Which UHF system? IBCrazy LRS shootout

[MrBen]

Flite Test - Long Range System (LRS) Shootout

EzUHF for the win!

[mark1975]

It just so happens i have ezuhf winner...

[Dusty]

to be fair, the guy's a legend... he didn't have to do all that testing but did so to genuinely help people in the hobby.

The reason they tested these systems against 1.2/3 Ghz video systems is because of the known harmonic interference.

If you're using 2.4 or even 5.8 with directional/patch/helical antennas, pretty much ANY of these systems will work well for you.

Money no object, of course I'd choose Immersion RC EZUHF, but for the kind of flying I do (rural areas, and 2.4 video) honestly, Rangelink or even OpenLRS do the job perfectly

[Cupid Stunt]

Hmmm, didn't test Rmilec and some others, shame, would have been nice to know how they faired when used properly with 1.2/3

[bigMouse]

Entertaining but not very scientific! I have reservations about people interpreting the results of those tests as a list of what to buy and what to ignore! Mention was made of behaviour in built up areas when all tests appear to be done in rural settings. Many things in that particular test setup could account for the various findings with different designs! In my experience you actually need to test in the different environments to have a glimpse of what actually does work, as oppososed to what should work! User findings are invaluable for finding problems with equipment, for example, most of the defects in cars resulting in call-backs are the result of end user experiences rather than the manufacturers intensive tests! Suggesting that probably the best quides are the user forums.

I had OpenUHF, (still got it) Never experienced any glitching, been in the sea (powered up). Recovered, disconnected rinsed off, dried and working as good as new! I would be slightly surprised if any of the others in that list would survive the same misuse! Rx pcb and components (as sold) are exposed and completely unprotected so very prone to physical damage. cheapest in the range.
OpenLRS (at least that version ) was made for 433mHz, it won't perform properly outside of the intended frequency range. The the poor results of attempts to run it on the UK 459mHz band (outside the designed freq range) might have unjustly damaged its reputation.

RangelinkLRS Has never glitched, Haven't yet seen any negative postings via google. This what I'm currently using, very pleased with it.

About 18mths ago Was going to get EZUHF but a quick google search at the time revealed that EzUHF had a really bad press, in fact so bad it turned me off buying it! Ok the early versions might have been good, the latest versions might be ok, who knows! Hard to argue on forums with someone when they can't get more than a few few hundred meters range after trying everything under the sun!

Can't speak for the rest of the makes, no experiences with them, although about a year ago found a few google links with unhappy people using Chainlink Dare.

[Dusty]

How about we make this thread into a list of personal experiences with UHF LRS then? I suggest we include the following:

1. LRS name (and hardware/software version if applicable)
2. Frequency used (e.g. 433/459)
3. accompanying video equipment (frequency/power)
4. locations flown in
5. aircraft / style of flying / distances
6. supporting statement

heres mine

1. OpenLRS w/ DIY hacked 7W booster (thundead f/w)
2. 433
3. 5.8ghz 600mw, crap stock antennas, GoPro on board
4. only ever flown FPV at the same playing fields, fairly rural environment but not exactly middle of nowhere (see my vids)
5. Bixler 1, FPV Raptor and Skywalker. I was just starting out so very soft and simple flying, not much if any aerobatics... perhaps the odd loop or roll, only out to max 800m
6. This was my first UHF, and done on a budget. it was second hand and a helluva mess. the module was hacked all over the place in order to fit a stupidly bulky (and uneccesary) 7 Watt booster, never had confidence in it but it never glitched or caused a failsafe. in fact, I out flew my video range once and was able to manually engage RTH when using the FY31AP.


1. RMILEC
2. 433
3. 2.4ghz 500mw, GoPro on board
4. only ever flown FPV at the same playing fields, fairly rural environment but not exactly middle of nowhere (see my vids)
5. Funjet Ultra and Bixler 2. 2.2km out and 1km up in the bix2, lots of aerobatics and fast flying in the Funjet.
6. Although I never got to really push the range limits of the RMILEC, the diversity antenna/receiver (not sure if just 2 x antennas or true diversity rx) meant you could put the antennas in different planes so no matter what attitude the plane was in, I always had full control and never glitched. The receiver felt very strong and sturdy, very tough plastic casing and held up well in many crashes . The TX unit however, I thought was very cheap and plasticky (well it is made of plastic lol) most other units i've ever seen have some kind of metal casing and some filtering, this had none. although it was very reliable for me, I sold it in order to "upgrade" to a more proven product with filtration, support and the ability to switch to a higher power mode in emergencies.


1. Rangelink (v1.24 f/w)
2. 433
3. 2.4ghz 500mw, GoPro on board
4. only ever flown FPV at the same playing fields, fairly rural environment but not exactly middle of nowhere (see my vids)
5. Skyhunter - no aerobatics but starting to push for long range and altitude. acheived personal bests of 2.5km out and 1.3km up with no loss of control or failsafes.
6. By far my second favourite purchase in FPV so far (2nd only to my goggles). it's a very well made unit with upgradeable software, head tracking support  and manual high/low power mode switching. the RX unit feels well made and well protected with some metal shielding and tough heatshrink, very robust unit. The TX unit is a very simple black metal case but the switches and connectors are very high quality and sturdy. running 200mw in low power mode, I've been 2.5km away and 1.3km up (not at the same time) with no loss of control or failsafes. image in the 2.4 video was perfect also so I'm very confident that I could fly much further.

[Mancini]

ffs... who likes to buy dragon link.

[Dusty]

ffs... who likes to buy dragon link.

lol

[MrBen]

I got the right one first time IMO, I went for ezuhf only because I was a fan of EZOSD as the time and they worked together for digital Rssi etc, seems like I made a good choice as I have seen other people go through several other UHF systems, most people who use Ezuhf dont need to look any further with the odd exception to the rule. I noticed recently several DragonLink users on RCG UK thread moving over to EzUHF recently too, remember reading about random lockouts etc.

[Martink1974]

not sure on this one really , I've read about ez users with reduced range on some video frequencies i think brod was one of them , I've only had bad experiences with dl support and that has improved since dl2 has come out, if i was honest id probably go ezuhf if i was newto it based on what others have , but i must stress in fairness ive used 1.2 forever and had none of these issues, i thought such issues were with earlt v1 units when they had poor separation between vrx and dl tx

good luck everybody

[brodjackella]

1.240 on my lawmate 1w killed the ezuhf stone dead,couldnt get 15 yds..

still no idea what went wrong that visit martin,i was on 1.160,weird.

[jsxx]

Sold my chainlink (no failsafe never) and bought amazing ezuhf - now cant go further than 3-4km with dipoles... time to get RL ...;/

[mark1975]

suppose they quoted correctly if your system works for you why change lets be honest here why change (because someone you know has one ) ?

[MrBen]

Sold my chainlink (no failsafe never) and bought amazing ezuhf - now cant go further than 3-4km with dipoles... time to get RL ...;/

have you checked the Pot inside see its turned to the right place?

[mark1975]

i initally had the chainlink myself and it worked flawless i sold it to balders and to the best of my knowledge he is still using it i got the ezuhf as i wanted to use all the functions available on the ezosd like digital rssi diversity link quality etc ..And for me although irc maybe a little slow in responding to emails i think they offer the best after support ie downloads etc on there site .