Log In | Register
Skip to main content
Topic: Replacing the Sony CDX-300 radio with a Sony MEX-BT2500 (Read 5 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Replacing the Sony CDX-300 radio with a Sony MEX-BT2500
Yahoo Message Number: 86937
Some will call this a "downgrade", others will call it an enhancement.

I recently saw the new Sony XPLOD MEX-BT2500 radio on sale at Fry's Electronics for a great price:  $99.  It is a pin for pin replacement for the CDX-GT300 installed in all recent Lazy Daze.

The up side?

1) Safety  
2) The Sony MEX-BT2500 is a Bluetooth radio.  It means, for me, that  I can pair my bluetooth cellphone with the radio, stick the phone up  in the overhead escape hatch dome and all incoming calls will ring on  my rig's stereo speakers.  One short button push and I'm hands free  talking to the caller using the mike that's also built in to the  BT2500.  One longer (2 second) push and I can "reject" the caller.
 The radio itself is automatically muted and the phone audio replaces  it.

The down sides?  
1) I must initiate any OUTGOING call using the cell phone, but should  the call not go through I can then re-dial using the radio.  A small  price.

2) I cannot direct connect a Sony XM/Sirius radio to the 2500 and  control it with the radio like I can with the GT300  
3) I cannot direct connect and control a Genuine Apple Ipod like I
 can with the GT300.

Hey, it was ninety nine bucks and if I really thought I'd use the features, the higher priced $250-$400 BT series covers it.  I can add an external XM/Sirius module and/or a clone type IPOD using the external input jack on the front.  It just means I need to tune the XM radio and control the music player locally.
 The point?  Used GT300's can be had for about $67 on Ebay.  I intend to sell my old unit there (unless someone here needs a spare).
Result?  A valuable hands free cell phone feature in my LD for under $40 bucks and about 30 minutes of time, mostly spent removing the old radio and cursing the guy who gobbed all the silicon in there.

WARNING.  Lazy Daze uses generous amounts of silicon(?) adhesive on the slide Ford provides for it's radio and again on some of the clips that hold the plastic trim strip in. Removing it takes patience and wiggling the radio side to side until the adhesive breaks away. Then it slides right out.  Remove the Ford slide "runner" off the rear of your radio, transfer it to the new one and after cleaning the innards and transferring the two plugs (power/speaker harness and antenna).
The trim strip just above the radio just pops out so you definitely have a better view.  I did not remove the doghouse or any other panels.
Re: Replacing the Sony CDX-300 radio with a Sony MEX-BT2500
Reply #1 –
Yahoo Message Number: 86953
Don,
 Do you know if the GT300 is plug-compatible with the radios installed by LD in 2001?  (I'll try to see what model radio we have the next time I go out to the storage shed.)
 I see from a picture on Amazon that it has an Auxiliary input on the front panel.  Does it have one on the rear as well?  (For an XM radio)

How much are you asking for the GT300 with shipping to Texas?

Barry 2001 Red RB, TX Where are we?  http://map.datastormusers.com/user1.cfm?user=122
Re: Replacing the Sony CDX-300 radio with a Sony MEX-BT2500
Reply #2 –
Yahoo Message Number: 86964
The GT300 is pretty full featured, Barry.  It has inputs front and rear, and a control bus for external changers etc.  You can go to Sony and download/view the manual as well.  I actually wonder if it's a good match for the LD, since it's installed using all that liquid adhesive and not at all easy to access for adding accessories.  If I were to recommend a "new" unit for future LD's I'd probably go with the MEX- BT5000 which also makes outgoing calls and can conta
Re: Replacing the Sony CDX-300 radio with a Sony MEX-BT2500
Reply #3 –
Yahoo Message Number: 86970
Don,
 Thanks for the quick and informative reply.  I'll watch your radio on Ebay.
 Personally, I prefer to avoid the 'Swiss Army Knife' syndrome.  I prefer to have several simple devices that do one job than to have one device with a number of functions.

Barry 2001 Red RB, TX Where are we?  http://map.datastormusers.com/user1.cfm?user=122
Re: cell phones
Reply #4 –
Yahoo Message Number: 86980
"I am a firm believer in hands free cell phone use..."

