Pro 96 Disappointment

Pro 96 Disappointment

Post by lynn luca » Sat, 13 Sep 2003 11:01:53

Poor sensitivity, weak audio, tinny construction.   Compared to my old
Bearcat and newer AOR 8000, it's just not made as well, nor is the
reception as good.  Signals heard strongly on other scanners fade in
and out on Pro 96.  It's going back.

lynn

 
 
 

Pro 96 Disappointment

Post by Woolridg » Sat, 13 Sep 2003 13:17:06


sorry to hear that :(


Quote:> Poor sensitivity, weak audio, tinny construction.   Compared to my old
> Bearcat and newer AOR 8000, it's just not made as well, nor is the
> reception as good.  Signals heard strongly on other scanners fade in
> and out on Pro 96.  It's going back.

> lynn

 
 
 

Pro 96 Disappointment

Post by Fredric J. Einstei » Sun, 14 Sep 2003 09:15:02


>> Poor sensitivity, weak audio, tinny construction.   Compared to my old
>> Bearcat and newer AOR 8000, it's just not made as well, nor is the
>> reception as good.  Signals heard strongly on other scanners fade in
>> and out on Pro 96.  It's going back.

I reply:

I purchased one here in Michigan and find it to be equal in
sensitivity and image rejection to my previous scanner, the BC-245
(Uniden TrunkTracker 2) on standard FM and analogue trunking.    I
live about a block away from 4 powerful commercial FM stations,
putting out a total of 125,000 watts of rock music.  The PRO-96
doesn't suffer from any interference.  

Since our State Police use 9600 baud APCO-25 trunking, I'm able to
hear our State Police for the first time on this scanner.   I can hear
two different State Police trunking transmitters from my location in
Oak Park, MI and it follows the conversations flawlessly.

Ergonomically, it's fine, just different from the Uniden Bearcat
model.  One of the best features is that you only have to program in
the control channel of a Motorola Type II or APCO trunking system and
it'll find the whole system.  On the Uniden, you had to program in
each frequency used by the system.  Thus, I use only two channels in a
single to trunk both State Police systems that are within my reception
range.  Also, I like the single priority channel for the entire
scanner.  On the BC-245, each bank had its own priority channel.

Perhaps Lynn got a poor sample of the PRO-96.  

For scanner users here in Michigan, the PRO-96 seems to be the best
solution for a "full scanning package" that's unmatched by any other
available scanner.  

 
 
 

Pro 96 Disappointment

Post by Eric .......... » Sun, 14 Sep 2003 13:05:38

glad to hear the raves...I plan on getting one once Redding (CA) police convert
their system
Eric G.
education CANNOT buy common sense
 
 
 

Pro 96 Disappointment

Post by Ryan, KC8PM » Tue, 16 Sep 2003 18:11:18

Can you hear the Michigan DNR (including DNR firefighting radio traffic)
also?? Curious to find out....

--
Ryan, KC8PMX
FF1-FF2-MFR-(pending NREMT-B!)
--. ---  -.. ...    .-  -. --. . .-.. ...   .- .-. .  ..-. .. .-. . ..-.
.. --. .... - . .-. ...



> >> Poor sensitivity, weak audio, tinny construction.   Compared to my old
> >> Bearcat and newer AOR 8000, it's just not made as well, nor is the
> >> reception as good.  Signals heard strongly on other scanners fade in
> >> and out on Pro 96.  It's going back.

> I reply:

> I purchased one here in Michigan and find it to be equal in
> sensitivity and image rejection to my previous scanner, the BC-245
> (Uniden TrunkTracker 2) on standard FM and analogue trunking.    I
> live about a block away from 4 powerful commercial FM stations,
> putting out a total of 125,000 watts of rock music.  The PRO-96
> doesn't suffer from any interference.

> Since our State Police use 9600 baud APCO-25 trunking, I'm able to
> hear our State Police for the first time on this scanner.   I can hear
> two different State Police trunking transmitters from my location in
> Oak Park, MI and it follows the conversations flawlessly.

> Ergonomically, it's fine, just different from the Uniden Bearcat
> model.  One of the best features is that you only have to program in
> the control channel of a Motorola Type II or APCO trunking system and
> it'll find the whole system.  On the Uniden, you had to program in
> each frequency used by the system.  Thus, I use only two channels in a
> single to trunk both State Police systems that are within my reception
> range.  Also, I like the single priority channel for the entire
> scanner.  On the BC-245, each bank had its own priority channel.

> Perhaps Lynn got a poor sample of the PRO-96.

