New-CB radios with CTCSS Sub tones,who's tried it yet?

This is the place to discuss any general CB radio related topics. Getting started, installations, operation etc.
Post Reply
rpcomms
Super Member
Super Member
Posts: 110
Joined: 19 Jan 2012, 14:13

New-CB radios with CTCSS Sub tones,who's tried it yet?

Post by rpcomms »

Been running tests using ctcss for quieter CB channels when mobile to mobile (less QRM)
Getting ready testers for VoIP CB gateway ctcss operated uses,HT to base ctcss and car to car ctcss uses.

So far tested
Jopix Doris
Jopix GS-60
Randy 3
Albrecht AE6920

So far all works well using it,we got some testers out there trailing and response so far very positive.

Wondering if anyone done own tests yet?
Especially now more CB sets support ctcss sub codes.

Let me know :D

Rob.P 73's
rpcomms
Super Member
Super Member
Posts: 110
Joined: 19 Jan 2012, 14:13

Re: New-CB radios with CTCSS Sub tones,who's tried it yet?

Post by rpcomms »

Anyone trailed out
President Harrison 2 ctcss?
President George 2 ctcss?
President Randy 3 ctcss?
Ares II ctcss?
SS7900 turbo new version ctcss?
SS6900 new version ctcss?
SS9900 new version ctcss?
Jopix Doris ctcss
Jopix GS60 ctcss
CRT Alpha ctcss
Midland M88 unlocked ctcss


Here's a handy hint on using ctcss on CB channels,I've adopted similar system used on pmr446 to remember ctcss tone numbers per channel.
Ch xx=xx tone code.

Ch1-01
Ch2-02
----
Ch9-09
---
Ch14-14
---
Ch40-40
Etc etc

This way easy for ops to remember πŸ˜‰
Let me know if this way makes ctcss easier use on CB channels?

73's Rob.P
rpcomms
Super Member
Super Member
Posts: 110
Joined: 19 Jan 2012, 14:13

Re: New-CB radios with CTCSS Sub tones,who's tried it yet?

Post by rpcomms »

Well im kind of shocked nobodys tried CTCSS on these new cb radios yet!
My own tests on fm+ctcss is now a much quieter noise free qrm free channels when driving about or HT to car or base!

there NO disadvantages using it either,you can run on fm mode full rf gain regardless what S meter saying ,very sensitive no delays using ctcss or dcs codes even when mobile.
Like having business radio on cb noise free! Give it a go ! post your results here...
little Hint you can set your squelch to 1 min when CTCSS or DCS on ,then it relys soley on the sub tones transmitted to open the squelch ,much less falsing of mute.
CB FM should of had this ages ago if it was one feature that actually useful.
Give it a go ! ,post your results here...or a short youtube vid post link here.. :D

Theres plenty of recent CB radios that now support CTCSS\DCS including the Randy 3 CB HT,George 2 ,Harrison 2,Ares 2,CRT and Jopix brands.
Since switching to cb+ctcss locally im really impressed noise free channels locally now we have a perm ctcss call channel we monitor.

Have fun ..Happy New Year 2024

Rob.P
LondonCbRadio
Super Member
Super Member
Posts: 189
Joined: 29 May 2018, 15:19

Re: New-CB radios with CTCSS Sub tones,who's tried it yet?

Post by LondonCbRadio »

Can you add ctcss to old cb radios ?
rpcomms
Super Member
Super Member
Posts: 110
Joined: 19 Jan 2012, 14:13

Re: New-CB radios with CTCSS Sub tones,who's tried it yet?

Post by rpcomms »

Technically yes depending on radio,service information available on older sets

Same I suppose fitting them to business radios in past.

They is one requirement extra to older CB radios is that 27/81 radios tend to have wider filters 11ko F3E , as they used at the time different specifications compared with modern now 2023-2024 ETSI EN approved multi norms radios which are 8ko F3E.
Basically it involves a
new 455HT filter to be fitted
A resistor in FM discriminator to boost Rx audio level up
Reset the FM transmit deviation to around 2.00-2.10khz deviation.

Possibly some tweaking the microphone gain circuit as often the old CB radios weren't the punchiest of audio in some cases.

