GOL Results 9500i vs. V1 on Ka band

[ES13Raven]

So taking the averages, the V1 beat the 9500i on every Ka band but not by much:

35.5 = 87% of the distance
34.7 = 95% of the distance
33.8 = 99% of the distance

With 127 feet being the most distance. If you were travelling 55 mph, you would pass 127 feet in just over 1 second.

So basically the 9500i and V1 alerted at the same time, and about 1 second later on 35.5.

Also interesting that the 9500i was king of the "Forward Facing" test, beating the V1 - which only got 83% of the distance of the 9500i.

[nascar]

If they can tweak performance for X and K as well as fix the TrueLock issues, the 9500i will be a stellar unit.

[happya$$]

So taking the averages, the V1 beat the 9500i on every Ka band but not by much:

35.5 = 87% of the distance
34.7 = 95% of the distance
33.8 = 99% of the distance

With 127 feet being the most distance. If you were travelling 55 mph, you would pass 127 feet in just over 1 second.

So basically the 9500i and V1 alerted at the same time, and about 1 second later on 35.5.

Also interesting that the 9500i was king of the "Forward Facing" test, beating the V1 - which only got 83% of the distance of the 9500i.


"So remember: small 50-foot differences between detectors tested on our "extreme" course might easily equate to hundreds or even thousands of feet on a much longer, flatter course. "

[KnightHawk]

So taking the averages, the V1 beat the 9500i on every Ka band but not by much:

35.5 = 87% of the distance
34.7 = 95% of the distance
33.8 = 99% of the distance

With 127 feet being the most distance. If you were travelling 55 mph, you would pass 127 feet in just over 1 second.

So basically the 9500i and V1 alerted at the same time, and about 1 second later on 35.5.

Also interesting that the 9500i was king of the "Forward Facing" test, beating the V1 - which only got 83% of the distance of the 9500i.


"So remember: small 50-foot differences between detectors tested on our "extreme" course might easily equate to hundreds or even thousands of feet on a much longer, flatter course. "

Not with my video on 35.5. Happy, where the radar units tested passed the tuning fork test? Looks like the picture in the currency passed the hudsome guy test from GOL. :lol: :lol: :lol: But just second only to the sig picture though.. :wink:

[ES13Raven]

"So remember: small 50-foot differences between detectors tested on our "extreme" course might easily equate to hundreds or even thousands of feet on a much longer, flatter course. "
I wish you guys could have done that... but with the 9500i winning the Forward Facing tests on 35.5, I am not so sure about the quote. :wink:

[RacerX]

actually jim had a very good explanation of why a detector (brand) may do better on one type of test as opposed to another. it has to do with design, but i'll butcher the explanation, so hopefully jim will chime in.

the only answer i have is that it has to do with "side lobes".

[statusquo]

"So remember: small 50-foot differences between detectors tested on our "extreme" course might easily equate to hundreds or even thousands of feet on a much longer, flatter course. "
I wish you guys could have done that... but with the 9500i winning the Forward Facing tests on 35.5, I am not so sure about the quote. :wink:
Average in the poor score of the forward facing test and the lead may reverse.

I still don't know why the V1 did so poorly on the forward facing test since it's the only one with a rear antenna. Something is odd here.

The V1's X-band was stellar, but around here X-band is only used by the beer market's door openers. Maybe a good reason to get a V1-- if for nothing more than to find a beer! :D

[jimbonzzz]

I still don't know why the V1 did so poorly on the forward facing test since it's the only one with a rear antenna. Something is odd here.

The rear antenna had NO bearing on this test, since the radar source was ahead of the vehicle, but facing in the same direction of the vehicle travel (and angled)...

[<<JAZZY>>]

It's too bad you didn't do a rear radar detection test so that we could see the difference between the true rear radar detection of the V1 and reflected forward facing radar detection from the rear of all other brands.

[RacerX]

well there was a reason why we didn't get to do some of the tests we wanted, which will be detailed soon.

[ES13Raven]

well there was a reason why we didn't get to do some of the tests we wanted, which will be detailed soon.
Mysterious Ka band....

[KnightHawk]

Here's the video taken during out test with the golden eagle that passed the tunign fork test. Test was conducted with 3 individual runs with each detector - 9500i , X50 rev 5 and V1. The 9500i was clearly the winner here where alert was detected 0.4 mile and the X50 and v1 were neck to neck at 0.3 mile. To verify that the 9500i was superior during this test, we stopped where the first alert was detected and switched radars to see if the V1 was picking up what the 9500i was picking up. We also wanted to know how both will give you a consistent alert thereby eliminating refelcted signals.

Video= http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1425657934141764712

Picture over the hill.

http://new.photos.yahoo.com/cpproducts2000/photo/294928804297544339/0

[nascar]

I have to think someone was trying to mess with GOL and didn't want their detector showing its true colors.

[KnightHawk]

I have to think someone was trying to mess with GOL and didn't want their detector showing its true colors.

I'm not trying to mess up GOL's test. I'm just proving it to others that this happened. Just look at the video closely.

[thestaton]

I was very impressed with the 9500i. Had the tech's not repeatedly lied to me, and others on this forum I would of kept the unit.

However, its still to buggy with the true lock.

As per the results I was impressed and was a huge fan boy all during the testing, constantly ripping on happya$$ because he still had the zombie in him. I'd certainly recommend it after they get the bugs worked out.

[statusquo]

Are you sure there wasn't some Ka drone out there?

I've seen the things on poles in No. CA as well as photos of them on school buses, road work signs, patrol cars.

With all the detectors, you could have had a treasure hunt.

