View Full Version : Wireless range

2006-09-01, 11:18
Hi All,

I started a thread a couple of weeks ago about signal strenght.
My SB2 seemed to be much deafer that other wireless devices I have, and I could not use it at my bedside, 'cause it was more distant from my AP, with large wall in between and a marble staircase.

To add that, someone stated that SB3 had 30% less reception than SB2, so I felt on a dead end.

I decided to purchase two SB3s anyway, and I'm happy to say that my SB3 is much more sensitive than SB2, and it works fine placed in my bedroom.

To give some figures, I get 33% on my SB2 and 70% on my SB3.

I am planning to replace the SB2 antenna with a longer stud, but would like to know if the insides of SB2 hide any trimmer or is there any tinkering one can try to inprove wireless range.


Ross L
2006-09-01, 15:59
You could certainly try another antenna! I would think that a bigger antenna may not be that impressive, but if you used a directional antenna and pointed it right at your Access Point, you might see better signal strength.

You could always try a DIY antenna, might be a fun project. Or you could just buy one:


If you do go through such an exercise, please post your results, I'd love to know!

If you want to open the SB2 you'll need a T10 (torx) driver.

2006-09-08, 14:33
Hi Ross,

I just installed a simple USR antenna with 5db gain, and I get a sufficient improvement in the signal. In this moment is 62-68%, which is a noticeable improvement on the 36-41% I had before.

To add some confusion, I tried three 3Com APs I had in my office with the new SB3 just arrived. Two of them are the same model and fw revision, but one is much stronger than the other.

It seems not possible to draw conclusions about wireless range, everything seems so unpredictable...

Ross L
2006-09-08, 14:40

I must agree, in many circumstances wireless networks can be very difficult, at times even illogical.

Thanks for chiming in with your results. You may also find this recent thread interesting:


2006-09-08, 14:43
gian wrote:
> It seems not possible to draw conclusions about wireless range,
> everything seems so unpredictable...

Actually, the 'unpredictable' results are expected.
WiFi runs on the 2.4 gHz band, which was allocated for Microwave Ovens,
in part because no radio designers wanted to use 2.4 gHz.

Prior to microwave ovens, designers stayed away because the 2.4 gHz
radio signals interacted strongly with the water molecules in air,
plants, people, etc. The RadarRange designers picked it because the
purpose of a microwave oven is to excite the water molecules.

So when the RadarRange folks wanted that band, the communications
engineers said "take it, I don't want it"

So it is unregulated world wide, since water molecules are the same size
all over the planet, and maybe galaxy.

Now, we have WiFi, bluetooth, ZigBee and other radios all trying to play
in the same space. And if you move a big house plant around,
or a big roomate, the reception is impacted.