| Author |
Message |
    
Cbblackbeard
Member
Username: Cbblackbeard
Post Number: 93
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Friday, August 13, 2004 - 7:40 pm: | 
|
I'm looking for a Mobile SSB radio.
For the same money should I go with the Galaxy 949 or the Cobra 148?
I like the variable power and talk back on the Galaxy. |
Brewdirect
Junior Member
Username: Brewdirect
Post Number: 29
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, August 14, 2004 - 3:00 am: |
|
Between those two radios...go with the galaxy.
Better options... |
Cbblackbeard
Member
Username: Cbblackbeard
Post Number: 94
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, August 14, 2004 - 11:07 am: |
|
Thanks Brewdirect.
I like all the features that the Galaxy DX 949 has, but over all performance is what really matters I guess. How would the 949 perform with a KL203? Any one else have any comments? |
Pointman
Intermediate Member
Username: Pointman
Post Number: 111
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, August 14, 2004 - 9:52 pm: |
|
I don't own a 949 but I have read that it is a great radio with great receive. Couple it with a nice amp like the 203 (which I have) and you will have one great set up.
Can I ask why you are not looking at the 959 with the frequency counter? I really like the counter when I am talking on SSB so that I know where I am so to speak.
Hey, enjoy the radio. |
Cbblackbeard
Member
Username: Cbblackbeard
Post Number: 95
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Sunday, August 15, 2004 - 1:14 pm: |
|
Pointman,
I have heard more bad things about the 959 than the 949. I already have the Galaxy external frequency counter, so I can just hook that up to the 949. |
Barracuda
Intermediate Member
Username: Barracuda
Post Number: 261
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Monday, August 23, 2004 - 5:17 pm: |
|
Cbblackbeard,
I was under the impression that the only difference between the dx949 and dx959 was the frequency counter display. They are built on the same main pcb and have all of the same functions. I own a dx959 and enjoy using it. It would be nice though if the frequency counter had a 6th digit.
have fun,
Barracuda |
Bc910
Member
Username: Bc910
Post Number: 80
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Monday, August 23, 2004 - 7:23 pm: |
|
For a "non export" I woul forget both and pick up a Uniden Grant. Just my 1 cent 
BC |
Troublemaker
New member
Username: Troublemaker
Post Number: 9
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Monday, August 23, 2004 - 9:44 pm: |
|
I have the 148 & the 949,,148 talks circles around the 949 and also has far better recieve |
Bc910
Member
Username: Bc910
Post Number: 87
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 24, 2004 - 11:14 am: |
|
Very true TroubleMAker, I just like the
Uniden version better
BC |
Cbblackbeard
Intermediate Member
Username: Cbblackbeard
Post Number: 100
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 24, 2004 - 10:42 pm: |
|
Troublemaker,
Is that an older 148 or the new version?
I have heard alot of good things about the GRANT also. |
Troublemaker
Junior Member
Username: Troublemaker
Post Number: 12
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Thursday, August 26, 2004 - 9:09 pm: |
|
its a new one called "the origional is back", but a good talker!!!!,I like the Grant as well.I talk all over the U.S with the 148,palamar 250 &a wilson1000 mag mount,in my work van. |
Cbblackbeard
Intermediate Member
Username: Cbblackbeard
Post Number: 103
Registered: 12-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, August 26, 2004 - 11:01 pm: |
|
Troublemaker,
Where do you live? I have a Texas ranger 296, a Texas Star 250, and a Wilson 1000 mag. Pretty similar set up don't you think? I haven't tried to talk skip in a while... I'll have to get back out there.
I also have a Cobra 29 LTD ST on the way. |
Climber
Member
Username: Climber
Post Number: 65
Registered: 1-2003
| | Posted on Friday, August 27, 2004 - 12:00 am: |
|
I have a 148 I bought from Copper 15 years ago. Never got around to opening up the box yet. How does the older model 148 differ from this new 148?
Thanks,
Climber |
Oldpirate
Junior Member
Username: Oldpirate
Post Number: 36
Registered: 11-2003
| | Posted on Friday, August 27, 2004 - 11:51 pm: |
|
I made the mistake of buying a brand Cobra 148nwst and it was absolute c**p wouldn't stay on freqency drifting as much as 300hz eventually bought a 2nd hand grant and a PC122 clone and no more problems. Had the cobra fixed by a good tech but its now my standby rig, shouldnt have these problems with a new radio. Cobra sure isn't what it used to be. |
Tech548
Moderator
Username: Tech548
Post Number: 268
Registered: 5-2004
| | Posted on Saturday, August 28, 2004 - 1:44 pm: |
|
Oldpirate
Cobra hasn't been "what it use to be" since they left Uniden and started having somone else build their PC boards for them. And that's a shame.
