receivers with new 1258MHz option

[MatCat]

My current cheapo digital vRX (looks just like the new 9 to 1.3 digital w/ 1258) picks up HORRIBLE interference from my 1 watt 2.4 amp, I am assuming this new one with the upgraded saw filter will alleviate that? Also I am getting about 4km or so at the moment with a bluebeam set, so theoretically this vRX could change that to 8km?

[ReadyMadeRC]

My current cheapo digital vRX (looks just like the new 9 to 1.3 digital w/ 1258) picks up HORRIBLE interference from my 1 watt 2.4 amp, I am assuming this new one with the upgraded saw filter will alleviate that? Also I am getting about 4km or so at the moment with a bluebeam set, so theoretically this vRX could change that to 8km?

It really depends on how that interference is getting in to the receiver. Our extra filtering was added to take care of 433MHz, and there's a pretty good chance that the "el cheapo" vRX that looks the same actually came from a different manufacturer. There are a lot of copycats over there.

On a side note, you have no idea how many times it's been reported to me about people losing their plane using one of those 2.4G amps. There's a reason I don't sell them!

[ReadyMadeRC]

And if you all didn't already notice, we have the 300mW TX's and the "Tan colored" receivers with 1258MHz as well. Those have always been known to put up with 433MHz interference, even without additional filtering!

[MatCat]

I eventually plan to go UHF, but my devo RX handles 2.4 very well, I don't even have filters on my vTX and I can still get a mile of range on my 2.4 without any assist, made it to 4km using just a windsurfer parabolic reflector without glitches (this is the point where my video pretty much about craps out), I could probably get video to 5km with my current vRX but I would probably lose some video on the way back.

At either rate I already ordered that rx from you guys.

Here is what the amp does to my current vRX, not the sync issue as that was caused by the EZCap, but the horizontal lines.


View this video on YouTube

[GhostRider32]

Tim,
Which one of these receivers would you say is the best that you sell now for 1.2?
This one:
http://www.readymaderc.com/store/ind...roducts_id=911
or this one:
http://www.readymaderc.com/store/ind...oducts_id=1020

they appear to be the same except that the one has more frequencies.

Also, do these receivers have any issues with the Skylark AAT causing magnetic interference like some of the other receivers do?

[IBCrazy]

^You need to define "best". I forget who said it at the Fly-In, but "Best is strictly situational". The top unit is more sensitive and will have longer ultimate range assuming you have a low noise floor. The bottom unit has better filtration and is better for urban environments and higher noise levels.

-Alex

[GhostRider32]

Thanks. That's the info I'm looking for.

[MatCat]

Well I got my new RMRC digital vRX, did a test flight on it yesterday. I did 4.7km which is better then I did with my other RX but only by .7km :P. I was getting a lot of color shifting and interference where I usually wasn't with my much cheaper RX, but at the same time my GS fell over from the wind prior to take off and squished my SPW, so that could of also had a part to do with it, I did hand bend it back to approximate proper shape, and fiddled with it some more after landing.

I also tested my 2.4Ghz amp with the RX, interference was just as bad on 1.280, though on 1240 and 1258 it was nearly gone, which is a good sign.

Alex, how far off of 1.280 can I go with tuned bluebeam set before the SWR would get too bad?

[IBCrazy]

My Bluebeams do just fine on 1258MHz. I worked on the project with RMRc well before the channel was released and adjusted the dimensions accordingly so it works great for either frequency.

-Alex

[Dionysos]

Interesting stuff Alex...
just found this and it's quite an eye-opener, especially with the RMRC statement of faulty Lawmates. So far, I was not happy with them (tx) anyway, RX was ok for me. Not trying to break records, though...

Dio