Retevis RT90 Mobile Dual Band DMR Mobile Radio Review

bought the only one to hope for would be kenwood icom and yaesu no chance they are to stuck on d star and wires x

 

That Anytone Radio is a Model AT-D578UV DMR and kinda looks like the 878. One thing that is pretty cool first time I seen a Dual Band DMR/Analog with 60 Watts on VHF

 

I'm just waiting on final price on it. I don't have a mobile in my vehicle at the moment but leaning toward the AnyTone DMR,UHF, VHF that's useful. Load my codeplug from my 868 into and I should be good to go. Like another poster said I hope they make it so it has a remote head unit but I'm not going to hold my breath.
With the roaming feature I'll probably load up all the listed DMR repeaters in the state.
I do have a JumboSpot and my cell phone has unlimited data but I rather just be able to get in the car, turn the radio on and ready to go.

 

The first DMR mobile radio Retevis RT90: http://blog.retevis.com/the-first-dmr-mobile-radio-rt90/

 

The RT90 isn't the first DMR mobile radio

 

But it is the Retevis first DMR mobile Radio.

 

That's fine but it reads like it's saying the RT90 is the first DMR mobile...either way no biggie
I guess I read it wrong

 

I'm not so sure I saw the actual device certifications from the FCC in either post. The companies did file all the technical paperwork and forms though but just that isn't the same as the FCC approval. If it's there please point it out to me.

I remember a couple of years ago RM Italy showing most of their high gain wide band hf amps as FCC approved when all they had actually done is file the paperwork with the FCC. Sometime later the FCC did approve one or two of their amps but not all that RM had listed on their website as "FCC Approved".

I think these Chinese companies are playing with us.

 

Go to https://www.fcc.gov/oet/ea/fccid
Search for
Grantee Code: POD
Product Code: -DMR3 (the dash is part of the product code)

In the future Retevis might file for a separate FCC ID under their own name for this product like they (and other companies) have done with some of their other products.

 

W5TXR Check the imbedded link to your business web site on your qrz page. Points to some Japaneses blog.

 

I own, and sell, TYT 9600's. This Retevis is the same radio, and it's more than $100 higher price than the TYT.
And for the "Chinese Junk" haters......... There are at least 20 9600's in operation in my area. They sound better than most of the big three models, and I've had zero returns. The early versions (1 & 2) had some issues. By version 3 they had been resolved. Also, don't forget, it wasn't that long ago it was the "Jap Junk"!

 

I have a TYT MD9600 and I echo the above statement. As long as you have the later version of the firmware it is a great radio. I can hit DMR repeaters on my commute in the Chicago area, so having a mobile DMR is perfect—no need for a hotspot or mobile broadband. The 9600 is also what I use to monitor analog repeaters while I operate HF on my FT-857D, which is my main mobile radio. The only drawback to this radio is that it doesn’t have a remote control head.

 

Yikes!
Thanks

 

Hams are spending far too much time crying over "unapproved chinese junk" (as if "Motorola" is the only legitimate radio manufacturer - hihi!) .... when one of the greatest benefits of our licenses is the fact that we can pretty much put anything on the air we can get our hands on .... heck, half of the "homebrew" stuff we hams transmit with would be "unapproved junk" if FCC approval was required before keying up. That's the thing; it ain't. Our only problem is that whatever we *do* put on the air had better be in compliance with Part 97 or ELSE. These Chicom radios don't quite meet the standards in either part 90 or part 15 .... primarily because any old mommy's basement freebander can program them with the "free programming cable" and away they go. (example: the "10 watt HT" set up on FRS channels, removable antenna, wideband mode, etc, etc) - No "radio shop" required. That is the stuff that the FCC takes a dim view of. I am surprised at how few amateurs actually get this ... but then, the hobby/service *has* been watered down a bit with the end of the CW requirement, hasn't it?

 

I was understanding that post Up^there until the watered down remark came. Heck I'm a newbie getting a novice in 1980, 5word tech in 1985. I think more of the older guard don't quite get things.