Surecom SW 33Plus SWR Meter 

I've seen others do that, too. Thanks for watching and commenting.

Awesome. Thanks for commenting.

If your base stations are 2m and 70 cm, then it should work fine. You'll likely need an adapter for your coax, though. Cheers.

@@GadgetTalk4U thanks

Couple things, many small radios have bad SWR on stock rubber duck antennas. I'd use it anyway, for now. Next, find a friend with an SWR meter and compare the two. Even asking on a repeater or when you hear someone might uncover someone who would help you. Last, get a different style SWR meter and compare the two. If you got them on Amazon, return one or the other. Cheers.

Just connect your antenna. Dummies are good when doing a lot of testing on busy frequencies. Just remember to ID when transmitting as required by whatever service you're using. Cheers.

@@GadgetTalk4U Thanks for the info!

I changed it to use the least power required. As this device says it is best to use at least 3 watts, I could have left it on high.

I'm not sure about the differences as I don't have the SW-33. Try comparing the specs on their respective sales pages. As for your high VSWR try using the dummy load. Mine says it has a 20Watt peak limit. That probably means less than 1 - 2 seconds before damaging the unit. Set your radio to a lower power setting. With the dummy load attached and no antenna you should get a zero reflected power amount so a VSWR of close to 1.0. The power reading should be what the radio's outputting. I've found that's usually less than what's advertised. If you get a high VSWR with the dummy load you know there's something wrong with the device. If the VSWR is low with the dummy load then something is reflecting power back to the radio in the antenna system. I did a video on the channel on HT antenna comparisons you might find helpful.

@@GadgetTalk4U Good comments all! I have a 50W dummy load that tends to be a bit heavy for such small meter and it gives me a 1.00 reading. Your meter has a very small readout, but at least it can be seen on camera. I have an SW-102 meter, but I don't know whether to get an SW-33+ or keep the SW-33. I'd like a small pocket meter; just don't know which way to go. Did you consider the standard SW-33 when you bought the 33+? Also, have you noticed a significant difference in SWR when you cup the meter? (One reviewer complained that when he cupped the meter, the SWR went down and that when he released it, it went up. But that's exactly what the manual, such as it is, said to do.) If you needed to trim an antenna, would you fell comfortable using the SW-33Plus? Or would you want something more a bit more extensive?

@@johnroberts6695 If I were tuning a base station antenna, I think I'd use a more expensive meter. I have a MFJ 874 that covers that range as well as a NanoVNA that does VSWR readings. Sad to say, I haven't compared them.

The + has a back lit display, shows forward watt power and reverse reflection. It also has a SW readout The Mark II (your device) has a digital readout, forward watt power and a SW readout. The difference between the two is the display and the + shows reverse reflection.

YES, the manual suggests you cup the meter in your hand to get an accurate SWR reading. If you only want a power reading, you don't need to do this, however. By cupping the radio in your other hand, it will act as a ground plane. Thus your readings will be more accurate.

@@johnroberts6695 Hi. Yes, I bought one. I wanted an SWR meter so that I wouldn't have to deal with problems with the antennas and connections and know which ones are convenient and which ones aren't, and the manual indicates this. By the way, it seems accurate for how portable it is, right? Regards.

@@Hexagramaton » Well, that's the big question, but during the last day or so I’ve learned precious little about them. I suspect the SWR is far more accurate with mobile or station radios, as there's so much RF energy bouncing around that the SWR seems unusually high for all HTs. I have a SW-102 with a ground plane plate and I was expecting BIG differences in readings, but it didn't happen. I suspect the reason Surecom stopped including them was because they just weren't making a huge difference. Perhaps if I put six- to ten-inches of cable between the antenna and the meter it might change things, but I still have to find TYT's damn proprietary cable for the TH-8600. I can't find one anywhere, so I can't test my theory.

@@johnroberts6695 I understand. I have found that SWR measurement on portable transceivers is very poor. There is no system or norm that measures the radiation of a wave fraction in a mobile system without anchor and without proper mass. I mean that in the walkie the establishment of the transmission should always be with a ground plane and it is never observed or can be observed, unlike the anchored and mounted emissions with installation. The antennas of the walkie talkies are terrible, and this device at least serves to see if the antenna, although it does not have all the precision that I would like, resonates more or less decently. All the best.

I've not run comparisons against any validated or certified meters. As with most consumer grade kit, I assume it is in the ball park. No more, no less.