> For scanner users here in Michigan, the PRO-96 seems to be the best
> solution for a "full scanning package" that's unmatched by any other
> available scanner.

 
 
 

Pro 96 Disappointment

Post by Ruben F » Wed, 17 Sep 2003 08:24:56


Quote:

> Can you hear the Michigan DNR (including DNR firefighting radio traffic)
> also?? Curious to find out....

Look like those of you in Michigan may be out of luck. ScanFan has a report
on the Michigan compatibility issue at:

RS/GRE Pro-96 - Update on Local Compatibility
http://www.scanfan.com/article.php?sid=19

-RF
===============================
Forget Milk, Got Scanner?
http://www.Police-Scanner.info
===============================
Email reply to: ruben "at" police-scanner.info

 
 
 

Pro 96 Disappointment

Post by PowerHouse CB & Scanne » Wed, 17 Sep 2003 21:13:57


Quote:

> Look like those of you in Michigan may be out of luck. ScanFan has a
report
> on the Michigan compatibility issue at:

Ummm..  That's MINNESOTA, not Michigan he is talking about there...  I don't
know which type of modulation Michigan uses, but it seems Minnesota is still
out of luck when it comes to proper monitoring of the digital system...

PH

 
 
 

Pro 96 Disappointment

Post by Fredric J. Einstei » Thu, 18 Sep 2003 08:18:49




>> Can you hear the Michigan DNR (including DNR firefighting radio traffic)
>> also?? Curious to find out....

>Look like those of you in Michigan may be out of luck. ScanFan has a report
>on the Michigan compatibility issue at:

I reply:

Uh, I hear the Michigan State Police just fine using the PRO-96.  It
decodes the digital signal flawlessly.  As far as the DNR goes, it
uses the same APCO-25 trunking system as the Michigan State Police,
so, I would assume that I can hear it (although there don't seem to be
any DNR transmissions in the Detroit Metro area.

 
 
 

Pro 96 Disappointment

Post by Ryan, KC8PM » Thu, 18 Sep 2003 11:44:49

Glad to hear that, and if you chat with anyone actually recieving the DNR
communications as well, PLEASE let me know.
It will make the difference of whether or not I am gonna get one of the
PRO-96's.

Thanks,

--
Ryan, KC8PMX
FF1-FF2-MFR-(pending NREMT-B!)
--. ---  -.. ...    .-  -. --. . .-.. ...   .- .-. .  ..-. .. .-. . ..-.
.. --. .... - . .-. ...





> >> Can you hear the Michigan DNR (including DNR firefighting radio
traffic)
> >> also?? Curious to find out....

> >Look like those of you in Michigan may be out of luck. ScanFan has a
report
> >on the Michigan compatibility issue at:

> I reply:

> Uh, I hear the Michigan State Police just fine using the PRO-96.  It
> decodes the digital signal flawlessly.  As far as the DNR goes, it
> uses the same APCO-25 trunking system as the Michigan State Police,
> so, I would assume that I can hear it (although there don't seem to be
> any DNR transmissions in the Detroit Metro area.

 
 
 

Pro 96 Disappointment

Post by ScorpionK.. » Fri, 19 Sep 2003 06:23:17



Quote:>Poor sensitivity, weak audio, tinny construction.   Compared to my
old
>Bearcat and newer AOR 8000, it's just not made as well, nor is the
>reception as good.  Signals heard strongly on other scanners fade in
>and out on Pro 96.  It's going back.

>lynn

Sorry to hear that.  My new 96 is great.  Reception better then 780xlt
side by side.
--
Like a game of pick up stick played by ***ing lunatics
 
 
 

Pro 96 Disappointment

Post by Ruben F » Fri, 19 Sep 2003 19:37:28



Quote:

>> Can you hear the Michigan DNR (including DNR firefighting radio traffic)
>> also?? Curious to find out....

> Ummm..  That's MINNESOTA, not Michigan he is talking about there...  I
don't
> know which type of modulation Michigan uses, but it seems Minnesota is
still
> out of luck when it comes to proper monitoring of the digital system...

DOH!, your right - my bad, just trying to help......

-RF
===============================
Forget Milk, Got Scanner?
http://www.Police-Scanner.info
===============================
Email reply to: ruben "at" police-scanner.info

 
 
 

Pro 96 Disappointment

Post by PowerHouse CB & Scanne » Fri, 19 Sep 2003 23:30:28


Quote:

> DOH!, your right - my bad, just trying to help......

Hey, no big deal...  Everyone has their day...
Some just have it more often than others...

PH