Bluetooth connection Freelander 2
Bewlay Brother
Rover themselves seem to know... worryingly.
I understand the concept of the hands-free bluetooth system in the vehicle
(mine is a 2010 model) and have been able to successfully pair my mobile
phone with the hands-free system - even to the degree that my phone's
contact list is viewable on the dashboard display - so far so good. The
bluetooth link can pick up a paired handset anywhere in the cab of vehicle -
this again is what you would expect with the bluetooth signal. What I want
to know is whether handset placement in the vehicle is important to received
network signal quality - i.e. window level (this is what we used to have to
do with handheld mobiles - the basic science as to why was obvious...) - OR
have Land Rover built into the vehicle roof/windows a cellular antenna of
some kind that the dashboard handsfree system utilises - even if only a
"passive" type antenna? In which case - handset in handbag (not my handbag)
in footwell versus handset tucked into dashboard cubby hole would make no
difference to received network signal strength...
(Fitted car phones in years gone by have necessitated some kind of physical
connection to a cable leading to a roof antenna - has the technology
improved in this area??)
John Williamson
do) an external aerial because there isn't one "in the box", and the box
is normally sited inside another totally enclosed metal box (such as the
boot) itself. The fitted bluetooth systems use a small aerial and a
milliwatt or less of power to connect with the bluetooth system on your
phone, which then handles the onwards connection (Up to a watt of
radiated power on a totally different frequency) to your mobile phone
provider, and this all works in more or less the same way as a bluetooth
earpiece.
I'm not sure about the Landrover answer, but I use a portable bluetooth
handsfree setup with a Nokia mobile in various vehicles, and I use the
same mobile as a modem for 3G internet connections, and I find that as
long as the phone's not buried in a glovebox or similar, the signal is
sufficient unless you're in a marginal area. Mostly, if it doesn't work
in my coat pocket on the seat, then it won't work anywhere inside the
vehicle. Signal strength, especially in urban areas, has improved
greatly in the last five years or so. If you're somewhere rural, it
makes more difference which network you are on than where you keep your
phone. Against this is the fact that some modern vehicles have an
(effectively radio wave proof) electrically heated windscreen, which is
why your satnav will sometimes need an external aerial.
--
Tciao for Now!
John.
Dave H
news:KNCdnTjg5vNO6CXR...@giganews.com...
Placement in the vehicle is important - to a degree - now a days, but so
long as the phone can 'see' outside it should be okay.
Bluetooth AFAIK doesn't have any form of amplification / relay / rebroadcast
of the cellular signal, you are quite correct that cellular technology has
come on leaps and bounds since the days of fitted car phones - how many
phones now a days have an antenna, look at the fuss caused by the iPhone 4
and holding it in your left hand !!
One major improvement is that the cellular networks have 'improved' their
coverage since the days of the Motorola 4500 & BT Ruby 2 - I had a external
antenna with 6dB of gain on a vehicle once in 1990 and there was some very
dodgy reception areas even on Motorways !! The antenna was bloomin massive
as well looked like at 2M / 70cm Amateur antenna as as for the transportable
suitcase - that looked like a Clansman set. I say 'improved' as Vodafone at
home is absolutely pooh, O2 on a certain Junction of the M61 is none
existent - but that's quite possibly down to network overload.
Nige
"Dave H" <1*0*0*9*8*8...@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:4cb98183$0$2532$da0f...@news.zen.co.uk...
T-mobile is unspeakable pigshit, everywhere.
Bewlay Brother
the only window to the mobile network in this configuration. Yes, coverage
has improved over the years as I was aware but the "fringe" coverage areas
would still be an issue with handheld versus fitted cellphones featuring
external antennae.
re the trend for internal antennae on handheld cellphones - I think it was a
bad concept and I wish some leading manufacturers would sacrifice some of
the "style" for proper "function" - if Apple have their heads screwed on
properly they ought to re-design the iPhone to feature an external hi-gain
antenna - even if it means it has to be retracted between phone call usage
to fulfil the needs of idiots who cannot appreciate the fact that it is a
RADIO telephone after all...
"Nige" <n...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:8htrti...@mid.individual.net...
John Williamson
> Thanks all for your responses.. as I suspected the handheld antenna is still
> the only window to the mobile network in this configuration. Yes, coverage
> has improved over the years as I was aware but the "fringe" coverage areas
> would still be an issue with handheld versus fitted cellphones featuring
> external antennae.
> re the trend for internal antennae on handheld cellphones - I think it was a
> bad concept and I wish some leading manufacturers would sacrifice some of
> the "style" for proper "function" - if Apple have their heads screwed on
> properly they ought to re-design the iPhone to feature an external hi-gain
> antenna - even if it means it has to be retracted between phone call usage
> to fulfil the needs of idiots who cannot appreciate the fact that it is a
> RADIO telephone after all...
>
>
were supposed to extend to make calls. It apparently made no difference
whatsoever, and further investigation revealed it to be just a plastic
rod, not connected to anything....
Then there were the adjustable external aerials on other phones which
just fell off with use. :-/
The iPhone aerial is just in the wrong place, and so is sometimes
surrounded by the user's hand when in use. The same aerial at the other
end of the phone would work perfectly well. Nokia, among others, seem to
have it cracked.
Mr Dave Baxter
Not as bad as Orange! Total crap.
Dave B.
puffernutter
...and those two networks have now merged!
Cheers
Peter
--
1985 110 CSW (Clumber Spaniel Wagon)
1989 Defender 90
1990 Defender 110 County (Reggie the Veggie)
1971 Triumph Stag (original engine) hopefully on the road next summer
(but I said that this year!)
1964 Rover P4 110 (no chance of getting on the road even in the medium
term!)
Train set at www.lmandwr.co.uk
Dogs at www.whissgig.co.uk
John Williamson
>> T-mobile is unspeakable pigshit, everywhere.
>
>
> Not as bad as Orange! Total crap.
>