Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 26
  1. #11
    Professional
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Maine
    Posts
    1,192

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Buford T. Justice
    Besides the field test, can you show me 1 post where an STi user is having issues with 33.8?
    No they can't.

  2. #12
    Founder of Stealthvation
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Cleveland, Ohio
    Posts
    11,174

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Buford T. Justice
    Besides the field test, can you show me 1 post where an STi user is having issues with 33.8?
    Like I said if the cop picks a location where he attenuates the signal then you would see more posts. It is no fluke that our tests have shown problems on 33.8gh. Is our setup common meaning that a cop would setup that way? Probably not. Trust me the problem does exist. We have tested about 5 different units and have got same results. Coincidence? Not. Do not let your fan blood blind you
    RIP Duncan my BELOVED black lab son 8/7/99-3/23/11. I will miss you DEARLY.


    http://www.criminalcustomzshop.com/


    LET THE BIRTH OF MANY TESTING GROUPS HAPPEN!











    You want to know what it is like doing something for the love and passion and not for the mighty dollar then look up GOL!










    buyradardetectors rocks!

  3. #13
    Advanced Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    7,509

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by aaseavey
    Quote Originally Posted by Buford T. Justice
    Besides the field test, can you show me 1 post where an STi user is having issues with 33.8?
    No they can't.
    I can:
    http://www.radardetector.net/viewtopic.php?t=22065

    And just because the STi gives you a long range warning to constant-on 33.8 doesn't mean that the issue isn't there. The issue only rears it's head in extreme situations where a more sensitive detector really does make a difference. See my posts in this thread here:

    http://www.radardetector.net/viewtopic.php?t=26517

    If you're happy with the performance of your detector, that is all that matters. But I can assure you that the 33.8 issue is real.

  4. #14
    Founder of Stealthvation
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Cleveland, Ohio
    Posts
    11,174

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jimbonzzz
    Quote Originally Posted by aaseavey
    Quote Originally Posted by Buford T. Justice
    Besides the field test, can you show me 1 post where an STi user is having issues with 33.8?
    No they can't.
    I can:
    http://www.radardetector.net/viewtopic.php?t=22065

    And just because the STi gives you a long range warning to constant-on 33.8 doesn't mean that the issue isn't there. The issue only rears it's head in extreme situations where a more sensitive detector really does make a difference. See my posts in this thread here:

    http://www.radardetector.net/viewtopic.php?t=26517

    If you're happy with the performance of your detector, that is all that matters. But I can assure you that the 33.8 issue is real.
    Thank you. Some people are in denial. Look at V1's J out bug. Does everyone encounter this? No. Does it mean that it does not exist because everyone has not encountered it? No. For crying out loud Mike B. has reproduced this in his lab and GOL has reproduced this in the real world WITH VIDEO! What else do you want? It exists and it is for real. The question should be how likely is it that someone will encounter this in the real world? Honestly not very likely
    RIP Duncan my BELOVED black lab son 8/7/99-3/23/11. I will miss you DEARLY.


    http://www.criminalcustomzshop.com/


    LET THE BIRTH OF MANY TESTING GROUPS HAPPEN!











    You want to know what it is like doing something for the love and passion and not for the mighty dollar then look up GOL!










    buyradardetectors rocks!

  5. #15
    Yoda of Radar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    In front of my computer
    Posts
    10,773

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by happya$$
    Thank you. Some people are in denial. Look at V1's J out bug. Does everyone encounter this? No. Does it mean that it does not exist because everyone has not encountered it? No. For crying out loud Mike B. has reproduced this in his lab and GOL has reproduced this in the real world WITH VIDEO! What else do you want? It exists and it is for real. The question should be how likely is it that someone will encounter this in the real world? Honestly not very likely
    New York State rural Interstates.

