Vector 985

[KaPro]

I just got a very nice 985 for 70 bucks. I used to own one but I don't remember what the last rev was. Does anyone have a clue?? The reason I'm asking is the autoscan mode seems to work like a sort of "city all" mode and I don't think it should. Another words in autoscan, it has reduced sensitivity on all bands. It's a rev 5.6 and I was thinking about sending it in for a flash. ($80) Thanks for any feedback.

[ViperDom]

looks like a nice backup for 60 bucks:
http://www.overstockdealz.com/produc...referer=google

just email beltronics directly to find out what the latest rev is for your 985 since you will have to contact them reguardless if you plan on sending it in...

let us know how it turns out

[Z1NONLY]

I just got a very nice 985 for 70 bucks. I used to own one but I don't remember what the last rev was. Does anyone have a clue?? The reason I'm asking is the autoscan mode seems to work like a sort of "city all" mode and I don't think it should. Another words in autoscan, it has reduced sensitivity on all bands. It's a rev 5.6 and I was thinking about sending it in for a flash. ($80) Thanks for any feedback.

No, Autoscan on the 985 filters both x and K band. (but not Ka) It's the only feature on my (now gone) 985 that I still miss. :cry:

[passlabs]

I own a 985 that dates back to before the fcc id sticker went on it, and i feel it still competes well with current detectors. Any other 985 owners out there want to chime in?

[jimbonzzz]

The 985 is based on the S7 platform, just like 1st gen X50's and RX65's, in fact it carries the QL4G1S7 FCC ID just like the 1st gen RX-65's. So it will definitely hang with current detectors, and in some cases will perform even better.

[MEM-TEK]

The 985 is based on the S7 platform, just like 1st gen X50's and RX65's, in fact it carries the QL4G1S7 FCC ID just like the 1st gen RX-65's. So it will definitely hang with current detectors, and in some cases will perform even better.

Startin' up that whole S7 versus M4 thing again, are ya? :wink:

[KaPro]

Now that I have used it for a few days...... I'm not sending it in. It works excellent. I am quite impressed with how well it does on all bands, especially Ka band. Thanks for the replys. Jim is (of course) right, this unit will hang with todays best.

[focalcivic]

I own a 985 that dates back to before the fcc id sticker went on it, and i feel it still competes well with current detectors. Any other 985 owners out there want to chime in?

I have the 960 which is the sister unit a few less features, but the same performance. The 960's performance is impressive, esp on Ka.

One interesting thing I noticed with these platforms is no self calb or service required messages, I assume the newer units incorporated the more advanced software, but sometimes simpler is better in the long run.

[GTO_04]

The 985 is very good, and yes it can hang with the newer ones. Even on K band it is very close to the V1! However, I would not use Autoscan mode on the 985! It cuts way down on sensitivity on all bands.Stay with highway or city modes.

From what I've read on this forum, autoscan mode is much different on the newer BELs. But stay away from it on the 985. I cannot emphasize that enough.

GTO_04

[Ray]

I own a 985 that dates back to before the fcc id sticker went on it, and i feel it still competes well with current detectors. Any other 985 owners out there want to chime in?

I have the 960 which is the sister unit a few less features, but the same performance. The 960's performance is impressive, esp on Ka.

One interesting thing I noticed with these platforms is no self calb or service required messages, I assume the newer units incorporated the more advanced software, but sometimes simpler is better in the long run.

If there is a problem it will flash "Markers" then some code, back and forth between "markers" and "a code" while beeping. My Bel 980 is six years old and still performs very well. I have only had it in for service once in the six years I have owned it.