Obviously this requires a pre-test of radio before hand to ensure everything is spot on before taking on a modification at this level,last thing want is a fault before you start a mod and fault free old radio.

But yes can be done technically.

Only down side I can see from operational stand point is ctcss tone selection
Most ctcss are either tiny dip switches or more basic ctcss boards a tiny pot you have to adjust which really isn't that practical operational wise.
DIP switch types are a little easier but that said if a group monitor channel say ch 14-14(ctcss tone)
Only use that fine no issues.
Why because once ctcss like having a "private closed network" don't really need anymore CB channels apart from dxing ,other CB nets.

Think 94.8hz is a popular ctcss tone used.

On new Multi-Norms like George 2,Jopix GS-60,jopix Doris ,Harrison 2 it's selected thru the radios menu system ,lot easier !
Or via pc CPS software like Ares 2

Test set gear,soldering skills, abilities to read schematics diagrams would be vital requirement to do such a conversion.
And also a supplier of ctcss modules to retro fit in CB radio would need to sourced from a good supplier by engineer or whoever doing the modification,it's not impossible do just a bit challenging and supply and demand for such a service.

From my ctcss tests it should of been on CB from the beginning it would of helped greatly to blocking out foreign,electrical noises etc and where heavy voice traffic was present only wanted to listen to ones in your group net channels,why business radios use them on common hire channels.

Hope that helps answer your question.

Kind Regards Rob P πŸ™‚
User avatar
Transwarp
Veteran
Veteran
Posts: 2731
Joined: 03 May 2014, 20:15
Call Sign: Viper
Location: 'Ee bah gum'

Re: New-CB radios with CTCSS Sub tones,who's tried it yet?

Post by Transwarp »

ctcss doesn't provide private channel operation it's just a method of opening a receiver to hear a transmission using the same set code as the target receiver. On CB if a strong station comes on a channel where a round table is on that's using ctcss in the group the powerful station will still stamp out some if not all of the other stations, also all non ctcss radios will still hear ctcss transmissions as its basically just a tone squelch opening feature.

Back in the 80's a few CB's were made with sel-call capability, a form of ctcss if you like, which required an additional little box you plugged into the back of the radio via an already fitted socket for the purpose. One CB that had this l think was a Shogun 40FM.

ctcss comes into it's own for opening repeater / relay stations.
Champion of IBTL Christmas Edition 2023.
Champion of IBTL Autumn 2022 Edition.
rpcomms
Super Member
Super Member
Posts: 110
Joined: 19 Jan 2012, 14:13

Re: New-CB radios with CTCSS Sub tones,who's tried it yet?

Post by rpcomms »

Thank you for your response and input on subject πŸ‘
I fully understand ctcss uses and it's technicalities.
Ctcss or DCS does not provide voice encryption privacy or non ctcss CB can still listen in..

It's does however help in not allowing electrical man made noise,foreign stations,noise bursts ,A means to have a quieter channel,protect base Rx on a VoIP gateway or parrot repeater or a simplex straight channel you wish to monitor noiseless free.

Point I'm putting forward is new recent CB radios with DCS/ctcss built into set post 2023/4 models .

Have any operators actually tried it on recently released 2023/24 models?

What are their experiences with it?

What setups/models did you use to test it?

Does using the ch=tone number system make more sense to use for ease of use on CB radio?
For example
Ch 14=14 CT tone Mobile Calling
Ch 09=09 CT tone Emg
Ch 21=21 CT VoIP bridging gateway

Etc etc

For user simplicity remembering?

That's what I'm asking about on this post
Feedback and comments,rather than the inner workings of it,even though don't mind going deeper into the technology of the inner workings of sub tone uses in CB radios at all.

Perhaps my fault didn't explain myself properly on Post??

But thank you for your input on ctcss it gets the topic started,that's what we want,user awareness on subject more πŸ‘

Regards

Rob
26mb04
Super Member
Super Member
Posts: 257
Joined: 23 Nov 2017, 20:14
Call Sign: 26DG01
Location: Democratic Peoples Republic of Devon

Re: New-CB radios with CTCSS Sub tones,who's tried it yet?

