Experimenting with custom firmware on this €20 radio is what really makes it stand out. Even the most basic CW modifications improve reception and transform this affordable device into something quite capable, once you understand its starting point and limitations. I don’t know of any other radio that has such a large community dedicated to developing both software and hardware mods for it.
SSB receiver is also something that no other handheld radio (except the really expensive Kenwood TH-D75) offers and is extremely useful in our country where 2m/70cm SSB/CW contests are regularly happening.
@@RisingTidesAC this radio PCB has been completely reverse engineered so you can even modify the board... This is of of the best radios someone eager to experiment with radio both in software and hardware can buy for an unbeatable price... These radios are pure gold. This review is really a shame from the amateur radio point of view.
@@MauricioTaslik I don’t disagree with one word that you just posted. All I am saying is that this radio is a piece of crap and you know what? You know it is. From a purely experimental point of view it is absolutely worth playing with an experimenting with because that’s what amateur radio is all about. But the radio itself is a piece of shit, and you know it.
@@RisingTidesAC no, it is not. In every RF aspect this radio is mostly equivalent or even superior to the Baofeng UV5R shown in this same video. Is it cheap? yes. Does it lack a good Rx filter? Yes. Is it a piece of crap? Absolutely not. Moreover I affirm that you get more performance/money spent with these radios than with a 2 band analog Yaesu/ICOM/Kenwood walkie. Even with just a simple stopband filter for 87-108 MHz (ie. with a quarter wave open coax stub) you'll find the Rx improves dramatically.
I am truly disappointed that such an important channel as yours has treated a radio (whether Chinese, Japanese, American-it doesn't matter to me) with such carelessness, making it clear that you barely know how to turn it on (the voice heard with every button press is the first thing I disable, as it's ridiculous to use a radio in this way). Forget the advertising information it's sold with; this is a dual-band VHF and UHF radio and nothing more. However, radio amateurs experiment and have created firmwares that allow you to explore the full range of frequencies that the Beken BK4819, around which this SDR radio is built, can receive. This doesn't mean it instantly becomes an HF SSB radio, but it can receive signals-not as well as a radio specifically built for this purpose-but you can still get something, within the limits of a $25 radio designed for V and U. Additionally, there's a small PCB that can be soldered onto the radio, allowing you to listen (with appropriate antennas) to the entire HF spectrum. It costs around $10 and is easily available. No one will ever tell you to use this radio as if it were a CB; it’s not designed for those frequencies, and all the power is wasted in harmonics. But this is normal for a dual-band radio, even your ICOM would do the same. This is a radio for experimenting, and it can even be controlled via a PC at no extra cost, with a small modification to the Kenwood cable used to program the radio. Where has the desire to experiment (ham spirit) gone if a $25 radio capable of being modified both in software and hardware, even by people without extensive knowledge?
@@HamRadioConcepts he cant be that dedicated at only 2 comments on your channel! lmao! i will say this with cheep crappy radios is that, how can the hobby be fun when the front end of your radio gets overloaded and you cant hear nothing but static! im here in a area where you take the cheep uv5r's and put a good antenna on it the radio gets way to much front end overload cause theres no proper filtering! heck the other day conditions were right and i was able to check into the state link from one of many towers that is 65 miles away! now that is fun!
Interesting perspective. However, there are several logical fallacies and biases in your argument that need addressing. Appeal to Emotion and Authority: Your disappointment with the review focuses on the perceived carelessness of an "important channel," which doesn’t address the specifics of the radio’s performance. The credibility of a channel doesn’t guarantee the accuracy of their review. It’s crucial to evaluate the review based on the substance of the critique rather than the status of the reviewer. Red Herring: You argue that the reviewer’s supposed lack of knowledge about using the radio distracts from the core issue of its functionality. This shifts the focus away from whether the radio performs well out of the box and meets its advertised specifications. The essential question is whether the radio meets users’ expectations in its standard configuration, not how well the reviewer can operate it. Straw Man Fallacy: Your argument misrepresents the reviewer’s critique by suggesting he dismissed the radio’s potential for modification. This oversimplifies his position, which is based on the radio’s default performance rather than its modifiability. The review focused on the product’s performance as it is, rather than its potential after modifications. False Dichotomy: By implying that the reviewer should either accept the radio as is or embrace extensive modifications, you create a false dichotomy. This ignores the fact that the radio should be evaluated based on its performance in its out-of-the-box state. The product should meet certain expectations without needing modifications to be considered valuable. Appeal to Innovation: While the potential for modification and experimentation is indeed interesting, it doesn’t excuse the radio from meeting basic performance standards. A $25 radio should still perform adequately in its default state, and its value shouldn’t rely solely on user modifications to reach acceptable performance levels. Assumption of Expertise: Your argument assumes that “all” users have the knowledge and willingness to experiment with modifications. This overlooks the fact that many users, particularly beginners, may not have the expertise or interest to make such changes. The radio should be evaluated on its ability to perform effectively as delivered, without relying on modifications. The potential for modification is a valuable feature, it doesn’t address whether the radio performs well in its standard configuration. The review is based on how the radio meets its advertised features and performs out of the box. Addressing these aspects directly will provide a more accurate and balanced assessment of the radio.
@@KO4AYE show me where he gave a product review vs a product opinion. Did he go through any steps to quantify his positions? Did he post any data to support his accusations'? I saw a video of a radio on display as I heard a male voice complain about everything he didn't like about the radio, as he compared it to his other radio. However, I never saw the supposed reviewed product attached to any test device to see what the measured performance was to justify the statements made that it has a poor receiver. I did see a supposed side by side test of 2 radios that were to receive the weather channel, but without knowing how each radio was setup, or if each radio was set up, I can not trust the reviewers review. Therefor he only placed his opinions' into the frees pace , and labeled it as a product review. also, not all toys are for everyone, you dont hand the keys of exotic sports cars over to a 16yr old driver, and say have at it, and you dont hand the keys over to grandpas jalopy from the 1940's that still runs and looks ok, but isnt quiet so safe either without a few modifications. Instead the more reasonable person obtains the toys that are appropriate for what they are doing. The Quansheng is an example. It wasnt built for everyone. However here we are, a bunch of folks wanting their $25 radio to perform like its a Yaesu! That is the sign of a real cheap ham, cheap as in to frugal to invest properly into the hobby, all to save a dollar because they think it should perform the same way. The truth is, they dont understand the toys capability, or intention to begin with. Well maybe this reviewer got the message from his Baofeng friends anyways. Quansheng is coming to the scene hard and they intend to bring things to the market that Baofeng just isnt, I guess.
The HF mod is absolutely unnnecessary. I've done it and it is cute, but without an alt antenna it's very limited or even useless. You will get far more functionality by hooking up to the antenna connector a simple upconverter (like 125 MHz). You wil be listening to the whole HF band in this way, you can even listen to MW broadcast stations using the open firmwares implementing SSB and clear AM demod (stock AM is crap).
@@digitalmediafan the entire HF mod is crazy, no matter what version. You've better use an upconverter and get better results without modding anything but the firmware. You can also use the upconverter with other radios, like a rtl-sdr or the like.
You clearly bought this for the sole purpose of giving it a bad review. So as this is the first video I've seen on your channel, your behaviour tells me everything I need to know about your channel. I own both the handhelds in your video, as does every member of my local club. While the Quansheng has its issues it is far more useful and versatile than the Boafeng. Anyone who actually spends any time with it (and without the fanboi mindset you have of branded radios) can see the value in it, even with the stock firmware. Though I would recommend people try the Egzumer v0.22 firmware on it. It removes NOAA (which only works in the USA anyway, so a useless feature everywhere else (I'm UK)) and replaces it with a spectrum scanner. It also removes the need for the 2 key press functions, you can long press the keys for their function. As with any handheld, swap the rubber duck for a decent mobile antenna and you can get some decent milage out of it. I even went as far as to use mine on my Diamond x300 for club 2m and 70cm events, it worked perfectly. I also keep a second one in my car, with a mag mount antenna and a speaker mic on it. Cheapest and easiest way to get your vehicle setup with a 2/70 radio for less than £40 (~ $55). Overall, for the price. It is a decent little starter handheld. For anyone who just wants a radio to use, without the fuss. Then Baofeng. If anyone wants a radio they can spend time learning the hobby with, then Quansheng.
The only thing I would add, is be aware of the possibly spurious spikes out of bands. Some tests have been done and found that some radios had higher spurious emissions than others. As long as they fell in the amateur bands it was our problem, but if they fell out of the amateur bands it was really our problem, and needed to be squashed immediately. Just beware mate! I caught I think it was Josh on Ham Radio Crash Course who did a test and found his was transmitting from the 2mtr band and was heard clearly in the 70cm band at many meters distance away. It raised concerns for some environments. I wouldn't want to think I was safe while the explosives crew was working and using my radios near their work fields. I tested both of my radios, and found them to also be dirty and with spikes in the commercial bands. I will be putting one of mine into use as a remote CAT radio, so it wont be an issue with the use of external filters.
