New Yaesu FTM-300DR vs FTM-400XDR?

[PNW EXPLR]

The 400 has been around a few years now. The touch screen is a nice option, but for offroad, not sure it is best due to the potential for it become scratched due to dust.

The , not yet released, 300 is not a touch screen, but is manipulated with 10 buttons. Also the mic controls look bigger. The screen also looks like it has the option to connect to the main unit, as well as be a detached unit.

Thoughts?

 

[J.W.]

The only major upgrade with the new 300 is that it can dual monitor digital traffic. In theory, this means you could cross band repeat on WiresX which would be interesting for the overlanding community. Yeasu is notorious for not commenting on crossband functionality so we’ll have to wait to see them in the wild to see if this is the case.

Still it’s not enough to make me want one right away. I’m hoping the introduction of the 300 brings the price of the 400 down. Or at least put some more 400s on the used market so I can pick one of those up.

 

[RockyMountaineer]

The FT-300DR is a close companion to the FT3DR. However when compared to the FT400XDR I think the FT300DR is overpriced. The display is smaller then the 400XDR and is not touch sensative. However the 300DR is capable to dual digitial RX. It is sort of a weird mismatch and I think if Yaesu was looking to replace the 400XDR with the 300DR they missed the mark. And personally I would still opt for the 400XDR.

 

[PNW EXPLR]

Still it’s not enough to make me want one right away. I’m hoping the introduction of the 300 brings the price of the 400 down. Or at least put some more 400s on the used market so I can pick one of those up.

I was thinking the same way.

 

[Chris Ludwig]

The 300 doesn't support APRS. That is a deal breaker for me. I live in Utah. Many remote mountaintop repeaters out here also have APRS beacons. That is worth its weight in gold since you can check the recent station list and see what repeaters you are line of sight with. So if in the mountains, go for the FTM-400 or the TM-710 if you want to spend even more money for an outdated UI.

 

[Prerunner1982]

The 300 doesn't support APRS. That is a deal breaker for me. I live in Utah. Many remote mountaintop repeaters out here also have APRS beacons. That is worth its weight in gold since you can check the recent station list and see what repeaters you are line of sight with. So if in the mountains, go for the FTM-400 or the TM-710 if you want to spend even more money for an outdated UI.

Will have to wait and see but so far it appears to do APRS.

Yaesu FTM-300DR C4FM Dual-Band Transceiver

Yaesu FTM-300DR 50W C4FM/FM 144/430MHz Dual-Band Digital Mobile Transceiver at GigaParts

www.gigaparts.com

Other advanced features of the new FTM-300DR include

• DG-ID (Digital ID)
• Group Monitor
• Positional awareness from the built-in 66ch High Sensitivity GPS receiver enabling Real Time Navigation
• Backtrack feature
• A GPS Terminal for an external GPS receiver
• 1200/ 9600 APRS data modem for APRS mode
• Voice Recording of both Received and Transmitted audio
• Save and load data including configuration and memory channel information to a micro SD card
• Snapshot function using the optional MH-85A11U camera microphone

 

[Prerunner1982]

I think if Yaesu was looking to replace the 400XDR with the 300DR they missed the mark. And personally I would still opt for the 400XDR.

I wonder if it was more of a replacement for the FT-8800 that was discontinued a year or two ago.
I would opt for the 400 as well, especially since it is currently marked cheaper than the 300.

 

[RockyMountaineer]

I wonder if it was more of a replacement for the FT-8800 that was discontinued a year or two ago.
I would opt for the 400 as well, especially since it is currently marked cheaper than the 300.

Maybe. I have heard some speculation regarding the whys and hows this radio came to be. None of it really fits. Regardless my personal opinion is that Yaesu would have been better off just updating the internals of the 400XDR.

 

[PNW EXPLR]

Maybe. I have heard some speculation regarding the whys and hows this radio came to be. None of it really fits. Regardless my personal opinion is that Yaesu would have been better off just updating the internals of the 400XDR.

I was courious about the motivation behind this radio. Seems like a lesser version to the 400 but priced higher. Being a noob to HAM, maybe I am just missing something.

 

[Prerunner1982]

Down to $469.95 now, same as the FTM-400.

 

[PNW EXPLR]

Down to $469.95 now, same as the FTM-400.

Yup, Looking at Gigaparts now. I want to order my radio this week. Still not sure which one to buy. I'm a noob so not really up to par on the differences.

