Brand new, NTC-approved, inexpensive handheld radios!

[JoeTomasone]

So Powerwerx failed to publish the spec as promised and required.

That means only one of two things.  Powerwerx didn't care to do it (for whatever reason, which is their prerogative), or their lab results were not consistent
with their production runs.

That's on them, not CAP.

The only CAP failing is that they should have waited until things were properly published and documented before adding it to the list.

I personally think there was a miscommunication.   I think that Powerwerx felt that providing the lab report was sufficient, and CAP did not.   

Regardless, we should accept the lab report and reinstate the radio, IMHO.   To my mind a lab report is much better to have than a simple statement.

[Elmer]

The lab report demonstrates that particular radio is compliant.  The spec from the manufacturer says that all their radios will meet the standard. 

[JoeTomasone]

The lab report demonstrates that particular radio is compliant.  The spec from the manufacturer says that all their radios will meet the standard.

Where did you see the manufacturer state that?

[Elmer]

Sorry, I was generalizing on the difference between a lab report and the spec.  That seems to be the issue here, that they have not provided the spec.

[arajca]

If Powerwerx were to have put the report on their website, which I believe would be a fairly simple thing to do, it would be considered as published. That would have solved the problem. The reason it was listed is the NTC folks were working with Powerwerx to get that done, and after several months without that step being taken, they had to revert back to following the regs. If they had not listed it as compliant until the specs were published, this would not have happened.

[JoeTomasone]

If Powerwerx were to have put the report on their website, which I believe would be a fairly simple thing to do, it would be considered as published. That would have solved the problem. The reason it was listed is the NTC folks were working with Powerwerx to get that done, and after several months without that step being taken, they had to revert back to following the regs. If they had not listed it as compliant until the specs were published, this would not have happened.

Moot point; the gentleman at Powerwerx told me this morning that he is done with working with CAP; so apparently it's not going to happen.

[Storm Chaser]

If Powerwerx were to have put the report on their website, which I believe would be a fairly simple thing to do, it would be considered as published. That would have solved the problem. The reason it was listed is the NTC folks were working with Powerwerx to get that done, and after several months without that step being taken, they had to revert back to following the regs. If they had not listed it as compliant until the specs were published, this would not have happened.

Moot point; the gentleman at Powerwerx told me this morning that he is done with working with CAP; so apparently it's not going to happen.

Joe, that seems a bit extreme. If they have the specs and all they need to do is publish them/make them available, then why not just do it. Are they really going to lose the business of many prospective CAP buyers over this?

[Eclipse]

+1 - Unless he's selling out every unit, this sounds like he's not able to stand by the lab report.

Drawing a line like this, especially with a customer base as large as CAP potentially is, seems like a bad business idea.

Anyone who's ever dealt with a government, or pseudo-government agency knows there are plenty of PITA hoops
to jump, but that's just the nature of the game.

Publishing a report you committed to publishing doesn't exactly sound "onerous".

[JoeTomasone]

If Powerwerx were to have put the report on their website, which I believe would be a fairly simple thing to do, it would be considered as published. That would have solved the problem. The reason it was listed is the NTC folks were working with Powerwerx to get that done, and after several months without that step being taken, they had to revert back to following the regs. If they had not listed it as compliant until the specs were published, this would not have happened.

Moot point; the gentleman at Powerwerx told me this morning that he is done with working with CAP; so apparently it's not going to happen.

Joe, that seems a bit extreme. If they have the specs and all they need to do is publish them/make them available, then why not just do it. Are they really going to lose the business of many prospective CAP buyers over this?

Yep, they are.    He told me that they are selling tons of radios and don't need the aggravation that they apparently got in dealing with NHQ.   NHQ is also adamant that they will not approve the radio without the assurance that the manufacturer will stand behind the specs.   So, the members lose.    I'm too frustrated to check the redbook right now to see what NTIA requires.

[JoeTomasone]

+1 - Unless he's selling out every unit, this sounds like he's not able to stand by the lab report.

Drawing a line like this, especially with a customer base as large as CAP potentially is, seems like a bad business idea.