Not for everyone. Some just want to buy a radio and use it. But many people love experimenting with this radio. Me included. This radio is a very fun radio. Like others have said, I have never used the stock firmware. Currently experimenting with ijv mod firmware. Using ft8 and 2m ssb.
I never used this radio with stock firmware. But flashed it with IJV and it’s my handheld of choice. I tested spurious emissions on VHF and UHF and this radio is much cleaner than Baofeng. I said it’s radio to only hit repeaters and local communication, actually it is as all others UHF/VHF radios tend to tome the price. Yes HF sensitivity and selectivity is not good and it’s unusable on HF for me, but it is not HF radio. Everything else, airband/uhf/vhf am/fm and dsb works fine for me and I prefer it over $100 yaesu hendheld.
I have this radio running on Egzumer 0.22. Has better reception than the UV-5R. I've received stations from all over the globe on 6m, 10m, 11m, etc with a 51" telescopic antenna. I also use it daily for GMRS, I here many other ham operators using it on the PapaSystem down here. I think you may have received a bad one my brotha. Also, I have a couple Retevis RA79, which is the same radio priced at only $17.99 on Amazon. Also, it only takes 1 minute to flash custom firmware. I enjoy your content very much! 73 from Southern California.
You're wrong on this radio. For the price it is outstanding. With the mods it is very functional. Many reviewers have praised its capabilities. Do the children you intend to give it to have the appropriate ham licence? Not everyone can afford a kenwood, this radio opens the hobby up to more people and that should be encouraged.
I don't know if you are joking on not. I have two, each with different firmware, and they are great radios. Stock, they performed great on FM, crap on AM. But now, they are amazing!
You have a bad copy. I compared them side by side when I bought mine, and receive is the same if not better. And audio quality is noticeably crisper on uv-k5(8)
It is a $25 radio. FULL STOP. Realistically, you do want to install a new firmware to make it usable. The three I have are spectrally cleaner than almost any Baofeng in my collection, and not far off from some of the Yaesus I have (as a ham for 46 years, I have a lot of HTs). Mine are certainly more sensitive than yours, so maybe you get a bad one. I got these as throw-aways for local stuff, strictly on 2m and 440. I could not care any less about using them "elsewhere". Consider what it is meant to be, pay your 20-odd dollars, and use it for what it is.
It's all about the custom Firmware. It's the ONLY reason I bought this radio. Itsfun to play with all the different loads available out there that people are creating. Doesn't matter if we brick it. Toss and replace.
I'm plenty happy with my UV-K5 and UV-K6, both running the Egzumer firmware on both. These radios fill the same place a Baofeng did in the past(i.e. the cheap beater radio for taking to places that you may lose or destroy it), as well as are open to any software modification you may want to do. I've got plenty of Kenwood TK-2180 HT's(retired part 90 2m), and I prefer these. To get NOAA to work, you have to open the RX with the monitor feature. With the Ezguzer firmware, the [Function] [NOAA] opened up as basic spectrum analyser, so I programmed in the NOAA freq's as channels.
@@HamRadioConcepts Salty much? Social media is a public forum. You put your bad take out there and now your audience is responding and roasting you for it. Own it like a man.
@@wanderingcalamity360 Bad take? Guy puts out his honest opinion, based on his experiences with the radio, and instead of accepting that, people start crying about it. Holy shit, the title of the video says the radio is junk, so people watch anyway, then get pissy when he says it's junk. Imagine that, a title that wasn't click bait. Considering the crap quality control on the cheap HTs, his probably is junk. It's all a crap shoot anyway. No reason to "Own it like a man", when you're in a room full of children.
@@johnrogers4524 If you're okay with acting like a child, then I suppose you're in good company with this channel. But be a good little boy and go sit at the kids' table while the adults are talking.
u have to jail break it then its worth the 25$ lol just try it for fun u will see. now u have to do the update with the mod video lol fyi your right but for the price of a pizza its fun just mod it and do a new video .
Definitely might be worth revisiting with another model and with the third party firmware. What takes this radio to the next level for me is the bandscope on the egzumer firmware. Being able to look at the activity of the entire 70cm band on a handheld is pretty incredible. Its definitely not a perfect radio though. Selectivity is not great, but sensitivity is decent when your not in a noisy environment. Im definitively looking forward to other manufactures making use of the same chip while adding a more refined front end.
Load IJV firmware and that thing rocks. I have been using mine on CW and DSB/SSB (TX and RX) on 2m and 70cm. You need to dig into this much more. I think you have missed the point! (And the spurious emissions are NOT terrible when used in the 2m/70cm bands where it was designed to work!)
I have 2of these and with firmware they are great for monitoring bands without carting my hf rig. The rx does get overwhelmed and its not great for satellites. I also have a pair of yaesu vx7 which is very full functionality yet compromised. Surprisingly my baofeng uv9r plus has a better rx on the iss repeater than the yaesu and way more power. The best thing with the quangsheng is its price allows young people to enter the hobby and get on the air before us old farts die. The review was unfair, he should not have bought it. Its a hackers radio and hes no hacker
@@HamRadioConcepts receive 17m to 6m fine on usb. I only upgraded the eeprom chip for more channels, rest is standard. There is a full mod list to make it a full and filtered 10m 2 way handy for am fm and dsb, including a mesh capable sms messager. You cant use other bands after that mod, and obviously need test gear and ham licence that allows modding
funny that he mentions he doesn't have time to make a video about putting custom firmware on the $25 radio but he sure has time to make a 9 minute video trashing it :)
Still waiting for time to make part 2 but it's totally a WASTE of time to show how it looks on transmit at 17 meters, 20 meters and even 800mhz. Just trash.
This is a great radio for that price. Before you do the review you need to update the software before using all the RX facilities. This radio is a VHF / UHF radio and never was planned to work and should not be used on other bands TX. The SW upgrade has solved the issue with AM RX distortion. My conclusion, great little radio for the price for a licensed amateur.
“This radio is to get you on the repeaters” umm yeah what else is it really supposed to do. You got a dud maybe . I have a really good one apparently. I never read the manual didn’t need to I actually didn’t even try the standard firmware haha I uploaded exumer immediately. All radios have a qwerk if something doesn’t fit your needs doesn’t mean it sucks means you purchased a radio will bad expectations . What made you buy it ? You are welcome for the comment by the way 😉 mission accomplished on click bait 🤣
I have a couple of shorts of me using this radio. I got local CB no issue. I compared the reception on the Quansheng to CB and 2m/70cm on an AT5555 and a Retivas RT95 respectively and they compared. Audio is fine. It's great for entry level tinkering, scanning and outdoors don't give a dam about it conditions. The firmware update is so god dam easy it silly. I have memory and learning difficulties but have done it multiple times. I can't remember how I just know each time that I learn again it only take 5 minutes.
@@jurassiccoast wake up and realize the point of my video. And then read the comments how people think it is exactly comparable to a 705, 9700 etc. man, wake up guy
This review says more about the reviewer than it does about the product.... Engineers designed that radio, engineers with advanced degrees... he is an amateur criticizing the work of engineers with advanced degrees..... his opinion is based on "Chines junk" and a lack of knowledge.. and not understanding the manufacturing process that has made this radio available at such a Low price.. also what others say shapes his expectations and opinions. and many resellers change the programing "Thinking" they are going to make it better.... he is disappointed.. consider the source..he can dish it out but, can he take it?
OK, so when I put mine on the SA, help me understand all the spurious emissions I see. Explain why I have spurious emissions well out of band and above the permitted levels. How is it several of us can do these tests and get the same results, the radio tests bad. As for your idea that real engineers are designing these that might be true, but take note the manufacture has no way to test these and actually doesn't care. It is up to the licensee to ensure quality not the manufacture. The only thing that has to be FCC accepted in the thing is the receiver which is a PART 15 device, besides that the rest falls on the user. So if the manufacture produces a garbage product and the reviewer gets it, yep the reviewer is completely ok to make such a video. Just because an engineer designed them doesnt make them worth anything. I am also an RF engineer. I can design several RF transmitters. however I can also design many that will do the job but never pass muster for spectral purity as well, and yet most of the ham community wouldnt care because as far as they are concerned it works, and doesnt bother them if others suffer from interference, its not their problem! I agree the reviewer could have done a better product review. Most others are actually backing up the review with the Spectrum Analyzer results, which does show this model is garbage. I have 2 of these as well, I have tested both. Sadly these radios arent even strong enough to be used as a door chock. However it does make great target practice for the kids slingshot! As for the reviewers comments about trying to modify it. Well thats up to the users, as a licensed amateur, that is our discretion, see what it will do, clean it up and make it better, because it will do neat things but it needs extra filters external. More folks need to get test gear and quit bitching and start testing. The reviewer flapped his gums a bit too much , but isnt too far off from truth. The available firmware for this little thing does clean up some issues, not all, just some. So, IMHO , most need to STFU and start learning how to use what they have the right way. Step up and be willing to learn how to modify the firmware or hardware to make it comply if you arent happy. Figure out what your license actually allows you to do, and quit expecting the radio companies to hand you everything. It is a $25 radio, what did you expect, an iCom, Yaesu, or Kenwood? You better add an additional zero to that price tag before the decimal point! Too many folks are bitching about their cheap radios, and are expecting top tier performance from their bottom scrapings of a radio, its rather entertaining over the years. For the count, I have a box of these cheap radios. I know the specs of everyone of them, some have been smashed with the hammer so they will never be accidentally used, they were that bad, others only throw spurious in band and below levels, so I allow them to live on, some just arent worth anything as a transmitter like the first gen Baofeng UV-5R, no matter what you do to them.
