 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Honda Cars / April 2005'05 Accord EX - Poor FM reception
I just purchased a new Accord EX and have noticed I get very poor FM reception. It doesn't want to hold a station at all. I get a lot of FM station drift even with strong signals and on flat terrain. Has anyone else experienced this? Where is the antenna located? Does it need to be raised? it is typical of these Hondas. The antenna is built in to the rear window. There is not modifying you can do. Perhaps an amplifier might work but that might just amplify the noise. >I just purchased a new Accord EX and have noticed I get very poor FM > reception. It doesn't want to hold a station at all. I get a lot of FM > station drift even with strong signals and on flat terrain. Has anyone > else experienced this? > > Where is the antenna located? Does it need to be raised? > I just purchased a new Accord EX and have noticed I get very poor FM > reception. It doesn't want to hold a station at all. I get a lot of FM > station drift even with strong signals and on flat terrain. Has anyone > else experienced this? > > Where is the antenna located? Does it need to be raised? Same here. I got the 05 Accord Hybrid and am pissed to find that its cheap stereo is not replaceable. Climate control and low frequency noise cancellation are integrated. FM stations that I used to get perfectly clearly in my previous car are unintelligible now. I replaced the tinfoil speakers (you can literally crush them in your hand) in the rear deck but it seems that the system only puts out a few watts per channel. I do not find the radio acceptable at all. I need to contact the dealership to see WTF is up with this. It's a $30K car that CAN'T have a decent radio. I have the same problem with my 2004. I really believe the radio is OK, its the antenna. GM tried that "invisible" antenna in the windshield quite a few years back and I never liked it either. Nice for looks, lousy for reception. > > I just purchased a new Accord EX and have noticed I get very poor FM > > reception. It doesn't want to hold a station at all. I get a lot of FM [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > dealership to see WTF is up with this. It's a $30K car that CAN'T have > a decent radio. I have not seen that problem in our 2003 EX with Nav. In fact, the radio has more sensitivity on both AM and FM than the one in our Jeep Grand Cherokee with its telescoping outside antenna. I regularly listen to AM stations 100 miles away. I can also pick up our local FM music station more than 100 miles away with a good signal. As an amateur radio operator, receiver sensitivity is an issue with me. I'm very happy with this radio. >I have the same problem with my 2004. I really believe the radio is OK, its >the antenna. GM tried that "invisible" antenna in the windshield quite a [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >> > station drift even with strong signals and on flat terrain. Has anyone >> > else experienced this? > I have not seen that problem in our 2003 EX with Nav. In fact, the > radio has more sensitivity on both AM and FM than the one in our Jeep [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > amateur radio operator, receiver sensitivity is an issue with me. I'm > very happy with this radio. Also an amateur radio operator, I had to take the "EX Challenge" this morning. Mine's an '04 EX auto 4-cyl non-Nav, non-leather. It's the stock 6-CD changer. I live in southern Arizona. My radio works great: at 7AM (about an hour after sunrise) I was listening to KSL in Salt Lake City, Las Vegas, KFI in L.A., and could have gotten KNBR in SF if we didn't have a local station at 690. I was also getting strong signals from numerous Phoenix stations 100+ miles away, and FWIW there is a mountain range close by that is "in the way." I could be doing some serious broadcast band DX'ing with this radio. The subject line is about FM reception, so I found numerous Phoenix stations on FM as well on this radio. As characteristic of FM, different spots along the drive yielded signals for better or worse; occasionally quite strong. I think it's a fine radio, and I am surprised at how good its reception is considering the in-the-glass antenna. I expected a lot worse. Oh, and the audio quality is great, too, but I know that's a matter of opinion. ;) Howard >Also an amateur radio operator, I had to take the "EX Challenge" this >morning. Mine's an '04 EX auto 4-cyl non-Nav, non-leather. It's the stock [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > >Howard I happen to live in north/central Arizona. Maybe radios just work better in Arizona? :-) Dick > I happen to live in north/central Arizona. Maybe radios just work > better in Arizona? :-) It's the thin air... ;) N7SO > > I have not seen that problem in our 2003 EX with Nav. In fact, the > > radio has more sensitivity on both AM and FM than the one in our Jeep [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > > Howard The stock FM radio can't deal with multipath. The radio might work great out in the middle of nowhere but it's garbled and fuzzy sounding in a city. >> The subject line is about FM reception, so I found numerous Phoenix stations >> on FM as well on this radio. As characteristic of FM, different spots along [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >great out in the middle of nowhere but it's garbled and fuzzy sounding >in a city. Phoenix, the 5th largest city in the U.S., is not exactly out in the middle of nowhere. I don't see any multipath problems with our radio when driving around Phoenix. > >The stock FM radio can't deal with multipath. The radio might work > >great out in the middle of nowhere but it's garbled and fuzzy sounding [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > middle of nowhere. I don't see any multipath problems with our radio > when driving around Phoenix. Nor with mine when driving in Tucson. > I have the same problem with my 2004. I really believe the radio is OK, its > the antenna. GM tried that "invisible" antenna in the windshield quite a > few years back and I never liked it either. Nice for looks, lousy for > reception. My grandfather has a 2003 Ford Crown Victoria with the antenna in the rear window as well. I don't know how well it works though. As for the GM experiment, my father had an '80 Chevy Malibu with the windshield antenna, but the radio was only AM. I don't remember if AM/FM radios from that period used the same antenna or a typical one. my girlfriends 04 Accord is the same way. You can put in another stereo system but you will have to leave the original. The stereo can be mounted in the armrest or glove compartment etc. I would take it to a custom install place and see what they say. >> I just purchased a new Accord EX and have noticed I get very poor FM >> reception. It doesn't want to hold a station at all. I get a lot of FM [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > dealership to see WTF is up with this. It's a $30K car that CAN'T have > a decent radio. Looks like I'll have to subscribe to XM radio. >Looks like I'll have to subscribe to XM radio. That would sure solve your problem. And you already have the radio. Yeah, it's pretty nice, no station drift at all and no commercials, and 100+ channels. $12.95/mo isn't bad, but I wonder if they are going to keep raising it year after year, probably. I wonder why the antenna picks up XM so good? Maybe because it's a much stronger signal coming from directly overhead, but then why don't I lose it in a tunnel?? Anyone know the electronics of it?? If you are in a tunnel for more than a few seconds and don't lose signal, it is because you're driving in an area served by a local repeater. The radios buffer a few seconds' content internally, and XM's two satellites send the same signal a few seconds apart. All this together gives you a reasonable chance of maintaining a signal when driving under an overpass for example. >>If you are in a tunnel for more than a few seconds and don't lose signal, it is because you're driving in an area served by a local repeater. The radios buffer a few seconds' content internally, and XM's two satellites send the same signal a few seconds apart. All this together gives you a reasonable chance of maintaining a signal when driving under an overpass for example. << Thanks for the explanation. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.