Just a note of caution: studies that have compared handheld vs. hands-free cell phone use while driving have all reached the same conclusion: both are equally dangerous. The various laws forbidding handheld use while permitting hands-free use are based on myth, not fact.

Most researchers agree that using a phone while driving is about as dangerous as driving while drunk: whether you're using a hands-free phone or a handheld, the likelihood of a crash is four times greater.

In short, don't think that because hands-free use while driving is legal in your state, it's safe. A mounting body of evidence says that it isn't. For more information, see:

Quote
http://tinyurl.com/2lhmwf>

http://tinyurl.com/3b2odo>

Andy Baird http://www.andybaird.com/travels/
Andy Baird
2021 Ford Ranger towing 2019 Airstream 19CB
Previously: 1985 LD Twin/King "Gertie"; 2003 LD Midbath "Skylark"
Re: cell phones
Reply #5 –
Yahoo Message Number: 86982
Quote
Most researchers agree that using a phone while driving is about as dangerous as driving while drunk: whether you're using a hands-free phone or a handheld, the likelihood of a crash is four times
greater.

 Unfortunately, if one reads carefully, the study in Australia doesn't  state unequivocally that hands "free" leads to an automatic 4X increased risk like it does for hand held cell phones.  I can easily believe a 4X increase if the cell phone is in hand, just from personal observations here in SoCal. Not so with hands free.
 I can't personally accept an equally dangerous situation if the phone is totally hands free - both incoming and outgoing, though I can accept a risk equal to talking to your navigator or (especially) controlling kids in the back seat of a vehicle, and far less than risks presented by eating, drinking hot coffee, or putting on makeup/shaving while driving. All of which I've also observed and yes, the worse I've seen was not putting on makeup, it was dialing a cell phone followed by driving one handed through complex intersections with a cell phone held to the ear.
 As you said, Andy, the jury is still out. As much as I hate "studies" because few are totally unbiased, maybe we need to address all driver distraction activities and rank them by their proven level of danger.
 Fortunately, most of my RV driving is with "Navigator" and she's the big cell phone user....

Don
Re: cell phones
Reply #6 –
Yahoo Message Number: 86999
Quote
  Most researchers agree that using a phone while driving is about as dangerous as driving while drunk: whether you're using a hands-free phone or a handheld, the likelihood of a crash is four times greater.
No, I'm not trying to pick on you Andy, or pick a fight, just relating more personal observations that keep me from accepting that "hands free cell phone safety is a myth" and is on equal par with hand held cell phones.
 The news is always full of stories regarding the cell phone's impact on drivers and accidents. If one carefully checks the data, it's most prevalent in the "young inexperienced driver" category and this too I believe.
 If the last LD "Caravan gathering" I attended is any indicator, young (as defined as under 50) is NOT your average LD owner!  In fact, folks in their 40's were a distinct minority at that gathering.  So by our collective ages alone and the proven low rate of LD accidents on the highways, we have all survived the dumb decisions of youth and IMHO can continue to handle responsible cell phone usage without governmental interference or over exaggerated warnings.

Personally, I've been a radio amateur for over half a century, with rigs in my vehicles, merrily making contacts all over the world while traveling down the highways.  Also dabbled with CB and all without accident or even a "close shave."
 If you think hands free cell phone usage is a distraction, check out any modern police car with laptops, multi-channel radios and yes, hand held cell phones all going at once.  A long way since the old three channel Motorolas of the '50's. The guys (and gals) behind the wheel are darn good multitaskers. Some even make good Fajitas!

Driving in this electronic gadget age is nothing more than multitasking on a vehicular level. The answer isn't regulating because that's pretty much unenforceable.  The answer is learning responsible multitasking behind the wheel. We will always have jerks.
It's called "thinning the herd", hopefully without damaging the good guys in the process. We'll always have young invincible teenage drivers learning how to safely drive the hard way and many will lose their lives before learning.  As for drinking and driving, I don't even want to go there.

Sweeping statements have always fired me up, Andy.  Mostly because the second greatest lie after a bald face lie is, IMHO, "statistics." There are two sides to every issue as well as exceptions, and statistics have to be carefully qualified before applying a result to the entire population.

In my case I will continue to use a hands free cell phone. I'm too damn old to fight with my girl friends on the phone and besides, my spouse is usually less than 3 ft. away.  I don't make many outgoing calls and at my age, incoming calls increasingly involve hospitals, deaths, family and other emergencies, not business, sports, or whatever those jerks constantly fill the airwaves with. Besides, those new phones are too darn small to operate without bifocals, so on the rare occasion I need to make an outgoing call either spouse pushes the right buttons or I pull over.

Have a great time on the road.  I do.

Don
Re: cell phones
Reply #7 –
Yahoo Message Number: 87003
Don said

Quote
Driving in this electronic gadget age is nothing more than multitasking on a vehicular level. The answer isn't regulating because that's pretty much unenforceable. The answer is learning responsible multitasking behind the wheel.
By profession I am a Traffic Engineer.  I am one of those guys who work with statistics of all kinds and prepare designs to make the roads safer.  I use a hands-free cell phone.
 I think Don is right, as are the others who say there is an increased risk.
 Multitasking while driving increases your risk.  If you are having a conversation with a passenger and you divert your attention from the road, that is dangerous.  If you reach over and re-tune your ham radio while driving, that is dangerous.  If you insert or remove a CD or cassette in the stereo while driving that is dangerous.  They are dangerous because they divert driver attention from the driving task.
 Responsible multitasking is possible.  You wait for a break in traffic before inserting the CD, tuning the radio or dialing your cell phone.
With good visibility you may be able to safely do so while moving; that is a judgment call that depends on the task, the visibility, the speeds, traffic density, etc..
 I DO NOT ADVOCATE MULTITASKING, but I think we all do it.  We listen to the radio.  We have a conversation with a passenger.  We drink a cup of coffee.  The trick in safely multitasking is to remember at all times what task is your top priority, and be ready at a moment's notice to return full attention to that task.  I can't tell you how many times I have been talking hands-free and have had to ask the other person to repeat something, because I took my attention away from the call to concentrate on a situation evolving on the roadway near me.  If you cannot retain that primary task focus while multitasking, you should not multitask while driving.  That means no GPS, no radio, no conversations, etc.  Each of us must decide for ourselves just how much risk we are creating if we allow any of those events to detract our attention from the road.
 Sorry if I sound "preachy" - I really just wanted to share my thoughts.
Ken
'08 MB
Re: cell phones
Reply #8 –
Yahoo Message Number: 87005
"As you said, Andy, the jury is still out."

Actually, Don, I said the opposite: the evidence is strong.

Andy Baird http://www.andybaird.com/travels/
Andy Baird
2021 Ford Ranger towing 2019 Airstream 19CB
Previously: 1985 LD Twin/King "Gertie"; 2003 LD Midbath "Skylark"
 
Re: cell phones
Reply #9 –
Yahoo Message Number: 87007
Quote
Driving in this electronic gadget age is nothing more than multitasking on a vehicular level. The answer isn't regulating because that's pretty much unenforceable.  The answer is learning responsible multitasking behind the wheel. We will always have
Don, there are always exceptions who may be able to perform dangerous tasks without undue risk to themselves or others, and I also suspect that this would apply to folks that drive while drunk, stoned or otherwise drug-affected, etc. Yet, when specifically looking at phone use enroute, I can pick out the users with amazing success just by observing the vehicle behavior. Just because I might fail at that in your case is no argument against making appropriate laws protecting us from the majority who cannot drive safely while so distracted.

Yet I DO use my cell phone while driving my car, on rare occasions, mostly answering a call to inform the caller I will get back to them shortly. And, when the new CA law prohibiting my handheld goes into effect, I will use our GPS with bluetooth to do the same. It is silly to think the act of holding a phone is any more distracting than hands-free talking, so it is a stupid law that ignores statistics. It would make much more logical sense to outlaw all phone, CB, ham, and other communication by any driver on the road, and I believe accident statistics would show considerable improvement if this were done.
Sometimes individual inconvenience for you or others with enough experience to multitask while driving is worth it to protect us from those who can't. Unfortunately, you are probably right - as a preventative, it is unenforceable. However, a stiffer punishment for those involved in accidents due to illegal activity may accomplish the purpose of the law.

Steve
2004 FL
2013 Honda Fit