Your comment on "engineers" developing a $25 radio is a major insult to every ham operator on the planet, including the Japanese engineers that have "engineered" the worlds finest radios. I have actually MET AND HAD DINNER with the "engineers" that "Engineered" the Yaesu FTDX101, the weekend it was announced in Dayton years ago. Take your "engineering" mindset and click that little button that says "unsubscribe".
@@HamRadioConcepts "including the Japanese engineers that have "engineered" the worlds finest radios" - Not anymore. All handhelds that Yaesu produces nowadays are just crap with poor selectivity and no modern features like USB charging or even the features that old (VX-8) handhelds had more than 10 years ago. Icom is not much better + is massively overpriced.
I have the K6 model, and it seems to be fine. The only benefit of the K6 or of the box is 220. It does work, and I can reach one or two 220 repeaters. I haven't had the issues you found, but it's very possible the one you have is junk. It's becoming more and more common for components to be substandard or just plain fakes. I really don't think those counterfeit chips and SMD components made from Chinese toothpaste and melamine baby formula are ONLY being sent to us. I fully believe that the Chinese companies are plagued with fake components, parts wildly out of spec, and chips that actually are the proper part, they're just the ones that failed QC and Uncle Wong Foo sold them to one of their customers for a deep discount. That's a very plausible problem these days. I'll check my K6 and see if it has any of the receiver issues you described. Just making it clear: I do not doubt your experience with that radio one bit. A radio that functions that badly, and the person using it isn't a noob, is a total piece of junk. I just don't know if it's the _brand_ that's junk, or an occasional radio. I hear you on the convoluted menus. But a Kenwood 75a is ten times as convoluted as the Quansheng, and some Yaesus are worse. Don't get me started on the Tytera DMR radios! They're far worse than anything I've ever used.
The only reason I have one is the NOAA weather alert function. Mine cost $17 on Amazon and a "real" handheld weather radio is around $100 and also has very bad reviews. For a weather radio it's well worth the money. Mine has a good receiver, it is possible you have a bad antenna. I would return it and try another one.
You were having a bad day? One of the most current popular radios out there, and you find it junk 😅 I’m sure they could add the same firmware at the factory if they wanted, as for Yaesu and Icom, well they don’t either yet still cost 8 times more than the UV-K5 🤷♂️
You must have received a bad radio. I have a stock one and another that I have FLASHED. I have had no problems with receiving or transmitting. Sorry for your bad experience. But let's all remember YOU GET WHAT YOU PAY FOR!!!!!
I have a couple of these, on the frequency they are designed to transmit on they are clean, And the RX is plenty hot. It hears a 2m cw beacon in ssb mode as easily as my ic-9700. Selectively I'm sure is crap, but it's a HT.
I've got one & easier for my bad eyes to read than my dim display Baofeng. I'm using it as the $25 radio that it was meant to be. If someone comes out with a mod that makes if more accessible to visually impaired, I'd do the mod in a heartbeat. It would make more sense than laying out the $$ for a TH-D75A.
I purchased 1 of these makes a good 2m 1.25m 70cm for me But mine has more recieve than yours wow at least it was only $25. So you know how someone keeps telling you you have to watch show on TV 1000 times so you never watch it that's my feelings towards hacking this radio leave it. I feel since it came out too many firmware updates how many is there for quashang / Anysceu Aside continues firmware You ain't receiving hf with rubber duck or 6m FM as I discovered . I found up against a ud1p wouxun that the K5 has: Hi pitched receiver audio No extended battery available the so ht is throw away . Low charge on 5 volts USB C compared to charge on docking charger. Factory antenna is junk don't get out. Side jack top tight on programming cable . Thanks for video ❤
I have two of them, I bought them just to play with. I like to experiment; they make add on receive filters, every has a following. You probably have more HT's than I do, I have given away 6 or 7 and still have 7. Yes, no point in it if you just operate out of the box, but for me they are just fun, for an old man to play with.
What you said is essentially correct which I can confirm as I own one of these. However what concerns me is you sound pissed off and clearly aren't having any fun which is a big part of what the hobby is about. My first ever voice contacts were made on this radio and inthe absence of other reasonably priced alternatives for new licence holders I think it serves a purpose at least for the time being. Let people mess aroind with it mod it and maybe break it. It's all part of learning and experimentation. Better than breaking your fancy Yaesu. 73 M7JZW.
The next time you are inclined to buy a $20 radio and think that is going to function as an Icom or Kenwood with stupid and useless firmware, buy $20 tires for you car that your family drives. See my point?
You have no idea what your talking about. Probably a person that doesn't even know how a HT works and now thinks they know everything. For the price it does 1000% better then your Baofeng will ever do. Please stick to what you know.
What people forget that these are mass produced general purpose two way radios, they are NOT ham radio transcievers. Just like the "10m" radios which are just mass produced cb radios. I recently bought a new Baofeng Uv82 radio and am pleased with it.
crappy review! Where are the SA results to back up anything? Your idea that this radio shouldnt be messed with is partially correct. I agree it is a garbage radio, however it should be explored to see what we as hams can do to make it better. Our license is a license to modify and tear apart in everyway these devices. Just remember its also your license on the line either way, so be sure that what you are doing is proper. Make sure your signals are clean and in the right band. Many hams are just buying these things and leaving the burden on the manufacture and not realizing that the manufacture has no obligation to test the design, let alone has the ability to test the design. Many times these are just produced and sent out the door at the cheapest rate possible. The manufacture has no say about anything just yes or no as to if they accept the job or not. Often times these radios are also duplicated, so if a mistake is made in an early model or brand, it can and often is duplicated throughout others. I still have not figured out why so many people are expecting "Big Three" quality from a $25 radio. If thats what you wanted, I guess you shoulve bought one of the "Big Three"! The old adage is true, you get what you paid for, and well you paid for a $25 radio, you got exactly the performance of that too. Why the complaint? If anything, I would be grateful and truthfully impressed. I also understand I need to add extra filters to this transmitter to clean it up. this is just a dirty transmitter. it can be made better. the firmware it comes with absolutely works, but sucks. The available 3rd party firmware does clean up some issues, not all, and does make use of some neat features of the chipset in the radio. Appliance users tend to grab the item off the shelf turn it on and expect it to work out of the box. It appears many hams are falling into this category lately, and not understanding the license affords them the privilege's to explore and torment that little device to make it conform and bend to the will of the user.
@@KO4AYE Where have I heard that before? oh thats right, I said that above. Hey do me a favor please at least show that this is quoted text and not yours. 73 mate.
@@HamRadioConcepts Yeah, I have seen a few of the other reviews. I dont know whom you are referring to as professionals. I am a former communications company owner myself. While I do consider myself a former "Professional" as I was paid to do the job, I enjoy the title of "Amateur" now as I do this for my pleasure, but by no means is there anything amateurish about my knowledge or what I am doing in my station or testing. I am not suggesting you are either less then professional either, however it does appear as an excuse to say well they posted all the information you need so I dont need to post the data. Id suggest that the video didnt need to be made then. You were only parroting what others said, and offered nothing to support it besides opinion. Be your own channel and support your findings, or at least point to where you are getting your data. please. 73 mate, de KF6NFW
Is this really a terrible radio? Compared to what? It is $25 on Amazon right now. What are you comparing it to? Yes, it is junk compared to a $300 Yaesu. And the Yaesu is junk compared to a $4000 Harris XL. And the Harris XL is junk compared to a $8000 Motorola APX. Also....where did you get your information about the spurious emissions? Are you speaking about out of band tx as allowed by unauthorized firmware???
I have a lot of fun with custom firmware on the UV-K5. But I don't transmit with it. I also hate the display, but that's personal preference. Frequency copy works great. Wireless copy (clone) takes too long and I see errors occur when I try it. When it comes to Chinese budget radios, I strongly prefer the Tidradio TD-H3. It does wireless copy quickly and flawlessly, and frequency copy, too. And it has bluetooth programming and USB-C programming. The UV-K5 does NOT do USB-C programming. The USB-C port is just for charging. I have no problem getting NOAA on either.