Anyone who's ever dealt with a government, or pseudo-government agency knows there are plenty of PITA hoops
to jump, but that's just the nature of the game.

Publishing a report you committed to publishing doesn't exactly sound "onerous".

The story I got was that the radio was evaluated as a request from a friend in CAP.   They had the test done and got an FCC ID and all, but apparently unless the manufacturer swears (by publishing a spec) that every radio will match the lab report that CAP won't honor it.

He does not sell to the Government, they sell to hams.   Much less red tape.   He was under the belief that publishing the REPORT (which he did) was what was needed, not publishing and guaranteeing the SPEC (which really, how can he do?).  So the CAP business is not worth the grief to him.

[Eclipse]

Fair enough, then it appears he was never all that interested in selling to CAP to start with.

Not like we need these things anyway, there's plenty of other options in the market, not to mention
plenty of radios in the field for people who actually need them.

The issue, from what I can see, is when hams want to buy "one radio to rule them all", which is a nice-to-have
for them, but not really CAP's concern.

[Storm Chaser]

He was under the belief that publishing the REPORT (which he did) was what was needed, not publishing and guaranteeing the SPEC (which really, how can he do?).

So he can't stand by his product? When I buy a product, especially electronics, I expect that no matter when or where I buy it, the specs will be the same for the particular model. That's a guarantee from the manufacturer. Why would I buy something that may not always meet the same specs or standards? It's a shame because I was considering buying this radio.

[SarDragon]

I bought one. Easy to program. Seems to work well.

[Panache]

Yep, they are.    He told me that they are selling tons of radios and don't need the aggravation that they apparently got in dealing with NHQ.   NHQ is also adamant that they will not approve the radio without the assurance that the manufacturer will stand behind the specs.   So, the members lose.    I'm too frustrated to check the redbook right now to see what NTIA requires.

His steadfast refusal to publish a spec for his product (a step every other NTC-approved radio manufacturer has to do) does not exactly instill confidence in me.

[JoeTomasone]

He was under the belief that publishing the REPORT (which he did) was what was needed, not publishing and guaranteeing the SPEC (which really, how can he do?).

So he can't stand by his product? When I buy a product, especially electronics, I expect that no matter when or where I buy it, the specs will be the same for the particular model. That's a guarantee from the manufacturer. Why would I buy something that may not always meet the same specs or standards? It's a shame because I was considering buying this radio.

Powerwerx is the importer, not the manufacturer, so no; I can't expect them to guarantee specs if the manufacturer does not. 

[PHall]

He was under the belief that publishing the REPORT (which he did) was what was needed, not publishing and guaranteeing the SPEC (which really, how can he do?).

So he can't stand by his product? When I buy a product, especially electronics, I expect that no matter when or where I buy it, the specs will be the same for the particular model. That's a guarantee from the manufacturer. Why would I buy something that may not always meet the same specs or standards? It's a shame because I was considering buying this radio.

Powerwerx is the importer, not the manufacturer, so no; I can't expect them to guarantee specs if the manufacturer does not.

So where are the radios made then?  China?

[Brad]

So where are the radios made then?  China?

Yep. From the back pages of the manual:

Quanzhou Wouxun Electronics Co.,Ltd.
No.928 Nanhuan Road
Jiangnan High Technology Industry Park
Quanzhou, Fujian 362000, China
Tel:+86 595 28051265 Fax:+86 595 28051267
http://www.wouxun.com

[Woodsy]

With this radio now disapproved, what is the least expensive (buying new) approved portable?  Mobile?

Hopefully someone knows off hand.  I'd rather not spend my evening going down the list and googling each one

[Eclipse]

Used is your best bet, eBay or your Wing DC is your friend.

[Brad]

XTS3000 is a good one, and dirt cheap. I just typed it in on ebay and see a bunch for under $300, even some under $100. Look for the VHF 136-174 MHz one and make sure it says it can do P25. If you're not sure, ask the seller for the flash code and I'll decode it for you. I got a XTS3000 from my Wing Comms Engineer the other day and it's as solid as a rock. The Jedi and Astro series both Motos are almost indestructible.