But the Uniden Grant? Now that's a very well built CB radio. I'm not saying that the Grant will out-talk the 148-Cobra. I'm saying that the Grant is a much better designed and built radio. And to see that, all you have to do is compare the circuit boards, both top and bottom, of the two and anyone can see the difference in quality.
Cobra survives today on its name alone. Uniden on the other hand survives on its reputation for designing and building quality products. Cobra never designed anything.
Some years back, there was very little difference between the two when Uniden was building them. But today is a completely different story.
If you want something that comes close to the "original" 148, go with the TR-296 Texas Ranger. Those radios are pretty close to the Cobra-148 of yesteryear. Not great...but not bad either.
Jeff
Tech548 |
Troublemaker
Junior Member
Username: Troublemaker
Post Number: 22
Registered: 2-2004
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 07, 2004 - 9:52 pm: |
|
I've just had good luck with some radio's,I run a new 148 in my work van, a great talker, also run a 296gk in my pickup, cant say one is better than the other just that I think BOTH are great!!! |
Bruce
Senior Member
Username: Bruce
Post Number: 1539
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, September 07, 2004 - 11:15 pm: |
|
My Vote GTANT XL
 |
Yankee
Intermediate Member
Username: Yankee
Post Number: 265
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 08, 2004 - 11:26 am: |
|
What is not being told about the picture above is that it is a Uniden Grant LT and not the Golden Oldie Uniden Grant XL. Say what you will the Grant XL and the Grant LT ARE NOT THE SAME RADIOS. Open up an XL and an LT put them side by side and there is no doubt of the difference between the two.
73, Carl CEF-357 |
Bruce
Senior Member
Username: Bruce
Post Number: 1541
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, September 08, 2004 - 7:46 pm: |
|
Yankee
I have no doubt about what you said ..... However the grant LT shown in that photo has been tested with DARN GOOD EQUIPMENT and found to be STABLE with good selectivity and sensitivity........ What more could you want? |
Yankee
Intermediate Member
Username: Yankee
Post Number: 266
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, September 09, 2004 - 1:56 am: |
|
In answer to the question, what more could I want?
And the answer is my Uniden Grant XL, plain and simple, it's by far a better radio than the Uniden Grant LT. What more can I say?
73, Carl CEF-357 |
Bruce
Senior Member
Username: Bruce
Post Number: 1543
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Thursday, September 09, 2004 - 12:19 pm: |
|
Intresting ..... "it's by far a better radio "
Could you tell me in what way and how you measured it? What tests did you do ?
The grant is AS GOOD as anyone would even need .... and mine with a channel guard holds its own with anything short of a good ham radio. Everyone has preferances but "BY FAR" makes it sound like you have a reason to beleve that this radio is inferior to the other "XL" model.
Comments like PARTS USED for consumer products don't hold water with me I work on Mid line Icoms all day and you can't compair CB stuff to them.
Now looking at schmatics for both they are simular. So it intrest me in what changes you found to make your statment. I would realy like to see the numbers you got in your tests and how you got them.
Bruce |
Yankee
Intermediate Member
Username: Yankee
Post Number: 269
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Friday, September 10, 2004 - 4:05 am: |
|
My judgement wasn't done by testing. I'm just going by what I saw when I had a friends Grant LT open to adjust the VCO circuit to put it on frequency. And yes, it was a new radio just a week old and wasn't on frequency from the factory. Uniden made to many changes to suite me. The biggest changes I saw was the clarifier circuit and the smaller wattage resitors. And I'm not going to keep going on and on about the Grant XL and LT as to which one is better, I just don't like the changes that Uniden made. A radio that has proved it's self over many of years and now the designers go in and change it. I do agree that the Grant LT might be a good radio as far as what you got testing it, but I just don't like the looks of it and the changes that were made to it. Enough said, I'm done talking about this issue. And by the way My friend traded the LT for an also new XL after a month, just because I have one and he liked the looks of the XL better also.
73, Carl CEF-357 |
Bruce
Senior Member
Username: Bruce
Post Number: 1553
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Friday, September 10, 2004 - 11:56 am: |
|
Carl
Never judge a resistor by size .... Just to check out your concerns i checked to see if any of them was getting hot .... nope there fine.