Try the Baofeng K5PLUS. Tri-band, extended battery, and V/M, A/B, and band select buttons, clearly labeled. Larger keyboard than typical Baofeng with buttons labeled in hi-contrast white on black (none of that fade-away blue on black typical of Baofengs). USB-C charging only (not data, since the jack is on the battery), but that's ok. High contrast color display with readable text and digits. Abou $30. Add a tri-band foldable ABBREE antenna so you can ditch the two-rrubber-duck system shipped with the radio, and you have a very usable low-budget, packable radio.
Wow, Baofeng used the name and the aspect of a Quansheng radio to promote its model. It did the same thing vith UV-K61. BTW, try to read a color display under sunlight...
@@PaoloBussola I've read this display outside here on a sunny summer day on the Salish Sea. Size of the text and fonts that are more than one pixel thick make a difference.
@HamRadioConcepts Eric, I couldn't comment, I only could reply to a comment. I'm 100% agree with you, buddy. In my shack for HT, I only use Kenwood, Icom, Yaesu, and Alinco. President HT AM/FM for 11 meter band. Thanks for the video.
It´s not the plane, It´s the pilot! Just kidding, but with my limited budget and what this radio can do with the right firmware, learning and a lot of inovative ideas. I Receive HF, Naval VHF, GMRS, FRS, FM, VHF, UHF. With CEC firmware i can transmit APRS directly from radio, some messages on FT8 in 2m, I can play with SSTV in 2m and 0,70m. With a good antenna i can use repeaters at even 40 miles from my QTH. I think that doesn´t exist a bad tool, but a right tool for with you planning and your budget. Have ton of money? Buy a better one, simple like that. Best regards, 73!
I'm more focused on the people using it to TX on HF. It looks horrible on 20 meters and 10 meters on TX, hundreds of megahertz across... Hardly any power output, receive sensitivity at 20 meters is 1.5 microvolts. I keep hearing people tell me "this will replace all my QRP HF radios for $28. That's a piss poor statement.
@@HamRadioConcepts Oh yeah i saw the harmonics on 18 to 30 MHz in an italian blog (i think IJV firmware blog) and it´s only miliwatts on 27 MHz principal emission. And it had an harmonic on Airplane band with Watts, It´s very dangerous. I Will experiment with a low pass filter in 30 MHz cut and if the harmonics are below the limits on FCC regulation, i think that i can use an RF amplifier after this filter and see what happens. I found a RF amplifier with an input of only miliwatts. But, before i test it i will check the harmonics. It´s a good radio for experiment, but at same time it´s dangerous if the ham radio operator dont know these things! To receive i dont know yet, i dont have a good antenna ( i will build ) for it and without the filter the spurious signals are stronger than the desired signals. I hear the FT8 signal on 10m band and some qso´s on open propagation. 73 and good contacts!
I bought one of these, messed around with firmwares etc and agree that they are a waste of money. Left it in my shack for a week fully charged only for it to be flat...charged it again to check and it was flat two days later without using it. My Baofeng can sit on my side table next to my bed and fire up 6 months later with a full charge. Complete waste of money.
It is a junk radio out of the box you are correct. Its not a radio to transmit on either. But, with that custom firmware I was able to catch the local 2m SSB net that I've never heard before. If you find the time, it may be worth playing with the firmware.
Nope. Never claimed to be. But if you are an expert, do not tell me this thing is anything useable on 20 meters HF, 17meter HF or even 11 meters. I have had it on both of my service monitors. It is garbage outside of 2 meters and 70cm.
I mostly agree. this little thing is an interesting radio. just be mindful of the spurious crap out of band. We are seeing it with extremely strong out of band spurious spikes. Strong enough to raise concerns about safety in some environments. We are seeing the 2 meters being heard on the 70 cm band at distances up to half mile, sometimes the 2mtrs are even being heard out of band in the commercial services, and its causing concerns. As for being CAT controllable as a remote station, I have only played around with that a couple times on this rig, and found it useful, though limiting in my situation. Though we intend to attempt again.
I think I'm with you on this one. I bought two of them, mostly to try out the OTA memory replication (BTW, it works pretty well). But, I tried one of the custom firmwares which opened up transmit on the radio. I tried to transmit on the 33cm band - 927.5 mhz, just to see what would happen. I had my wife take one into the other room, AND SHE COULDN'T HEAR ME. So, while trying other firmwares is cool just to see what could happen, it's not practical. It produced a minimal amount of power. Which means the radio wasn't desiged to transmit there. But yes, there are a lot of cool firmwares out there that one could try, but I don't have the time nor the inclination. It's just not a radio that I want to keep, so I'll be selling them soon. Thanks for your opinion on the radio.
Maybe for VHf UHF. Those who insist they are selling their HF transceivers from Icom and Yaesu for this piece of shit radio are complete and total assholes. Again, I say this whole heatedly. If you claim to use this quansheng over a $1200 ic-7300, you are a complete and total asshole.
Let me get this right you spend time slating the cheap radio which nobody is expecting the world from! When it does do some thing you tried to prove it didn’t do you just say “what ever” you’re a strange!
@@HamRadioConcepts Because they know nothing about radios, hardware and its limitations, firmware, et. They see a price of around $20 and that's what gets their attention. Then they are brainwashed by other videos that these firmware upgrades induce hardware limited results. Ignore them. What about the front end? LOL HORRIBLE!
2 місяці тому
@@RisingTidesAC Is there a better radio in the price range?
@@RisingTidesAC Front is easily overloaded but under normal conditions it's as sensitive as Motorola GP340 on UHF. It also supports select call out of the box with ack and I paid 10€ for it during sale. Just can't hate it.
Experimenting with custom firmware on this €20 radio is what really makes it stand out. Even the most basic CW modifications improve reception and transform this affordable device into something quite capable, once you understand its starting point and limitations. I don’t know of any other radio that has such a large community dedicated to developing both software and hardware mods for it.
SSB receiver is also something that no other handheld radio (except the really expensive Kenwood TH-D75) offers and is extremely useful in our country where 2m/70cm SSB/CW contests are regularly happening.
The point is that no one can overcome hardware limitations with firmware mods. It is impossible!
@@RisingTidesAC this radio PCB has been completely reverse engineered so you can even modify the board... This is of of the best radios someone eager to experiment with radio both in software and hardware can buy for an unbeatable price... These radios are pure gold. This review is really a shame from the amateur radio point of view.
@@MauricioTaslik I don’t disagree with one word that you just posted. All I am saying is that this radio is a piece of crap and you know what? You know it is. From a purely experimental point of view it is absolutely worth playing with an experimenting with because that’s what amateur radio is all about. But the radio itself is a piece of shit, and you know it.
@@RisingTidesAC no, it is not. In every RF aspect this radio is mostly equivalent or even superior to the Baofeng UV5R shown in this same video. Is it cheap? yes. Does it lack a good Rx filter? Yes. Is it a piece of crap? Absolutely not. Moreover I affirm that you get more performance/money spent with these radios than with a 2 band analog Yaesu/ICOM/Kenwood walkie. Even with just a simple stopband filter for 87-108 MHz (ie. with a quarter wave open coax stub) you'll find the Rx improves dramatically.
I am truly disappointed that such an important channel as yours has treated a radio (whether Chinese, Japanese, American-it doesn't matter to me) with such carelessness, making it clear that you barely know how to turn it on (the voice heard with every button press is the first thing I disable, as it's ridiculous to use a radio in this way). Forget the advertising information it's sold with; this is a dual-band VHF and UHF radio and nothing more. However, radio amateurs experiment and have created firmwares that allow you to explore the full range of frequencies that the Beken BK4819, around which this SDR radio is built, can receive. This doesn't mean it instantly becomes an HF SSB radio, but it can receive signals-not as well as a radio specifically built for this purpose-but you can still get something, within the limits of a $25 radio designed for V and U. Additionally, there's a small PCB that can be soldered onto the radio, allowing you to listen (with appropriate antennas) to the entire HF spectrum. It costs around $10 and is easily available. No one will ever tell you to use this radio as if it were a CB; it’s not designed for those frequencies, and all the power is wasted in harmonics. But this is normal for a dual-band radio, even your ICOM would do the same. This is a radio for experimenting, and it can even be controlled via a PC at no extra cost, with a small modification to the Kenwood cable used to program the radio. Where has the desire to experiment (ham spirit) gone if a $25 radio capable of being modified both in software and hardware, even by people without extensive knowledge?
Have a great day.
@@HamRadioConcepts he cant be that dedicated at only 2 comments on your channel! lmao! i will say this with cheep crappy radios is that, how can the hobby be fun when the front end of your radio gets overloaded and you cant hear nothing but static! im here in a area where you take the cheep uv5r's and put a good antenna on it the radio gets way to much front end overload cause theres no proper filtering! heck the other day conditions were right and i was able to check into the state link from one of many towers that is 65 miles away! now that is fun!
