thanks for watching the video 👍