[nascar]

I have to think someone was trying to mess with GOL and didn't want their detector showing its true colors.

I'm not trying to mess up GOL's test. I'm just proving it to others that this happened. Just look at the video closely.

Noooooooo.... I meant in AZ as they were doing the tests.... not you Azonehits.

[KnightHawk]

I have to think someone was trying to mess with GOL and didn't want their detector showing its true colors.

I'm not trying to mess up GOL's test. I'm just proving it to others that this happened. Just look at the video closely.

Noooooooo.... I meant in AZ as they were doing the tests.... not you Azonehits.
:) Sorry for the misunderstanding.

[jimbonzzz]

actually jim had a very good explanation of why a detector (brand) may do better on one type of test as opposed to another. it has to do with design, but i'll butcher the explanation, so hopefully jim will chime in.

the only answer i have is that it has to do with "side lobes".

Antennas have "side lobes" (or sidewinder lobes as happya$$ likes to call them :lol: ) which are potions of the antenna sensitivity pattern which are outside of the main beam.

http://img404.imageshack.us/img404/9021/sidelobesenae6.jpg

The spaces between the sidelobes are "nulls".

( If you want to know a bit more check out wikipedia's page here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Side_lobe )

In general, sidelobes are considered undesirable. In applications like police radar, there are standards that have to be met for sidelobe suppression, in order to prevent erroneous radar readings such as clocking a different target off to the side.

In radar detectors, sidelobes probably don't pose much of a problem. Although in all radar detectors the frontal lobe is the main sensitivity lobe, different antenna designs will have different "plots" as far as sidelobes are concerned, so the orientation and magnitude of the lobes will be different. Therefore, in situations where the radar is angled, reflecting, etc, the results can vary quite a bit depending on the specific situation.

While radar might be reflected at an angle directly into the sidelobe of one detector (yielding good detection), it might be reflected into the null of another detector depending on the angle (yielding worse detection). And at a different angle, things might go the other way....

Jim

[RacerX]

Thanks, i knew you'd be able to explain it better. :D

so this would explain why some brands maybe perform better on straightaways, and others slightly better around curves, etc..


so regardless of "who came in first" on certain tests, i think it's important for people to look at all the tests (past and present) and numbers, then apply that to you're area, and guns you go against to choose the "best" detector for you.


at least one thing i think even the fanboys for a certain brand can agree on, is that no detector brand has clearly dominated another brand on every test every time.

it's all what works for you and your area. :D

[ES13Raven]

So would the Belscorts be better at detecting "off axis" radar and the V1 better at detecting distance?

[KnightHawk]

So would the Belscorts be better at detecting "off axis" radar and the V1 better at detecting distance?

I know others don't like craig peterson. But in his current testing with the STi and V1, the STi came out on top as far as distance goes. I do have to give craig peterson a benefit of the doubt since no one has tested this distance and refuted his claims. Any thoughts?

[ES13Raven]

I know others don't like craig peterson. But in his current testing with the STi and V1, the STi came out on top as far as distance goes. I do have to give craig peterson a benefit of the doubt since no one has tested this distance and refuted his claims. Any thoughts?
Well, the STi clearly won on 34.7 and did decent on 35.5...

When it didn't suck on 33.8 - it had 2 of the longest distances at 1250 and 1230.

[crazyVOLVOrob]

I know others don't like craig peterson. But in his current testing with the STi and V1, the STi came out on top as far as distance goes. I do have to give craig peterson a benefit of the doubt since no one has tested this distance and refuted his claims. Any thoughts?
Well, the STi clearly won on 34.7 and did decent on 35.5...

When it didn't suck on 33.8 - it had 2 of the longest distances at 1250 and 1230.

CP's numbers were very fudged and sadly the STi is hit or miss on the 33.8 Ka sometime it detects it greats sometimes it forgets about it. Look at the videos section for he proof...

CP exsaggerated that results of the STi which isn't surprising at all.

The V1 is worst on forward facing radar for better arrow accuracy

[KnightHawk]

CP exsaggerated that results of the STi which isn't surprising at all.



How can you or i really tell or say that he exagerated the STi's performance when nobody did the test he did and no comparison has been ever made to date other than the short distance test? To me this still hangs in the balance. No comparison = no conclusions.

So far though, the 9500i shows good to excellent range overall. As i have indicated in the past that it had better performance with forward facing radar vs the V1 and also very good at 90 degree angle pickup.

[happya$$]

CP exsaggerated that results of the STi which isn't surprising at all.



How can you or i really tell or say that he exagerated the STi's performance when nobody did the test he did and no comparison has been ever made to date other than the short distance test? To me this still hangs in the balance. No comparison = no conclusions.

So far though, the 9500i shows good to excellent range overall. As i have indicated in the past that it had better performance with forward facing radar vs the V1 and also very good at 90 degree angle pickup.

The truth is out there. It will shock you

[ES13Raven]

The truth is out there. It will shock you

http://imagecache2.allposters.com/images/pic/PS/7655~Shocker-Posters.jpg

[microbb]

In the forward facing test what was relied on as reflective surfaces. In a typical highway trap setup you would much rather have a big box truck pass through the trap ahead of you than a Neon. Or better yet if there are any large traffic signs downrange of the trap.

microbb

[thestaton]

In the forward facing test what was relied on as reflective surfaces. In a typical highway trap setup you would much rather have a big box truck pass through the trap ahead of you than a Neon. Or better yet if there are any large traffic signs downrange of the trap.

microbb

the numbers from the GoL results are very close to the results I've encountered with forward facing radar. DE uses 34.7 and I never get any more than 500FT of alert time. its so deadly.