Interesting perspective. However, there are several logical fallacies and biases in your argument that need addressing.
Appeal to Emotion and Authority: Your disappointment with the review focuses on the perceived carelessness of an "important channel," which doesn’t address the specifics of the radio’s performance. The credibility of a channel doesn’t guarantee the accuracy of their review. It’s crucial to evaluate the review based on the substance of the critique rather than the status of the reviewer.
Red Herring: You argue that the reviewer’s supposed lack of knowledge about using the radio distracts from the core issue of its functionality. This shifts the focus away from whether the radio performs well out of the box and meets its advertised specifications. The essential question is whether the radio meets users’ expectations in its standard configuration, not how well the reviewer can operate it.
Straw Man Fallacy: Your argument misrepresents the reviewer’s critique by suggesting he dismissed the radio’s potential for modification. This oversimplifies his position, which is based on the radio’s default performance rather than its modifiability. The review focused on the product’s performance as it is, rather than its potential after modifications.
False Dichotomy: By implying that the reviewer should either accept the radio as is or embrace extensive modifications, you create a false dichotomy. This ignores the fact that the radio should be evaluated based on its performance in its out-of-the-box state. The product should meet certain expectations without needing modifications to be considered valuable.
Appeal to Innovation: While the potential for modification and experimentation is indeed interesting, it doesn’t excuse the radio from meeting basic performance standards. A $25 radio should still perform adequately in its default state, and its value shouldn’t rely solely on user modifications to reach acceptable performance levels.
Assumption of Expertise: Your argument assumes that “all” users have the knowledge and willingness to experiment with modifications. This overlooks the fact that many users, particularly beginners, may not have the expertise or interest to make such changes. The radio should be evaluated on its ability to perform effectively as delivered, without relying on modifications.
The potential for modification is a valuable feature, it doesn’t address whether the radio performs well in its standard configuration. The review is based on how the radio meets its advertised features and performs out of the box. Addressing these aspects directly will provide a more accurate and balanced assessment of the radio.
@@KO4AYEWell stated! 73
@@KO4AYE show me where he gave a product review vs a product opinion.
Did he go through any steps to quantify his positions? Did he post any data to support his accusations'?
I saw a video of a radio on display as I heard a male voice complain about everything he didn't like about the radio, as he compared it to his other radio.
However, I never saw the supposed reviewed product attached to any test device to see what the measured performance was to justify the statements made that it has a poor receiver. I did see a supposed side by side test of 2 radios that were to receive the weather channel, but without knowing how each radio was setup, or if each radio was set up, I can not trust the reviewers review. Therefor he only placed his opinions' into the frees pace , and labeled it as a product review.
also, not all toys are for everyone, you dont hand the keys of exotic sports cars over to a 16yr old driver, and say have at it, and you dont hand the keys over to grandpas jalopy from the 1940's that still runs and looks ok, but isnt quiet so safe either without a few modifications.
Instead the more reasonable person obtains the toys that are appropriate for what they are doing. The Quansheng is an example. It wasnt built for everyone. However here we are, a bunch of folks wanting their $25 radio to perform like its a Yaesu! That is the sign of a real cheap ham, cheap as in to frugal to invest properly into the hobby, all to save a dollar because they think it should perform the same way. The truth is, they dont understand the toys capability, or intention to begin with.
Well maybe this reviewer got the message from his Baofeng friends anyways. Quansheng is coming to the scene hard and they intend to bring things to the market that Baofeng just isnt, I guess.
Complete nonsense. This radio especially with the HF hardware mod is quite incredible for so many reasons
The HF mod is absolutely unnnecessary. I've done it and it is cute, but without an alt antenna it's very limited or even useless. You will get far more functionality by hooking up to the antenna connector a simple upconverter (like 125 MHz). You wil be listening to the whole HF band in this way, you can even listen to MW broadcast stations using the open firmwares implementing SSB and clear AM demod (stock AM is crap).
@@MauricioTaslik V2 of the HF mod is a lot better. Are you meaning V2 ?
@@digitalmediafan the entire HF mod is crazy, no matter what version. You've better use an upconverter and get better results without modding anything but the firmware. You can also use the upconverter with other radios, like a rtl-sdr or the like.
You clearly bought this for the sole purpose of giving it a bad review.
So as this is the first video I've seen on your channel, your behaviour tells me everything I need to know about your channel.
I own both the handhelds in your video, as does every member of my local club. While the Quansheng has its issues it is far more useful and versatile than the Boafeng.
Anyone who actually spends any time with it (and without the fanboi mindset you have of branded radios) can see the value in it, even with the stock firmware.
Though I would recommend people try the Egzumer v0.22 firmware on it. It removes NOAA (which only works in the USA anyway, so a useless feature everywhere else (I'm UK)) and replaces it with a spectrum scanner. It also removes the need for the 2 key press functions, you can long press the keys for their function.
As with any handheld, swap the rubber duck for a decent mobile antenna and you can get some decent milage out of it. I even went as far as to use mine on my Diamond x300 for club 2m and 70cm events, it worked perfectly. I also keep a second one in my car, with a mag mount antenna and a speaker mic on it. Cheapest and easiest way to get your vehicle setup with a 2/70 radio for less than £40 (~ $55).
Overall, for the price. It is a decent little starter handheld.
For anyone who just wants a radio to use, without the fuss. Then Baofeng.
If anyone wants a radio they can spend time learning the hobby with, then Quansheng.
The only thing I would add, is be aware of the possibly spurious spikes out of bands. Some tests have been done and found that some radios had higher spurious emissions than others. As long as they fell in the amateur bands it was our problem, but if they fell out of the amateur bands it was really our problem, and needed to be squashed immediately. Just beware mate! I caught I think it was Josh on Ham Radio Crash Course who did a test and found his was transmitting from the 2mtr band and was heard clearly in the 70cm band at many meters distance away.
It raised concerns for some environments. I wouldn't want to think I was safe while the explosives crew was working and using my radios near their work fields.
I tested both of my radios, and found them to also be dirty and with spikes in the commercial bands. I will be putting one of mine into use as a remote CAT radio, so it wont be an issue with the use of external filters.
I disagree...the first two that I bought were trash....the 3rd was awesome. I could see where he could hate it.
@@ChrisRobinsonKF6NFW Filters !!!
Im glad you did this video. I didn't know they were that cheap! I ordered 6.
Not for everyone. Some just want to buy a radio and use it. But many people love experimenting with this radio. Me included. This radio is a very fun radio. Like others have said, I have never used the stock firmware. Currently experimenting with ijv mod firmware. Using ft8 and 2m ssb.
I never used this radio with stock firmware. But flashed it with IJV and it’s my handheld of choice.
I tested spurious emissions on VHF and UHF and this radio is much cleaner than Baofeng. I said it’s radio to only hit repeaters and local communication, actually it is as all others UHF/VHF radios tend to tome the price.
Yes HF sensitivity and selectivity is not good and it’s unusable on HF for me, but it is not HF radio. Everything else, airband/uhf/vhf am/fm and dsb works fine for me and I prefer it over $100 yaesu hendheld.
I have this radio running on Egzumer 0.22. Has better reception than the UV-5R. I've received stations from all over the globe on 6m, 10m, 11m, etc with a 51" telescopic antenna. I also use it daily for GMRS, I here many other ham operators using it on the PapaSystem down here.
I think you may have received a bad one my brotha. Also, I have a couple Retevis RA79, which is the same radio priced at only $17.99 on Amazon. Also, it only takes 1 minute to flash custom firmware.
I enjoy your content very much!
73 from Southern California.
Where did you buy your antenna Als ?
You're wrong on this radio. For the price it is outstanding. With the mods it is very functional. Many reviewers have praised its capabilities. Do the children you intend to give it to have the appropriate ham licence? Not everyone can afford a kenwood, this radio opens the hobby up to more people and that should be encouraged.
I don't know if you are joking on not. I have two, each with different firmware, and they are great radios. Stock, they performed great on FM, crap on AM. But now, they are amazing!
You have a bad copy. I compared them side by side when I bought mine, and receive is the same if not better. And audio quality is noticeably crisper on uv-k5(8)
It is a $25 radio. FULL STOP. Realistically, you do want to install a new firmware to make it usable. The three I have are spectrally cleaner than almost any Baofeng in my collection, and not far off from some of the Yaesus I have (as a ham for 46 years, I have a lot of HTs). Mine are certainly more sensitive than yours, so maybe you get a bad one. I got these as throw-aways for local stuff, strictly on 2m and 440. I could not care any less about using them "elsewhere". Consider what it is meant to be, pay your 20-odd dollars, and use it for what it is.
It's all about the custom Firmware. It's the ONLY reason I bought this radio. Itsfun to play with all the different loads available out there that people are creating. Doesn't matter if we brick it. Toss and replace.
The boredom overtook him, and he began to speak.
Indeed!
