If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above.
You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.
To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
I have been looking at the test results from the GOL Off-Axis test in July where the 9500i performed poorly at 0 degrees (at 0 degrees the detector was mounted straight ahead as it would normally). I then looked at the results from the GOL August normal test and the 9500i at 0 degrees performed almost as well as the V1, and in some instances slightly better.
I made a thread asking why the results from the 2 test were so different and jimbonzzz said:
Quote:
That's just what happened, we were surprised ourselves by the 9500i's performance in August. Rumor has it that the earlier 9500i's weren't all that sensitive, and then later some re-engineering went on that tweaked it for more sensitivity.
Can anyone confirm that it is indeed true that earlier 9500is are not as sensitive as the current 9500is? It is well known that earlier 9500is had a ramp-up issue but it has been said that the ramp-up problem does not affect sensitivity.
If this is indeed true, does anyone know what build date escort started manufacturing the more sensitive detectors?
Re: Current 9500i More Sensitive than Early 9500i?
Early 9500i's were not quite as sensitive as current production 9500i's. The ramp-up issue had nothing to do with the sensitivity issue. All 9500i's built after February of last year definitely have the higher sensitivity. 9500i's built before this may have the higher sensitivity as well, since nobody has tested several 9500i's with different build dates.
__________________
Radar detectors which I use: 9500ci and STi. Check out my Vintage Radar Detector collection. Quotes from forum members: Jag42: "He probably owns the Broke Back Rocky Mountain Radar detector." partsfreak: "A Cobra is about as useful as a stripper pole in a convent."
Re: Current 9500i More Sensitive than Early 9500i?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZJamaican
Mem-tek are you talking about Feb 07 or Feb 08?
Definitely Feb or March of 2007, not 2008. The 2008 9500i tested at SML performs identically to my July 2007 9500i.
__________________
Radar detectors which I use: 9500ci and STi. Check out my Vintage Radar Detector collection. Quotes from forum members: Jag42: "He probably owns the Broke Back Rocky Mountain Radar detector." partsfreak: "A Cobra is about as useful as a stripper pole in a convent."
Mustang GT Convertible, 20" TSW Nogaros, Eibach Pro-Kit Springs 9500ci, Veil, V1 3.812 hardwired high with X and K off, Laser Interceptor Quad. 9500ix confiscated by the woman and hardwired high in her car.
Re: Current 9500i More Sensitive than Early 9500i?
I had 3 9500I's new 0908 older 1307 & 1707. All were very close in sensitivity with the biggest difference on the 1307. The 1307 gave me some serious doubts initially, and was returned/exchanged after much testing. I’m not one to give up on something with out thoroughly testing it, and boy did I with each one.
I would have to concur that Escort did do something, but I don’t think it had to do completely with improving the 9500I's sensitivity, more to the effect of consistency and less variance.
Every test is different and many factors can change results. I would be surprised if the ix is as close to the V1 as we are expecting.
-To embrace technology is not to blindly accept it. We must always question technology but never be afraid to use it. -No one detector is perfect for everyone. And the one you don’t like may be perfect for someone else.
Re: Current 9500i More Sensitive than Early 9500i?
CJR238, was there any noticeable difference between the 1707 and the 0908? Also was the difference between the older 1307 and the other significant, reason I'm asking is because I have an older model and am considering buying a newer model; is it worth it?
Re: Current 9500i More Sensitive than Early 9500i?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZJamaican
CJR238, was there any noticeable difference between the 1707 and the 0908? Also was the difference between the older 1307 and the other significant, reason I'm asking is because I have an older model and am considering buying a newer model; is it worth it?
The 1707 & 0908 seemed to be very similar in sensitivity. The one big difference was ramp up, it no longer had the 1-1-1-9-9-10 ramp up and it went to a more active ramp up.
My 1307 was less sensitive than my 1707 & 0908, however i think it may have been just manufacturers variance. If your going to send yours in get it upgraded to an ix, at least it will get some hardware changes/upgrades.
-To embrace technology is not to blindly accept it. We must always question technology but never be afraid to use it. -No one detector is perfect for everyone. And the one you don’t like may be perfect for someone else.
Radar Roy's Detector and Jammer Buyer's Guide!
For pros or novices, this FREE 22 page consumer report is a must read for anyone considering any speed counter measure device. Radar Detector Buyer's Guide
Visit RadarBusters for all your Speed Countermeasure Equipment RadarBusters.com
Current 9500i More Sensitive than Early 9500i? 
Re: Current 9500i More Sensitive than Early 9500i? 
