My UV-3R arrived an hour ago - 6 days after ordering - very fast! Initial impressions are generally favourable however, receiving paging interference on some 2m simplex channels (inside and on the supplied normal-mode helical) makes me think that it will not be very suitable for SOTA use.
Anyone tried yet?
73
Richard
G3CWI
In reply to G3CWI:
Hi Richard,
I have tested my UV-3R last Sunday from EA4/MD-016, that summit has some VHF surveillance and security systems at a second peak pretty close to it, and noticed some interference on 2m simplex too. On 70cms no interference was observed. Despite this, it performed like a champion, had some 60Kms contacts with Madrid city and beyond.
It seems like the frontend is not the most selective around the world, but I am sure this small TXCVR gives the most bang for the buck !!!
73
Mo.
EA4MZ.
In reply to G3CWI:
Hi Richard,
I was just about to buy one for £22 plus £9 off ebay - can’t go far wrong.
Reviews say they are not very selective, have only 22dB-down spurii on TX or worse on low power and minimum volume is still very loud on RX. Earlier models have no S-meter but yours will have. They say it sounds good on the air and is quite sensitive. It’ll be a great shirt pocket or glove box rig for walking around home for the odd local QSO as it’s only 5 ounces. Failing that you can always use it as a torch for walking the dog in winter!
Think I’ll hang back now and see what you say later?
73, John.
In reply to G4YSS:
John
I am pleased with mine; it is great value for money. I have done the filter mod to reduce the spurious and also the mod to reduce the gain of the AF amp (both required nerves of steel and the deft touch of a brain surgeon). I can soon make a little front-end filter if needed for SOTA. The insides are really very pretty with much of the PCB being gold plated. How they make them so cheap I cant imagine. Buy with confidence!
73
Richard
G3CWI
It is occasionally suggested that a possible cure for pager interference is the insertion of an open circuit 153MHz quarterwave stub in the line. I always had my doubts about this and just did some tests using thin semirigid co-ax as a stub. The ratio of loss on 153 to loss on 145 was only 16dB and to get an acceptable thru loss at 145MHz would require the stub to be resonant well above 153MHz. I therefore concluded that normal co-ax is just too lossy to give the Q needed for substantial rejection of pager interference.
Helical filters look to be the best bet.
73
Richard
G3CWI
In reply to G3CWI:
Where do you plug the key in?
Barry GM4TOE
No Barry, this is a different CWI now. One that is into 2m, especially FM. He likes mobile operating through repeaters, especially Echolink, and nodes. I’ll give it another six weeks maximum, by which time he will no doubt be fully fluent in 1980s CB language, and an enthusiastic consumer of Australian lager.
Tom M1EYP
In reply to M1EYP:
Don’t be too dismissive of all things CB, Tom. Last time I listened on 27MHz, I thought that “one-and-nine for a coffee” was remarkably good value in this day and age.
73 de Les, G3VQO
In reply to G3VQO:
In reply to M1EYP:
“one-and-nine for a coffee” was
remarkably good value in this day and age.
Roughly the same price as a Baofeng, Les 
73
Mike 2E0YYY
In reply to G3CWI:
You soon did the mods Richard. OK on your stub experiments. G4DAX Dave showed us how to make an anti-pager filter at the Scarborough Amateur Radio Society meeting many years ago. We have bad problems here because of pagers from Oliver’s Mount (HUMP G/HTW-007). However, I don’t think the look of your new handie would be much improved by the addition of a 1 litre paint tin at the RX input!
I am still thinking of buying a Baofeng but don’t know if I am keen enough to modify it as you have done. I had more than enough trouble fixing a satnav the other week.
73, John.