The box says "Simultaneous Dual Band--runs 2.4 and 5GHz bands concurrently" but it connects only at 2.4. How do I get it to connect at 5?
The WNR2000 doesn't connect to anything over wifi.
I'm guessing that you mean things do not connect to the router's wifi at 5 GHz.
You don't say which wifi clients you have. Some don't work at 5 GHz. That includes many IoT things.
Looking at the manual for all five routers in the WNR2000 range, I see no indication that any of them supports 5 GHz wifi. After all, it dates from 2014 based on a model launched in 2009. And the N300 wifi standard isn't 5 GHz.
Maybe that box was for a different device.
Just another user with a set of boilerplate macros.
Well, I suspect you are correct about its age and limits, but the unit labeling matches the box exactly--and the same box says, on one end panel, N300 Wireless Router (WNR2000v4) and on the other end panel, "Simultaneous Dual Band--runs 2.4 and 5GHz bands concurrently."
The router is connected to Spectrum's internet modem and to my Windows 10 PC.
Maybe I am mis-understanding "runs 24. and 5GHz band concurrently"???
The router is connected to Spectrum's internet modem and to my Windows 10 PC.
Over the years Spectrum will have provided many different modems to customers. That may include modem/routers.The important detail is the make and model number.
Well, I suspect you are correct about its age and limits, but the unit labeling matches the box exactly--and the same box says, on one end panel, N300 Wireless Router (WNR2000v4) and on the other end panel, "Simultaneous Dual Band--runs 2.4 and 5GHz bands concurrently."
You are right. The data sheet says "Simultaneous Dual Band—runs 2.4 and 5GHz bands concurrently". But the next bit says "IEEE 802.11 b/g/n 2.4 GHz". No mention of 5 GHz.
The manual doesn't even refer to 5 GHz.
Another spanner in the works is that the LAN connection is just 100BASE-Tx, so even if the router could handle 5 GHz wifi, you would not get that out of the internet.
Maybe I am mis-understanding "runs 24. and 5GHz band concurrently"???
I think not. It is just another case of bad proofreading of the documentation.