I'm plenty happy with my UV-K5 and UV-K6, both running the Egzumer firmware on both. These radios fill the same place a Baofeng did in the past(i.e. the cheap beater radio for taking to places that you may lose or destroy it), as well as are open to any software modification you may want to do. I've got plenty of Kenwood TK-2180 HT's(retired part 90 2m), and I prefer these.
To get NOAA to work, you have to open the RX with the monitor feature. With the Ezguzer firmware, the [Function] [NOAA] opened up as basic spectrum analyser, so I programmed in the NOAA freq's as channels.
Of every review I have seen this one is the biggest piece of $hit to date, and I have seen a LOT of $hit reviews. Sorry, but it is.
Cool. Stop watching the videos FFS
@@HamRadioConcepts
Salty much?
Social media is a public forum.
You put your bad take out there and now your audience is responding and roasting you for it.
Own it like a man.
@@HamRadioConcepts you off your meds you fairy? this video suggests its your time of the month.
@@wanderingcalamity360 Bad take? Guy puts out his honest opinion, based on his experiences with the radio, and instead of accepting that, people start crying about it. Holy shit, the title of the video says the radio is junk, so people watch anyway, then get pissy when he says it's junk. Imagine that, a title that wasn't click bait. Considering the crap quality control on the cheap HTs, his probably is junk. It's all a crap shoot anyway. No reason to "Own it like a man", when you're in a room full of children.
@@johnrogers4524
If you're okay with acting like a child, then I suppose you're in good company with this channel.
But be a good little boy and go sit at the kids' table while the adults are talking.
He's just helped Quansheng sell thousands more radios. It's a free ad for them.
u have to jail break it then its worth the 25$ lol just try it for fun u will see. now u have to do the update with the mod video lol fyi your right but for the price of a pizza its fun just mod it and do a new video .
Definitely might be worth revisiting with another model and with the third party firmware. What takes this radio to the next level for me is the bandscope on the egzumer firmware. Being able to look at the activity of the entire 70cm band on a handheld is pretty incredible. Its definitely not a perfect radio though. Selectivity is not great, but sensitivity is decent when your not in a noisy environment. Im definitively looking forward to other manufactures making use of the same chip while adding a more refined front end.
you just didn't experience it right. you NEED custom firmware and you need to understand the limits it has.
Excellent radio. My EDC, and I own several $400+ ht's.
Load IJV firmware and that thing rocks. I have been using mine on CW and DSB/SSB (TX and RX) on 2m and 70cm. You need to dig into this much more. I think you have missed the point! (And the spurious emissions are NOT terrible when used in the 2m/70cm bands where it was designed to work!)
This is an excellent radio actually
I have 2of these and with firmware they are great for monitoring bands without carting my hf rig. The rx does get overwhelmed and its not great for satellites. I also have a pair of yaesu vx7 which is very full functionality yet compromised. Surprisingly my baofeng uv9r plus has a better rx on the iss repeater than the yaesu and way more power. The best thing with the quangsheng is its price allows young people to enter the hobby and get on the air before us old farts die. The review was unfair, he should not have bought it. Its a hackers radio and hes no hacker
And it's NOT designed to be used on HF and I'm going to prove that on the service monitor.
@@HamRadioConcepts receive 17m to 6m fine on usb. I only upgraded the eeprom chip for more channels, rest is standard. There is a full mod list to make it a full and filtered 10m 2 way handy for am fm and dsb, including a mesh capable sms messager. You cant use other bands after that mod, and obviously need test gear and ham licence that allows modding
Send it too me I will do a benchmark test for you
funny that he mentions he doesn't have time to make a video about putting custom firmware on the $25 radio but he sure has time to make a 9 minute video trashing it :)
Awesome isn't it?
You havent a clue pal
Still waiting for time to make part 2 but it's totally a WASTE of time to show how it looks on transmit at 17 meters, 20 meters and even 800mhz. Just trash.
@@HamRadioConceptsclown didn’t even make one
This is a great radio for that price. Before you do the review you need to update the software before using all the RX facilities.
This radio is a VHF / UHF radio and never was planned to work and should not be used on other bands TX.
The SW upgrade has solved the issue with AM RX distortion.
My conclusion, great little radio for the price for a licensed amateur.
“This radio is to get you on the repeaters” umm yeah what else is it really supposed to do. You got a dud maybe . I have a really good one apparently. I never read the manual didn’t need to I actually didn’t even try the standard firmware haha I uploaded exumer immediately. All radios have a qwerk if something doesn’t fit your needs doesn’t mean it sucks means you purchased a radio will bad expectations .
What made you buy it ?
You are welcome for the comment by the way 😉 mission accomplished on click bait 🤣
I have a couple of shorts of me using this radio. I got local CB no issue. I compared the reception on the Quansheng to CB and 2m/70cm on an AT5555 and a Retivas RT95 respectively and they compared. Audio is fine. It's great for entry level tinkering, scanning and outdoors don't give a dam about it conditions. The firmware update is so god dam easy it silly. I have memory and learning difficulties but have done it multiple times. I can't remember how I just know each time that I learn again it only take 5 minutes.
It's really funny to see people rant about a device that costs 15-20 bucks and comes with a USB-C port and a docking station.
Typical crying, man this walkie-talkie costs £15 on eBay what do you expect it to be icom-705? Man, wake up
@@jurassiccoast wake up and realize the point of my video. And then read the comments how people think it is exactly comparable to a 705, 9700 etc. man, wake up guy
Another Sad HAM, oh dear never mind
This review says more about the reviewer than it does about the product.... Engineers designed that radio, engineers with advanced degrees... he is an amateur criticizing the work of engineers with advanced degrees..... his opinion is based on "Chines junk" and a lack of knowledge.. and not understanding the manufacturing process that has made this radio available at such a Low price.. also what others say shapes his expectations and opinions. and many resellers change the programing "Thinking" they are going to make it better.... he is disappointed.. consider the source..he can dish it out but, can he take it?
It doesn’t take an engineer to know if a radio has poor quality.
OK, so when I put mine on the SA, help me understand all the spurious emissions I see. Explain why I have spurious emissions well out of band and above the permitted levels. How is it several of us can do these tests and get the same results, the radio tests bad.
As for your idea that real engineers are designing these that might be true, but take note the manufacture has no way to test these and actually doesn't care. It is up to the licensee to ensure quality not the manufacture. The only thing that has to be FCC accepted in the thing is the receiver which is a PART 15 device, besides that the rest falls on the user. So if the manufacture produces a garbage product and the reviewer gets it, yep the reviewer is completely ok to make such a video.
Just because an engineer designed them doesnt make them worth anything. I am also an RF engineer. I can design several RF transmitters. however I can also design many that will do the job but never pass muster for spectral purity as well, and yet most of the ham community wouldnt care because as far as they are concerned it works, and doesnt bother them if others suffer from interference, its not their problem!
I agree the reviewer could have done a better product review. Most others are actually backing up the review with the Spectrum Analyzer results, which does show this model is garbage. I have 2 of these as well, I have tested both. Sadly these radios arent even strong enough to be used as a door chock. However it does make great target practice for the kids slingshot!
As for the reviewers comments about trying to modify it. Well thats up to the users, as a licensed amateur, that is our discretion, see what it will do, clean it up and make it better, because it will do neat things but it needs extra filters external.
More folks need to get test gear and quit bitching and start testing. The reviewer flapped his gums a bit too much , but isnt too far off from truth.
The available firmware for this little thing does clean up some issues, not all, just some. So, IMHO , most need to STFU and start learning how to use what they have the right way. Step up and be willing to learn how to modify the firmware or hardware to make it comply if you arent happy. Figure out what your license actually allows you to do, and quit expecting the radio companies to hand you everything. It is a $25 radio, what did you expect, an iCom, Yaesu, or Kenwood? You better add an additional zero to that price tag before the decimal point!
Too many folks are bitching about their cheap radios, and are expecting top tier performance from their bottom scrapings of a radio, its rather entertaining over the years.
For the count, I have a box of these cheap radios. I know the specs of everyone of them, some have been smashed with the hammer so they will never be accidentally used, they were that bad, others only throw spurious in band and below levels, so I allow them to live on, some just arent worth anything as a transmitter like the first gen Baofeng UV-5R, no matter what you do to them.
Engineers designed the o-ring that caused NASA's shuttle to crash too
Your comment on "engineers" developing a $25 radio is a major insult to every ham operator on the planet, including the Japanese engineers that have "engineered" the worlds finest radios. I have actually MET AND HAD DINNER with the "engineers" that "Engineered" the Yaesu FTDX101, the weekend it was announced in Dayton years ago. Take your "engineering" mindset and click that little button that says "unsubscribe".
@@HamRadioConcepts "including the Japanese engineers that have "engineered" the worlds finest radios" - Not anymore. All handhelds that Yaesu produces nowadays are just crap with poor selectivity and no modern features like USB charging or even the features that old (VX-8) handhelds had more than 10 years ago. Icom is not much better + is massively overpriced.
