Uniden v Cybernet lets be fair :-

This is the place to discuss any general CB radio related topics. Getting started, installations, operation etc.
User avatar
RadioPixie
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 1959
Joined: 08 May 2011, 17:53
Call Sign: 26TM552
Location: Peoples Republic of Cornwall

Re: Uniden v Cybernet lets be fair :-

Post by RadioPixie »

Excalibur wrote:I just did a quick skim of this thread and got that the Cybernet radios have a really good transmit audio but very bad receive/breakthrough and the Uniden radios have a very good recieve audio but very bad transmit. Isn't quite as simple as that.

Wouldn't it be good just to buy one Uniden radio and one Cybernet and put them next to each other have the Cybernet with no volume but use for transmitting and the Uniden with full volume but no transmit also an antenna switcher on the back when you want to change - or even two antennas.
Yes you can but isn't convenient.

Or would it even be possible if you were good with circuits/soldering to modify one radio to have the TX board of the Cybernet but the RX board of the uniden? Would that work?
To answer your last line, you can. You could wire stages of different rigs together and take advantage of the best bits of design. There isn't really many "perfect" rigs. What many people say about their favourite radio is just based on nostalgia and fantasy. CB's are built for a price. They all have their quirks - new and old.

Times have changed. Once you get to a reasonable standard on transmit it isn't worth spending more money on a set up. Receiver sensitivity and signal handling isn't such the issue that it once was, especially with the increase in noise from manmade sources. What's the point of have a receiver having 3dB more sensitivity if you have S-6 of PLT noise?! You would never tell the difference.
73 from Dave the Pixie - 26CT052 - 26TM552 - CB Radioaficionado
fazer
New User
New User
Posts: 3
Joined: 02 Jan 2019, 19:33
Call Sign: kb31

Re: Uniden v Cybernet lets be fair :-

Post by fazer »

Regarding 80's Cybernet radio's, someone commented on bleed over during those years, Cybernet were one of the better transceivers for rejection, back then I fitted a crystal filter sorted it, also put one in my Harvard 410T hand held.

Currents Radios, Cobra 148 GTL-DX, CRT Superstar 3900, President Lincoln-1, Colt Excalibur 1200-DX and a Harvard 410T for checking FM audio, rewiring mics etc.
User avatar
Mudslinger
Legend
Legend
Posts: 7483
Joined: 28 Jul 2010, 07:11
Location: Oxfordshire

Re: Uniden v Cybernet lets be fair :-

Post by Mudslinger »

Since my last post I have been through several Cybernet and Uniden Boarded radios and I am still firmly on the uniden side of the Fence.

Don't get me wrong some Cybernets are ok but I wouldn't want one as my only radio.

The Earlier Ranger (3900 type radios) I would pretty close to Uniden as well. But that's hardly surprising as they are pretty much a clone...
Mudslinger - Simon
26TM274
26CT612

There is no such thing as a Fidelity 1000 which is too good to scrap.
Edd200sx
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 1333
Joined: 12 May 2013, 12:55
Call Sign: AMC45

Re: Uniden v Cybernet lets be fair :-

Post by Edd200sx »

I’ve always been a Uniden fan.

I’ve just put a nato2000 in the shack and to be fair overall it’s better than my 148 in these day’s of no one to cause bleedover.

It has got a few mods to improve tx audio mind
User avatar
Mudslinger
Legend
Legend
Posts: 7483
Joined: 28 Jul 2010, 07:11
Location: Oxfordshire

Re: Uniden v Cybernet lets be fair :-

Post by Mudslinger »

The Nato /Tristar 797 are probably the best Cybernets out there, they do run the Unidens close.

The PTBM059 and PTBM125 ok, the PTBM121 IMO is the worst.

All of the ones I have had have had the improvements done to them.
Mudslinger - Simon
26TM274
26CT612

There is no such thing as a Fidelity 1000 which is too good to scrap.
Post Reply