Most changes are made for 2 reasons
1) a problem with that part
2) the parts are no longer made
As much as i would like to see quailty in CB radios it's not going to happen .... hint ... GALAXY ..... Unden makes good products unless its a NASA device cost becomes a issue ..... even the PUBLIC SAFETY radios here at the jail short cuts are taken and they cost $400 just for the basic radio close to 10 TIMES what a CB set would cost. Cost savings sometimes reflect the fact new parts ARE BETTER and the main problem would be DEPENDIBLY ( MBF ) if it goes DOWN then you screwed up .... and O YES some have coat the consumer DEARLY. I fully expect in 10 years to hear on this forum talk about the good old days of GRANTS, LINCOLNS and magnums ..... since by them a radio on a chip will be a way of life.
Bruce |
Patzerozero
Member
Username: Patzerozero
Post Number: 91
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Friday, September 10, 2004 - 7:38 pm: |
|
my grant xl and lt, side by side w/the same mods-unlocked clarifier w/parts changes for excessive slide, peak-tune-modulation mods, switched channel expansion, and a 575 mic are inditinguishable from each other except for a difference in transmit tone, loudness and clarity are the same, as it remains when the clipped limiter is switched in and out of the cicuit. frequency stability is disrupted over the stock radio only after the resistor and diode changes are made to get -14kc and plus 9kc slide(for A channels). receive is virtually identical. white noise during rare times of dead silence is actually louder on xl, but how often are airwaves really that quiet? |
Bruce
Senior Member
Username: Bruce
Post Number: 1557
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Friday, September 10, 2004 - 8:27 pm: |
|
patzerozero
As i said TESTED on a $12000 generator the Grant LT is a FINE radio. If someone needs more fine but for most of us THIS IS ALL THE RADIO YOU WOULD NEED.
JUST MY OPINION
Bruce |
Yankee
Intermediate Member
Username: Yankee
Post Number: 270
Registered: 7-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, September 11, 2004 - 12:32 am: |
|
Patzerozero, When I opened the clarifier on my XL, more than what it was when I got it. I came out with the frequency spread that you have and my radio has had nothing added to the clarifier circuit.
73, Carl CEF-357 |
Bruce
Senior Member
Username: Bruce
Post Number: 1563
Registered: 9-2003
| | Posted on Saturday, September 11, 2004 - 9:56 am: |
|
Guys .....
It just happins i had tested a LT and found it to be a fine radio. MISSINFORMATION is all to common on forums and all i tried to do was fine out if I had somehow missed something or just had the only LT that worked right. Everyone loves to tinker with their radio ... mine has a channelguard in it and im working on bulding a super channelguard ..( 2 back to back ).. I wonder if coupling between the input/output would defete any rejection gained and if such a device can be developed. also thinking of changing the ( REC) RF stage device to lower noise and higher gain. This could be done for both radios but if it would be worth a try i dont know ( FINAL sensitivity is mainly determined by first stage noise figure, system gain and bandwidth) so lowing it is worth a try. and of course changing the doides in the noise blanker i have a supply of the diodes.
Bruce |
Patzerozero
Member
Username: Patzerozero
Post Number: 95
Registered: 7-2004
| | Posted on Sunday, September 12, 2004 - 12:48 am: |
|
hey yankee i guess they're all a bit different. did the xl about 5 or 6 yrs ago so not sure exact values, but i know it wouldn't go 10kc either way til i changed a diode and resistor. the lt was done recently i believe it required a diode change to get more than 4 or 5kc, and that change shot it right up there to 13 or 14 like the xl. have tried many different mods to xl's. expo kit for channels is much easier to do in 25-29-68-78, so usually stick w/switch mod in grant and 148. though not as many lower channels. lots of different kits and just plain part swaps to increase swing, watts, modulation though the difference on the watt meter may be 1-4 watts, it's not noticeable to ear and as long as dead key is right for amp 10w or 14 w of swing doesn't make a whole bunch of difference to amps output either. just depends on what book/source i happen to pick up when i'm doing mod. never did a channel guard in any of yet. guess i have to grab the ole credit card soon and give one a try.
oh yeah, my point was i use the xl when needed only because i've had it longer than the lt.if it wasn't for the different knobs i'd never know which one i was using. they both can get 150 watts swing out of 2-2290 driver and make the dx1600 top over 1200watts with loud fairly clean audio everytime |