  6. #16
    Lead Foot
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    I'm Stealth
    Posts
    350

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jimbonzzz
    Quote Originally Posted by aaseavey
    Quote Originally Posted by Buford T. Justice
    Besides the field test, can you show me 1 post where an STi user is having issues with 33.8?
    No they can't.
    I can:
    http://www.radardetector.net/viewtopic.php?t=22065

    And just because the STi gives you a long range warning to constant-on 33.8 doesn't mean that the issue isn't there. The issue only rears it's head in extreme situations where a more sensitive detector really does make a difference. See my posts in this thread here:

    http://www.radardetector.net/viewtopic.php?t=26517

    If you're happy with the performance of your detector, that is all that matters. But I can assure you that the 33.8 issue is real.
    Oh Professor I do have so much respect for you and enjoy reading your post but you should have read the remaining thread. It was NOT a 33.8 issue but a hardware issue. He also points out many times in his thread that he was not receiving ANY KA hits and this explains why.

    I sent my detector back to Bel, and after two-three weeks, I got it back with a note saying "repaired KA antenna".
    Now its easy to say "oh Bel's customer support s*cks and we cant believe them" and just assume they didn't fix a dam thing.. But do read all his post and it does seem his complete KA band was disabled thus the reason why I assume and believe it to be an antenna issue.

    Now for the interesting point of view... Unlike happya$$ who thinks I got fan blood and enjoys name calling, I will keep to my higher standards and back the GOL test and say "yes there is an issue with 33.8 detection." But your forgetting one point, I run with POP ON and maybe, JUST maybe with POP On it does_not_reduce_the 33.8 frequency sensitivity as I have experienced. Instead of recognizing this as a possible interesting fine, I get commits back from happya$$ like
    POP is a waste of time. My research has shown me that POP is a waste of valuable resources. I am glad that 33.8 is being detected fine for you.
    And I say "are we sure of that? Maybe POP OFF is also effecting 33.8? Maybe POP ON causes more noise but also detects 33.8 better? I know from experience that POP on my 33.8 detection is outstanding.. I have no clue what happens with POP off. I have not test yet.

    I have always been open for friendly discussion but I keep getting thrown back water that has no weight and told what I should be thinking with no real reason why.

  7. #17
    Founder of Stealthvation
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Cleveland, Ohio
    Posts
    11,174

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Buford T. Justice
    Quote Originally Posted by jimbonzzz
    Quote Originally Posted by aaseavey
    Quote Originally Posted by Buford T. Justice
    Besides the field test, can you show me 1 post where an STi user is having issues with 33.8?
    No they can't.
    I can:
    http://www.radardetector.net/viewtopic.php?t=22065

    And just because the STi gives you a long range warning to constant-on 33.8 doesn't mean that the issue isn't there. The issue only rears it's head in extreme situations where a more sensitive detector really does make a difference. See my posts in this thread here:

    http://www.radardetector.net/viewtopic.php?t=26517

    If you're happy with the performance of your detector, that is all that matters. But I can assure you that the 33.8 issue is real.
    Oh Professor I do have so much respect for you and enjoy reading your post but you should have read the remaining thread. It was NOT a 33.8 issue but a hardware issue. He also points out many times in his thread that he was not receiving ANY KA hits and this explains why.

    I sent my detector back to Bel, and after two-three weeks, I got it back with a note saying "repaired KA antenna".
    Now its easy to say "oh Bel's customer support s*cks and we cant believe them" and just assume they didn't fix a dam thing.. But do read all his post and it does seem his complete KA band was disabled thus the reason why I assume and believe it to be an antenna issue.

    Now for the interesting point of view... Unlike happya$$ who thinks I got fan blood and enjoys name calling, I will keep to my higher standards and back the GOL test and say "yes there is an issue with 33.8 detection." But your forgetting one point, I run with POP ON and maybe, JUST maybe with POP On it does_not_reduce_the 33.8 frequency sensitivity as I have experienced. Instead of recognizing this as a possible interesting fine, I get commits back from happya$$ like
    POP is a waste of time. My research has shown me that POP is a waste of valuable resources. I am glad that 33.8 is being detected fine for you.
    And I say "are we sure of that? Maybe POP OFF is also effecting 33.8? Maybe POP ON causes more noise but also detects 33.8 better? I know from experience that POP on my 33.8 detection is outstanding.. I have no clue what happens with POP off. I have not test yet.