Post by 26mb04 »

I've tried CTCSS on a CRT2000. It made the channel... quiet. I've said this many times, I can see CTCSS becoming the norm in the future when the QRM from everything just gets too much. I personally like the idea, if everyone agreed on a CTCSS tone as standard (like NATO, but ideally not 150Hz), we could all carry on with each other without dodgy streetlamp PSUs ruining the bands for us all.
Sent from my GP300 using DTMF
rpcomms
Super Member
Super Member
Posts: 110
Joined: 19 Jan 2012, 14:13

Re: New-CB radios with CTCSS Sub tones,who's tried it yet?

Post by rpcomms »

Well done!

Yes,this is one of the points I mention ,in my tests forget S meters lol,TSQ on it either opens or not,no more noise bursts in car or base or handie talkies!
what do you think of public access ctcss ch xx=xx ctcs tone code.
for easy remembering?

would this solve standised ctcss tones as have 40 of them.

ch 01-01
ch 40.40
26mb04
Super Member
Super Member
Posts: 257
Joined: 23 Nov 2017, 20:14
Call Sign: 26DG01
Location: Democratic Peoples Republic of Devon

Re: New-CB radios with CTCSS Sub tones,who's tried it yet?

Post by 26mb04 »

It would do, whilst there seem to be only 38 standard CTCSS tones, there are more in reality. Initially this might seem awkward from a typical perspective, as once a CTCSS tone is set on most ham rigs it stays there until you change it. With CB, it should be possible to program a different tone per channel, as opposed to running with one tone across the entire band (Like PMR- 40 channels, with a different CTCSS for each). Some comparisons with PMR, as that's where most of my CTCSS experience lies:

Some PMR rigs allow for tone signal fade. I can't remember exactly which model (I'm thinking Kenwood), but I've seen settings on some of mine that definitely allow for a CTCSS dropout delay before closing the sq again. This means the CTCSS signal can fade to the point of being unreadable, but the sq switches over to Signal level for x seconds (configurable) before locking the channel out again. It's very useful, and gets around the temporary unreadability problem you mentioned.

One potential issue with CTCSS starting at 1 is that the lower tones can sometimes take longer to open up. This probably wouldn't be an issue on most modern gear, but I've noticed it on older PMR rigs.
Sent from my GP300 using DTMF
rpcomms
Super Member
Super Member
Posts: 110
Joined: 19 Jan 2012, 14:13

Re: New-CB radios with CTCSS Sub tones,who's tried it yet?

Post by rpcomms »

Yes I've have seen that issue on some vhf uhf radios.

But not on ones tested so far
They seem and respond ok on fringe,variable flutter signals.
Only thing I have seen is squelch control seems to be interactive with TSQ,so set them min Squelch

Yes there are other codes in ctcss table,but suppose DCS tones could be used too if CB sets don't support the full tone chart?

Or a standard single ctcss or DCS tone across the 1-40 channels like 118.8hz ?

Some of the budget model CB sets with ctcss/dcs just offer single tone tx/Rx only
Some of the better models offer split independent sub tones and can be used for repeater parrot uses on simplex ,use split tones for semi duplex uses instead of split tx offset.
I have tried it ,it works.
27.155mhz
Base tx tone 2
Base Rx tone 5

Mobiles 27.155mhz
Mob tx tone 5
Mob rx tone 2

This will give you simplex frequency,but semi duplex via CTCSS or DCS if the radio supports it,most of the high end CB do,like Randy 3,George 2, Harrison 2,Ares 2,AE6290.
Maybe this is more for advanced users ???

Some of the budget CB sets only support single sub codes but still useful if just running regular uses and want silent channels or VoIP gateway access to base.

Haven't checked these models yet so cannot confirm decoding speeds?

George 2
Harrison 2
Ares 2

Time will tell πŸ™‚
PMR-446 was a bit like this,took some time to establish sub tones etc.

So far,tests I have done been very positive on CB+ctcss especially mobile/hand portable to base and no problems,as I was sceptical too at first on decoding times and signal fades,but seems these aren't a problem.

Be interesting others users tests results on this one πŸ™‚πŸ‘
Post Reply