I have the K6 model, and it seems to be fine. The only benefit of the K6 or of the box is 220. It does work, and I can reach one or two 220 repeaters.
I haven't had the issues you found, but it's very possible the one you have is junk. It's becoming more and more common for components to be substandard or just plain fakes. I really don't think those counterfeit chips and SMD components made from Chinese toothpaste and melamine baby formula are ONLY being sent to us. I fully believe that the Chinese companies are plagued with fake components, parts wildly out of spec, and chips that actually are the proper part, they're just the ones that failed QC and Uncle Wong Foo sold them to one of their customers for a deep discount. That's a very plausible problem these days.
I'll check my K6 and see if it has any of the receiver issues you described.
Just making it clear: I do not doubt your experience with that radio one bit. A radio that functions that badly, and the person using it isn't a noob, is a total piece of junk. I just don't know if it's the _brand_ that's junk, or an occasional radio.
I hear you on the convoluted menus. But a Kenwood 75a is ten times as convoluted as the Quansheng, and some Yaesus are worse. Don't get me started on the Tytera DMR radios! They're far worse than anything I've ever used.
The only reason I have one is the NOAA weather alert function. Mine cost $17 on Amazon and a "real" handheld weather radio is around $100 and also has very bad reviews. For a weather radio it's well worth the money. Mine has a good receiver, it is possible you have a bad antenna. I would return it and try another one.
English England we don't get such a nice color box's just a plan brown boxes!
That’s true, hadn’t thought about that, maybe why his radio is affected / infected 😅
Excellent radio. Worst vidio review ever
I got it, flashed new firmware, switched antenna, and it's amazing for the price, default antenna was not great
The custom firmware makes it a nice usable rig with much better menus. A better choice than a Baofeng.
You were having a bad day?
One of the most current popular radios out there, and you find it junk 😅
I’m sure they could add the same firmware at the factory if they wanted, as for Yaesu and Icom, well they don’t either yet still cost 8 times more than the UV-K5 🤷♂️
Firmware doesn't add filtering. Firmware doesn't solder in balanced modulators. Firmware doesn't create anything on a board that isn't there.
You must have received a bad radio. I have a stock one and another that I have FLASHED. I have had no problems with receiving or transmitting. Sorry for your bad experience. But let's all remember YOU GET WHAT YOU PAY FOR!!!!!
And people wonder why many find HAMS off putting.
Yup. Because Icom and Yaesu and Kenwood deserve more respect than telling me a $26 handheld is better than all of those radios. Fkn garbage.
@@HamRadioConcepts I thought being a HAM was about testing and experimenting. You couldn’t even be bothered to do the basics.
Sad ham. 😢
Cool!
I have a couple of these, on the frequency they are designed to transmit on they are clean, And the RX is plenty hot. It hears a 2m cw beacon in ssb mode as easily as my ic-9700. Selectively I'm sure is crap, but it's a HT.
I rather use the uv5r/rh even though I don't like them than this bs
I've got one & easier for my bad eyes to read than my dim display Baofeng. I'm using it as the $25 radio that it was meant to be. If someone comes out with a mod that makes if more accessible to visually impaired, I'd do the mod in a heartbeat. It would make more sense than laying out the $$ for a TH-D75A.
Once you started 'reading the manual' you lost all credibility. It's an awesome radio for anyone with a modicum of intelligence.
I didn’t read the manual, I had to decipher it. And it’s not a manual it’s a leaflet
@@HamRadioConceptsyou’re such a clown
I purchased 1 of these makes a good 2m 1.25m 70cm for me
But mine has more recieve than yours wow at least it was only $25.
So you know how someone keeps telling you you have to watch show on TV 1000 times so you never watch it that's my feelings towards hacking this radio leave it.
I feel since it came out too many firmware updates how many is there for quashang / Anysceu
Aside continues firmware
You ain't receiving hf with
rubber duck or 6m FM as I discovered .
I found up against a ud1p
wouxun that the
K5 has:
Hi pitched receiver audio
No extended battery available
the so ht is throw away .
Low charge on 5 volts USB C
compared to charge on
docking charger.
Factory antenna is junk
don't get out.
Side jack top tight on programming cable .
Thanks for video ❤
I have two of them, I bought them just to play with. I like to experiment; they make add on receive filters, every has a following. You probably have more HT's than I do, I have given away 6 or 7 and still have 7. Yes, no point in it if you just operate out of the box, but for me they are just fun, for an old man to play with.
What you said is essentially correct which I can confirm as I own one of these. However what concerns me is you sound pissed off and clearly aren't having any fun which is a big part of what the hobby is about. My first ever voice contacts were made on this radio and inthe absence of other reasonably priced alternatives for new licence holders I think it serves a purpose at least for the time being. Let people mess aroind with it mod it and maybe break it. It's all part of learning and experimentation. Better than breaking your fancy Yaesu. 73 M7JZW.
How does it do on 1.25 meters?
you got a bad one 😂😂 dude......they are great better than Baofeng
You are totally wrong. You might have gotten a defective unit. It is far better than the baofeng.
i dont even use it on ham band i use it on pmr,i work 30km with this little radio lol
The next time you are inclined to buy a $20 radio and think that is going to function as an Icom or Kenwood with stupid and useless firmware, buy $20 tires for you car that your family drives. See my point?
Exactly. I bought it to see exactly how shitty it was myself
@@HamRadioConcepts It is SHITTY.
@@HamRadioConcepts In fact, because you are so spot on and not sugar coating these cheap pieces of crap, SUBSCRIBED!
Turn down squelch
So why, if you bought it if you’re gonna slag it off?
Give it away as a prize lol
what du you expect for 25 bucks?
Jailbreak it .. But chirp had issues with the ijv firmware in my case.. I use it as a backup to a backup to that backup..
You have no idea what your talking about. Probably a person that doesn't even know how a HT works and now thinks they know everything. For the price it does 1000% better then your Baofeng will ever do. Please stick to what you know.
It is fantastic for receiver sensitivity. Video uploading now with my service monitor.
The day you know how to turn on a service monitor please get ahold of me.
Must be a Friday made radio
What people forget that these are mass produced general purpose two way radios, they are NOT ham radio transcievers. Just like the "10m" radios which are just mass produced cb radios. I recently bought a new Baofeng Uv82 radio and am pleased with it.
Ive got this model and it works fine but mine came in a brown box
crappy review! Where are the SA results to back up anything? Your idea that this radio shouldnt be messed with is partially correct.
I agree it is a garbage radio, however it should be explored to see what we as hams can do to make it better. Our license is a license to modify and tear apart in everyway these devices. Just remember its also your license on the line either way, so be sure that what you are doing is proper. Make sure your signals are clean and in the right band.
Many hams are just buying these things and leaving the burden on the manufacture and not realizing that the manufacture has no obligation to test the design, let alone has the ability to test the design. Many times these are just produced and sent out the door at the cheapest rate possible. The manufacture has no say about anything just yes or no as to if they accept the job or not. Often times these radios are also duplicated, so if a mistake is made in an early model or brand, it can and often is duplicated throughout others.
I still have not figured out why so many people are expecting "Big Three" quality from a $25 radio. If thats what you wanted, I guess you shoulve bought one of the "Big Three"! The old adage is true, you get what you paid for, and well you paid for a $25 radio, you got exactly the performance of that too. Why the complaint? If anything, I would be grateful and truthfully impressed. I also understand I need to add extra filters to this transmitter to clean it up. this is just a dirty transmitter. it can be made better.
the firmware it comes with absolutely works, but sucks. The available 3rd party firmware does clean up some issues, not all, and does make use of some neat features of the chipset in the radio.
Appliance users tend to grab the item off the shelf turn it on and expect it to work out of the box. It appears many hams are falling into this category lately, and not understanding the license affords them the privilege's to explore and torment that little device to make it conform and bend to the will of the user.
I have all from the big 3.
Check out all the data other professionals have concluded on their channel that's exactly why I didn't show anything.
@@KO4AYE Where have I heard that before? oh thats right, I said that above.
Hey do me a favor please at least show that this is quoted text and not yours. 73 mate.
@@HamRadioConcepts Yeah, I have seen a few of the other reviews. I dont know whom you are referring to as professionals. I am a former communications company owner myself. While I do consider myself a former "Professional" as I was paid to do the job, I enjoy the title of "Amateur" now as I do this for my pleasure, but by no means is there anything amateurish about my knowledge or what I am doing in my station or testing.
I am not suggesting you are either less then professional either, however it does appear as an excuse to say well they posted all the information you need so I dont need to post the data.
Id suggest that the video didnt need to be made then.
You were only parroting what others said, and offered nothing to support it besides opinion.
Be your own channel and support your findings, or at least point to where you are getting your data. please.
73 mate, de KF6NFW
@@KO4AYE so you dont understand English? Fair enough, I will request a removal of your coment!
Perez Brian Lee Brenda Brown Larry
looks like your device is some how defective...
Is this really a terrible radio? Compared to what? It is $25 on Amazon right now. What are you comparing it to? Yes, it is junk compared to a $300 Yaesu. And the Yaesu is junk compared to a $4000 Harris XL. And the Harris XL is junk compared to a $8000 Motorola APX. Also....where did you get your information about the spurious emissions? Are you speaking about out of band tx as allowed by unauthorized firmware???
Ya don’t think you did the jailbreak and “good firmware “
Pay ya dollar takes ya choice!
I have a lot of fun with custom firmware on the UV-K5. But I don't transmit with it. I also hate the display, but that's personal preference. Frequency copy works great. Wireless copy (clone) takes too long and I see errors occur when I try it. When it comes to Chinese budget radios, I strongly prefer the Tidradio TD-H3. It does wireless copy quickly and flawlessly, and frequency copy, too. And it has bluetooth programming and USB-C programming. The UV-K5 does NOT do USB-C programming. The USB-C port is just for charging. I have no problem getting NOAA on either.
I have several of those they are great
My be faulty bad bad batch
Slow down and stop freaking out. You are the problem because you judge too quickly. Give it a day or two, slow down on coffee intake and try again
Bought it 2 months ago
Try the Baofeng K5PLUS. Tri-band, extended battery, and V/M, A/B, and band select buttons, clearly labeled. Larger keyboard than typical Baofeng with buttons labeled in hi-contrast white on black (none of that fade-away blue on black typical of Baofengs). USB-C charging only (not data, since the jack is on the battery), but that's ok. High contrast color display with readable text and digits. Abou $30. Add a tri-band foldable ABBREE antenna so you can ditch the two-rrubber-duck system shipped with the radio, and you have a very usable low-budget, packable radio.
Wow, Baofeng used the name and the aspect of a Quansheng radio to promote its model. It did the same thing vith UV-K61. BTW, try to read a color display under sunlight...
@@PaoloBussola I've read this display outside here on a sunny summer day on the Salish Sea. Size of the text and fonts that are more than one pixel thick make a difference.
What are you doing now after leaving AT&T Commercial Radio work I hope
Haven't been in AT&T in over 6 years. Commercial LMR repeaters, public safety, NOAA weather stations to the GOES satellite and microwave tower sites.
@@HamRadioConcepts I am so glad you are keeping Florida Safe for everyone
Try better antenna
Already did all of this. 3 handheld antennas, open squelch. Squelch on Icom is set to 3 and is fine. Baofeng set to 2 and is fine.
Some you win some you lose
Come on, it's not that bad. Pure CRAP what you are saying..
I have never thumbs down a video so fast
Thanks for the interaction
@HamRadioConcepts Eric, I couldn't comment, I only could reply to a comment. I'm 100% agree with you, buddy. In my shack for HT, I only use Kenwood, Icom, Yaesu, and Alinco. President HT AM/FM for 11 meter band. Thanks for the video.
maybe these video should be deleted?? Love your channel though man
Nah, I got it on the service monitor now, Com120b, comparing it to my Icom and a Baofeng. Video soon.
It´s not the plane, It´s the pilot! Just kidding, but with my limited budget and what this radio can do with the right firmware, learning and a lot of inovative ideas. I Receive HF, Naval VHF, GMRS, FRS, FM, VHF, UHF. With CEC firmware i can transmit APRS directly from radio, some messages on FT8 in 2m, I can play with SSTV in 2m and 0,70m. With a good antenna i can use repeaters at even 40 miles from my QTH. I think that doesn´t exist a bad tool, but a right tool for with you planning and your budget. Have ton of money? Buy a better one, simple like that. Best regards, 73!
I'm more focused on the people using it to TX on HF. It looks horrible on 20 meters and 10 meters on TX, hundreds of megahertz across... Hardly any power output, receive sensitivity at 20 meters is 1.5 microvolts. I keep hearing people tell me "this will replace all my QRP HF radios for $28. That's a piss poor statement.
@@HamRadioConcepts Oh yeah i saw the harmonics on 18 to 30 MHz in an italian blog (i think IJV firmware blog) and it´s only miliwatts on 27 MHz principal emission. And it had an harmonic on Airplane band with Watts, It´s very dangerous. I Will experiment with a low pass filter in 30 MHz cut and if the harmonics are below the limits on FCC regulation, i think that i can use an RF amplifier after this filter and see what happens. I found a RF amplifier with an input of only miliwatts. But, before i test it i will check the harmonics. It´s a good radio for experiment, but at same time it´s dangerous if the ham radio operator dont know these things! To receive i dont know yet, i dont have a good antenna ( i will build ) for it and without the filter the spurious signals are stronger than the desired signals. I hear the FT8 signal on 10m band and some qso´s on open propagation. 73 and good contacts!
I bought one of these, messed around with firmwares etc and agree that they are a waste of money. Left it in my shack for a week fully charged only for it to be flat...charged it again to check and it was flat two days later without using it. My Baofeng can sit on my side table next to my bed and fire up 6 months later with a full charge. Complete waste of money.
I can only assume that you know nothing of any value about Ham Radio's, stick to shouting at clouds.
It is a junk radio out of the box you are correct. Its not a radio to transmit on either. But, with that custom firmware I was able to catch the local 2m SSB net that I've never heard before. If you find the time, it may be worth playing with the firmware.
Chinese Junk is not always a boat.
Pointless video and wrong I seen about radios. A simple fanboy of other thing whatever is it.
I thought you were going to make another video on the President George FCC
Poor poor useless review.
Are you you actually an expert?
Nope. Never claimed to be. But if you are an expert, do not tell me this thing is anything useable on 20 meters HF, 17meter HF or even 11 meters. I have had it on both of my service monitors. It is garbage outside of 2 meters and 70cm.
Completely CAT controllable. All the otter MODs are garbage.
Wait, you can remote control this?
I mostly agree. this little thing is an interesting radio. just be mindful of the spurious crap out of band. We are seeing it with extremely strong out of band spurious spikes. Strong enough to raise concerns about safety in some environments. We are seeing the 2 meters being heard on the 70 cm band at distances up to half mile, sometimes the 2mtrs are even being heard out of band in the commercial services, and its causing concerns.
As for being CAT controllable as a remote station, I have only played around with that a couple times on this rig, and found it useful, though limiting in my situation. Though we intend to attempt again.
@@ChrisRobinsonKF6NFW Thanks, pretty interesting & appreciate it.
@@randykitchleburger2780 yes... ua-cam.com/video/UwTz5wricmY/v-deo.html
@@randykitchleburger2780 I appreciate the Tech book you sent. My brother in OK is reading.
I think I'm with you on this one. I bought two of them, mostly to try out the OTA memory replication (BTW, it works pretty well). But, I tried one of the custom firmwares which opened up transmit on the radio. I tried to transmit on the 33cm band - 927.5 mhz, just to see what would happen. I had my wife take one into the other room, AND SHE COULDN'T HEAR ME. So, while trying other firmwares is cool just to see what could happen, it's not practical. It produced a minimal amount of power. Which means the radio wasn't desiged to transmit there. But yes, there are a lot of cool firmwares out there that one could try, but I don't have the time nor the inclination. It's just not a radio that I want to keep, so I'll be selling them soon. Thanks for your opinion on the radio.
Thanking you most kindly from England
też mam takie wrażenie, że odbiornik jest do "bani" na starym baofengu dużo więcej słychać niż na qwaku.
Over 1m sold
And counting.
lool it is incredible receiver though
Maybe for VHf UHF. Those who insist they are selling their HF transceivers from Icom and Yaesu for this piece of shit radio are complete and total assholes. Again, I say this whole heatedly. If you claim to use this quansheng over a $1200 ic-7300, you are a complete and total asshole.
Thank you for your honest and informative review.
You really have to ask yourself 'what am I getting for $25?' In this case not much.
Is so cheap the manual doesn't even make good ass wipe! I got one in the wrist strap gave me crabs!
Let me get this right you spend time slating the cheap radio which nobody is expecting the world from! When it does do some thing you tried to prove it didn’t do you just say “what ever” you’re a strange!
FINALLY, someone tells the truth about this horrible radio!
What do you mean? Everyone is telling me I’m a total asshole.. just read the comments
@@HamRadioConcepts Because they know nothing about radios, hardware and its limitations, firmware, et. They see a price of around $20 and that's what gets their attention. Then they are brainwashed by other videos that these firmware upgrades induce hardware limited results. Ignore them. What about the front end? LOL HORRIBLE!
@@RisingTidesAC Is there a better radio in the price range?
@@RisingTidesAC Front is easily overloaded but under normal conditions it's as sensitive as Motorola GP340 on UHF. It also supports select call out of the box with ack and I paid 10€ for it during sale. Just can't hate it.
Get out of this price range and get a better radio. That's the point of this video