    I have always been open for friendly discussion but I keep getting thrown back water that has no weight and told what I should be thinking with no real reason why.
    I apologize if I came across that way. We did test it with POP on and got worse results at our test than with POP off on 33.8gh. My fan blood comment is directed to V1 zombies too not just Belscort.
    RIP Duncan my BELOVED black lab son 8/7/99-3/23/11. I will miss you DEARLY.


    http://www.criminalcustomzshop.com/


    LET THE BIRTH OF MANY TESTING GROUPS HAPPEN!











    You want to know what it is like doing something for the love and passion and not for the mighty dollar then look up GOL!










    buyradardetectors rocks!

  8. #18
    Lead Foot
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    I'm Stealth
    Posts
    350

    Default

    Dont worry happya$$... Before I joined this thread I did my home work with lots of reading and you always came across one I could trust RD opinions. Maybe my ideas or comments came across too "closed minded" but I always enjoy tough discussion that has good found facts.

    Also thanks for the info on the Pop on results.. I didn't know that. I am truly puzzled now on whats going on with the 33.8. I know its just "my word" but again Im puzzled as to why Im not seeing this same issue.

    humm

  9. #19
    Founder of Stealthvation
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Cleveland, Ohio
    Posts
    11,174

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Buford T. Justice
    Dont worry happya$$... Before I joined this thread I did my home work with lots of reading and you always came across one I could trust RD opinions. Maybe my ideas or comments came across too "closed minded" but I always enjoy tough discussion that has good found facts.

    Also thanks for the info on the Pop on results.. I didn't know that. I am truly puzzled now on whats going on with the 33.8. I know its just "my word" but again Im puzzled as to why Im not seeing this same issue.

    humm
    we even took video with POP on I believe. We were as curious as you to try and figure out what was going on so we thought for sure POP on would help but it actually made it worse. Let me get the details to see how much worse but if my memory serves me right substantially worse.


    "NOTE: Surprised by the STi's results? So were we.

    Since 33.8 GHz is the frequency for Ka POP, we decided to try a few runs with POP turned ON (instead of the default of POP turned OFF) to see if that would make a difference. On three runs with POP turned on, we got 348, 384, and 397."
    RIP Duncan my BELOVED black lab son 8/7/99-3/23/11. I will miss you DEARLY.


    http://www.criminalcustomzshop.com/


    LET THE BIRTH OF MANY TESTING GROUPS HAPPEN!











    You want to know what it is like doing something for the love and passion and not for the mighty dollar then look up GOL!










    buyradardetectors rocks!

  10. #20
    Advanced Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    7,509

    Default

    OK if you're skeptical of the first thread, here's another that I (and a few others) think is suspicious:
    http://www.radardetector.net/viewtopic.php?p=227045

    It's Ontario which we know uses 33.8, he claims his RD always worked before and worked afterwards.

    But the bottom line is that in a lot of these these real-world encounters, there are a lot of variables and you really never know what the problem was: did the cop lie? Did the cop use instant-on? Did the individual's detector have some sort of failure that was unique to that single detector? You can speculate and argue the particulars all day long and probably never come to a firm conclusion one way or another.

    So, it is a good thing we have Michael B's great lab tests and the GOL tests, which are conducted under a fixed set of conditions which do not have all of the variables of real-world encounters.

    There's the STi Michael B tested in the Lab, and the three STi's tested at the GOL test which were all purchased at different times. It is really a good thing that we decided to test multiple samples, if we had tested only one people would simply assume that the one sample was "broke" somehow and ignored the problem completely.

    You might never see this issue in your daily drives, especially if police in your area always run constant-on radar on long straight stretches of road that give you a mile of warning.

 

 

Similar Threads

  1. I am sure this has been talked about...
    By polecats03 in forum Valentine One
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 02-26-2011, 10:11 AM
  2. talked to bel today
    By zfactor in forum Beltronics
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 10-25-2006, 07:40 AM
  3. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 07-28-2006, 09:50 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •