BYOMesh – New LoRa mesh radio offers 100x the bandwidth
A new LoRa-based mesh radio called BYOMesh claims up to 100× the bandwidth of popular projects like Meshtastic and MeshCore by using 2.4 GHz LoRa and very wide channels, trading much shorter range for higher throughput (e.g. sending photos). Commenters weigh whether this is actually useful given LoRa’s traditional appeal for long-range, low-bit-rate links, heavy congestion and attenuation in the 2.4 GHz band, and strict spectrum regulations that limit legal duty cycles and power. Many see current hobbyist mesh systems as fragile “toys” compared with alternatives such as Wi‑Fi HaLow, DECT‑NR+, ESP‑NOW, or satellite links, and some question the value and hardware choices of this particular design.
Performance & “100x bandwidth” claim
- Claim is that 2.4 GHz LoRa configurations with very wide bandwidth (800 kHz–1.6 MHz) provide ~100× throughput vs typical Meshtastic/MeshCore settings on sub‑GHz.
- Several comments question what baseline the “100×” is measured against and ask for clearer substantiation.
- Higher throughput is acknowledged to come at the cost of much shorter range and higher susceptibility to interference.
Frequency, Range & Propagation
- Multiple posts stress that LoRa’s appeal is long range at low data rates, best at 868/915 MHz or lower (e.g., 433 MHz).
- 2.4 GHz suffers higher free-space path loss, worse penetration through buildings/foliage, and more pollution from Wi‑Fi/Bluetooth/microwaves.
- Some note impressive long-range LoRa records, but others emphasize these are extreme setups; typical users won’t see that performance.
Use Cases & Practicality
- Suggested uses: mesh chat, environmental/structural sensors, remote mountaineering/weather, emergency comms, campus/industrial sensor backhaul, experimental “LoRaLAN” in buildings.
- Several argue mesh radio is mostly a hobbyist/toy technology; for “real work” the internet and satellite systems are preferred.
- For low-power, intermittent data (e.g., tiny payloads every few minutes), many feel sub‑GHz LoRa already suffices; extra bandwidth is of limited practical value.
Mesh Protocols & Software Quality
- Meshtastic and MeshCore are criticized as buggy and architecturally weak, especially at scale; routing and broadcasting behavior called “a mess.”
- Reticulum/OpenMANET are cited as more “professional,” but commenters agree large-scale mesh is intrinsically hard.
Regulatory & Legal Concerns
- Discussion of FCC Part 15 rules: bandwidth, spectral power density, duty cycles/dwell time.
- Some current meshes allegedly violate regulations (e.g., too‑narrow channels, overuse of spectrum), though North America and EU differ on duty-cycle limits.
- Debate over “unenforceable” rules vs real enforcement, including anecdotes about interference complaints.
Alternative Technologies
- Wi‑Fi HaLow, ESP‑NOW, DECT NR+, Unifi AirFiber, and various newer LoRa chips (LR1121/LR2021) are mentioned as competing or superior options depending on range, cost, and bandwidth needs.
Hardware, Cost & Skepticism
- Critiques target use of older SX1281/SX1276 chips and ~$50 price versus cheaper, newer multi‑band modules.
- Some suspect the project and marketing may be AI‑generated or overhyped, calling it incremental (“two chips on a board”) rather than revolutionary.