PDA

View Full Version : Our verdict on the Ubiquiti XR3/XR3-3.7 cards


soulmata
05-12-2009, 01:49 PM
So, we have been using Ubiquiti's XR3 cards for nearly a year now. We began our first demos in the summer of last year, and today have collected an ample amount of data on the cards.

Sadly, I have to say, this is, in our opinion, one of the worst products Ubiquity has ever released.

Though we conformed precisely to Ubiquti's instructions in terms of hardware, mounting requirements, grounding requirements, power consumption, et cetera, the XR3s have been one of the most unreliable cards we have ever worked with.

We originally worked with the XR3s, then later bought a batch of XR3-3.7s when we were told the original XR3s no longer conformed to the FCC guidelines. At $250+ a pop, it wasn't an easy switch. With our first batch of XR3-3.7s, we have nothing but trouble. Though the performance was great, at first, every card invariably would lose SNR to the point of eventually going deaf or just outright fail. One card after another would die in the field, regardless of the situation.

We sent our XR3-3.7s back, and were told by Ubiquiti support that our cards were being "retooled" and we should give them a third chance.

We received our cards back and put them back into the field, alongside our existing 5.x deployments. As always, we properly DC ground the equipment every time. At the customer sites these were deployed too, we even had electricians come on site to inspect the work and approve it.

Once again, for several weeks, the cards worked fantastic. Good SNR, great throughput.

Then, once again, they started dropping like flies. They would lose SNR and eventually give up the ghost altogether.

We've now spent over $2500 buying these cards and have decided to cut our losses and look for another 3.65 solution.

Considering that we have thousands of other radios deployed, at least 500 of which are high-power Ubiquiti radios, I am fully confident that we followed Ubiquti's recommendations to the T. I also am disappointed that they could continue to profess how well this card works when we have yet to get a single 3.65 link to remain stable for any length of time beyond a few weeks. We are in the process of now of selecting another vendor for 3.65 equipment. We have made ample use of SR2s, SR5s, SR9s, XR2s, XR5s, XR9s and numerous other ubiquiti products. Above all, these cards have been the worst, which is sad - because usually we look to Ubiquiti to give us an edge where other hardware can't cut it.

If anyone else has their opinion to share on the XR3s, let me know. As I see it, they are terrible cards.

tog
05-12-2009, 02:45 PM
Thanks for the earnest report of your personal experiences.

cephlon
05-17-2009, 12:49 AM
Thanks for the info. We were just starting to look into 3ghz.

Are there any other solutions for using StarOS and 3ghz?

soulmata
05-21-2009, 02:16 PM
Sadly, no.

And all other options we've considered (Alvarion, Redline, et cetera) are absurdly expensive.

We are simply going to sit on our license and wait a year, hoping that UBNT has turned things around.

To their credit, they were more than willing to accept our radios in for trade for some other UBNT radios that we are fond of. It's for that reason that we will give the XR3s another chance, down the road, after they have had more time to mature the hardware. And their support team was more than willing to work with us throughout our trial period, and worked with us well in getting things shipped out. So I do give kudos to their support team.

mickeym
07-28-2009, 03:59 PM
Is there any more recent information about the newer XR3.7's?

Anyone else using these or have tried to use them?

Thanks

soulmata
07-31-2009, 11:13 AM
We used both generations of XR3s. Unless there is a third model of card I haven't heard about.

Mark
11-11-2009, 01:46 PM
My first batch, which I got shortly after they were available, were junk.

They sent me replacements, and those have been issue free.

They don't seem to perform fully up to snuff, in terms of sensitivity and power. Maybe the antennas are the problem, I dunno. Only one antenna to use, really.

rebuscom
11-11-2009, 07:55 PM
We had similar reliability issues with the SR2's when they first came out. We ran them in two different locations as APs. They would last about two months before going deaf (usually) or die altogether on one or two occasions. The deafness would sometimes come on gradually and sometimes suddenly. A passing thunderstorm would often do them in suddenly. To make a long story short, we replaced the Pac Wireless omni antennas with a pair of Hyperlinks at both locations and the problems disappeared.

davidd
11-13-2009, 06:13 AM
We had similar reliability issues with the SR2's when they first came out. We ran them in two different locations as APs. They would last about two months before going deaf (usually) or die altogether on one or two occasions. The deafness would sometimes come on gradually and sometimes suddenly. A passing thunderstorm would often do them in suddenly. To make a long story short, we replaced the Pac Wireless omni antennas with a pair of Hyperlinks at both locations and the problems disappeared.

Are you saying the only thing you changed was the antenna and the SR2's stopped going deaf?

David

rebel2234
11-13-2009, 07:21 AM
Are you saying the only thing you changed was the antenna and the SR2's stopped going deaf?

David

Omni's are horrible for making radios go def. We have lost a ton of radios because of omni's. Usually because they are the tallest thing on the tower (in my case anyway). We haven't had a card attached to a sectional go def yet! I think the reasoning is because sectionals are usuall attached to the tower on the side and not on the very top.

rebuscom
11-14-2009, 04:07 PM
Are you saying the only thing you changed was the antenna and the SR2's stopped going deaf?

David

That is correct. The position of the antennas did not change and the same LMR-400 was used. The Hyperlink omnis are more expensive and over an inch in diameter and gray, while the PacWireless omnis were about 1/2" diameter and white, but both are fiberglass and have the same rated gain. The PacWireless worked fine with the original Prism cards years ago, but as soon as we switched to the SR2's when they hit the market we couldn't keep the APs running reliably.

It was a shot in the dark to "upgrade" the omnis but once replaced we no longer had the repeated SR2 deafness.

Beebe
11-14-2009, 08:34 PM
What you want to look for on the omni is that it is "dc grounded". This will stop a lot of the cards going deaf. I had the same problems with CM9 cards until I switched to DC grounded antennas.

Thanks,
Roger

rebuscom
11-15-2009, 05:20 PM
What you want to look for on the omni is that it is "dc grounded". This will stop a lot of the cards going deaf.


The Hyperlink omnis are listed as "DC Shorted", whereas the PacWireless make no mention. The Hyperlink is also center fed vs bottom fed for more uniform wave propagation along the length. They cost about $40 more, but have performed better for us and actually provide about 3db more gain.

Scott

DrLove73
11-16-2009, 01:45 PM
My own network has only Hyperlink Omni's. I am totaly satisfied. Other omni's are not as good.