 

[Prerunner1982]

Yup, Looking at Gigaparts now. I want to order my radio this week. Still not sure which one to buy. I'm a noob so not really up to par on the differences.

The 300 is starting to grow on me. Though it doesn't have a touchscreen, it's at least a color display. It has a new mic, built in bluetooth standard and dual external speaker outputs, one for each band.
I will be interested to see if this radio does APRS and voice at the same time though I doubt that it will which is unfortunate as a radio with it built in should really be able to do it simultaneously.
Though the 300 is the same price as the 400 now, the 400 has been around for a while and it's original MSRP was somewhere around $700 so the 300 really falls between the 100 and the 400 as a mid-level radio and the price will come down on it too.
If I was looking at a new radio today and trying to decide between the 300 and the 400... I would probably still go with the 400. It's a tried and true radio and I know that it does what I need/want it to do.
The Kenwood TM-d710ga is another good option if APRS is something you want. It is only about $40 more than the 400 and from what I understand does APRS a bit better than the Yaesu FTM-400..but it does look outdated.

 

[PNW EXPLR]

The Kenwood TM-d710ga is another good option if APRS is something you want. It is only about $40 more than the 400 and from what I understand does APRS a bit better than the Yaesu FTM-400..but it does look outdated.

I am leaning towards the 400. I would rather have more tech then I need, or ever know how to use, then find out a couple years down the road that I would have liked to have an option I passed on.

 

[1Louder]

"The FTM-300DR has a built in GPS and provides some GPS navigation controls on the display. It also has a built in 1200/9600 baud data modem for APRS support."

New Radio! Yaesu FTM-300DR Product Announcement - KB9VBR Antennas

Gigaparts broke the news last week of a new mobile radio coming from Yaseu. The FTM-300DR is a dual band mobile transceiver with Yaesu’s C4FM system fusion digital mode built it. At this time it’s difficult to tell if the FTM-300 will be a replacement of the FT-400 or not‚ but it seems to be […]

www.jpole-antenna.com

Just saw this....

 

[Trad77]

Yup, Looking at Gigaparts now. I want to order my radio this week. Still not sure which one to buy. I'm a noob so not really up to par on the differences.

Honestly, I have had the 400 for many years and it is a solid performer. The only benefit the 300 has over the 400 is dual C4FM receive. Id go with the 400, but in the end, its YOUR decision.

 

[PNW EXPLR]

Honestly, I have had the 400 for many years and it is a solid performer. The only benefit the 300 has over the 400 is dual C4FM receive. Id go with the 400, but in the end, its YOUR decision.

I have decided the 400 will be purchased.

Can you recommend an antenna? I have a large solid steel front bumper. I would like to hard mount (drill into) the flat surface on the bumper on the driverside. Then I can run a long antenna when I need it. Would this provide the required ground plane?

 

[Prerunner1982]

@PNW EXPLR : My concern with your suggested mounting location is how low it is. For line of sight communication antenna height is key and with is mounted low the body of the vehicle will block and may also interact with the signal which can cause high SWR.
A shorter antenna up high would perform better than a long antenna down low. I think even a fender mount would be better.
The ground plane would be fine as long as you can clean off some of the paint/powder coating on the underside of the hole for the mount to make good clean contact with the bumper.

 

[PNW EXPLR]

@PNW EXPLR : My concern with your suggested mounting location is how low it is. For line of sight communication antenna height is key and with is mounted low the body of the vehicle will block and may also interact with the signal which can cause high SWR.
A shorter antenna up high would perform better than a long antenna down low. I think even a fender mount would be better.
The ground plane would be fine as long as you can clean off some of the paint/powder coating on the underside of the hole for the mount to make good clean contact with the bumper.

I have seen a couple 7' antennas, that would put it over the cab a few feet. I am not opposed to running a mag mount on my roof if that is the better option. I have been running a mag mount up there for my GMRS with success.

 

[PNW EXPLR]

I have seen a couple 7' antennas, that would put it over the cab a few feet. I am not opposed to running a mag mount on my roof if that is the better option. I have been running a mag mount up there for my GMRS with success.

I am currently running a UT-72 for my HT I have been using in the mean time. Think I will just use it and see how it does.

 

[M Rose]

I am currently running a UT-72 for my HT I have been using in the mean time. Think I will just use it and see how it does.

what radio are you running?