|
|
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| − | ==PRO-92 User Reviews==
| + | {{TalkInForumsPlease|radio-shack-scanners|Radio Shack Scanners}} |
| − | | |
| − | Added: August 15th 2002<br>
| |
| − | Reviewer: Jack Phelan<br>
| |
| − | Score: 4 stars<br>
| |
| − | Hits: 3329<br>
| |
| − | | |
| − | Overall a pretty nice scanner & works as it should. When programming EDACS make certain you start on channel 01
| |
| − | and not (default) 00. I spent many hours trying to figure that out. (It is in the manual, but not underlined or in
| |
| − | bold type.) I would prefer to see an easier manual with the author being a novice rather than an engineer type.
| |
| − | Unlike many scanners that put talk groups in separate banks, this baby puts 100 in a row and each must be locked out.
| |
| − | (as oposed to locking out a sub group - like the sheriff or the medical banks) Sensitivity is fairly good. Volume is
| |
| − | OK, and things work as they should. By all means get rechargeable batteries. A lot bang for the buck.
| |
| − | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |
| − | Posted by ocn29rsc on 2004-06-16 19:52:23<br>
| |
| − | My Score: 1.5 stars<br>
| |
| − | | |
| − | I've owned a pro92 for close to 4 years or so, and pretty munch hands down stinks!!!! I've programed other trunking
| |
| − | scanners for friends and was much more impressed with what they had than mine. The worst of all I payed more. | |
| − | | |
| − | Sesitivity isn't that well either, and unless you use super high capcity batteries very limited play time. I eventually
| |
| − | broke down and bought a Motorola MTX B3 and then a B7, which I still have today and is great.
| |
| − | | |
| − | Recently bought bearcats bc785D and super luck with it.
| |
| − | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |
| − | Posted by BillTheCat on 2002-12-12 18:15:02<br>
| |
| − | My Score: 5 stars<br>
| |
| − | | |
| − | I've had a Pro-92 for a couple of years and am always happy with its capabilities. It works as advertised and its
| |
| − | sensitivity seems to be very good for a hand-held unit. Definitely get Win92 to program it. The only complaint I've got
| |
| − | is that I can't set the STEP rates for user defined PSR search groups to something I'd like -- you must use one of its
| |
| − | defined defaults. Not a real problem but since I know that I don't need more than 250KHz for a particular area I can't
| |
| − | set it for that. The Win92 will also let you set the back-light to a much longer time.
| |
| − | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |
| − | Posted by MetroBase on 2002-12-09 16:06:37<br>
| |
| − | My Score: 5 stars<br>
| |
| − | | |
| − | I own several trunking scanners and the PRO 92 is my favorite. I have the original Japaness make, w/ software ver. 1.0.
| |
| − | I'm in NYC and it does not suffer from any plaques discribe on most web-sites. If your lucky to find one Radio Shack is
| |
| − | clearing them out for a mere $149.00 and that might get reduced as well. Thanks
| |
| − | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |
| − | Posted by lou99 on 2002-10-23 18:55:56<br>
| |
| − | My Score: 4 stars<br>
| |
| − | | |
| − | The Pro-92A ia one of the best HH I've owned. I've seen the various complaints about the 92, and mine doesn't suffer
| |
| − | from most of them. I have no coplaints.
| |
| − | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |
| − | Posted by Ed-N2QBZ on 2002-10-22 23:03:34<br>
| |
| − | My Score: 3.5 stars<br>
| |
| − | | |
| − | The Pro-92 and the Pro-2067 mobile counterpart are decent scanners, but fall a bit short of being the ultimate scanner
| |
| − | for a few reasons.
| |
| − | | |
| − | '''Negatives'''
| |
| − | | |
| − | * Neither the 92 or 2067 follow a narrowband EDACS system, used by a few municipalities.
| |
| − | Audio from an external speaker on the Pro-92 is reduced by internal circuitry. Using a lapel speaker in a high noise
| |
| − | environment doesn't help much.
| |
| − | * PL/DPL decode only works in scan mode. Meaning you can't leave the scanner on one channel and only have it receive the
| |
| − | desired PL or DPL.
| |
| − | * Neither version automatically goes into scan on power up, you must press the scan button.
| |
| − | * Keyboard is not lit for nighttime operation, or mobile use.
| |
| − | *The alpha display should be a few characters longer.
| |
| − | | |
| − | '''Positives'''
| |
| − | | |
| − | * Steerable priority - select any channel as the priority, not just channel 1.
| |
| − | * Excellent PL/DPL decoder is very fast. Great for identifying new tones. But scanner must be set for either PL or
| |
| − | DPL decode and won't detect the tone if it is the other mode.
| |
| − | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |
| − | Posted by Anonymous on 2002-08-17 19:03:53<br>
| |
| − | My Score: 5 stars<br>
| |
| − | | |
| − | I had good service from my scanner. Greg
| |
| − | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |
| − | Added: January 16th 2004<br>
| |
| − | Reviewer: John Croll<br>
| |
| − | Score: 5 stars<br>
| |
| − | Hits: 503<br>
| |
| − | | |
| − | Lotta bang for a reasonable buck. By all means, get the programmer cable and the Win92 freeware application. Also,
| |
| − | tapping the discriminator is not too hard, but finding a suitable location for a 1/8 female jack to mount to was.
| |
| − | I recommend an open-type jack mounted centered to and just exactly above the belt clip on the back. (oops- a review
| |
| − | with a mod- sorry)
| |
| − | | |
| − | ==BC245XLT vs PRO 92==
| |
| − | Added: November 30th 2002<br>
| |
| − | Reviewer: Don Schrecker<br>
| |
| − | Score: 5 stars<br>
| |
| − | Hits: 2700<br>
| |
| − | | |
| − | I've got both and according to the reviews I've seen the Bearcat was supposed to be more sensitive. I can
| |
| − | tell no difference in either scanner. Both pick up extremely well and equal. As for which is the best ,it
| |
| − | comes down to what features you would rather have. The Radio Shack is harder to program off the keypad but
| |
| − | there are programs to make it a snap to do on the computer. The Bearcat is extremely handy if you have a
| |
| − | Scancat program. As far as I'm concerned they are both terrific scanners on the Edacs system I am using them for.
| |