Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 20
  1. #1
    Good Citizen
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Tampa bay area
    Posts
    104

    Default My "Hunch" about Escort lying appears to be righ

    Lok at the X50 vs. NON X50 results on Kaband

    http://www.kc8unj.com/radar/guysofli...artesting.html

  2. #2
    Lead Foot
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    K-55 land
    Posts
    414

    Default

    One measurement missing from this report is the distance to the Cobra XRS9700. The report is excellent from a comparative perspective, but knowing the significance of a foot relative to the total range seems critical wrt comparing the X50 and the original 8500. This need not be an exact measurement either, as the error will be imparted to all results.

  3. #3

  4. #4
    Lead Foot
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    K-55 land
    Posts
    414

    Default

    Thanks Jim,

    Looks to me like Escort's 5 y/o detector blows away the 2nd tier new designs. Escort may actually employ these results in supporting their upgrade policy. A "threat" is vague and dimensionless. Risk is not. I'd feel well protected with an 8500. The X50 with POP on may offer less protection in the real world as its POP alarm does not scale with distance and may mask a real threat.

  5. #5
    Speed Demon
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Radar Land
    Posts
    670

    Default Re: My "Hunch" about Escort lying appears to be

    Your "Hunch" about Escort lying appears to be wrong.

  6. #6
    Radar Fanatic
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    2,357

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by billgerr
    The X50 with POP on may offer less protection in the real world as its POP alarm does not scale with distance and may mask a real threat.
    That's plausible. Anything that scans very rapidly has less time to process incoming signals which could impact performance against weak constant signals. It could also be that they are using slightly reduced Ka sensitivity to reduce falsing. This doesn't make it a bad detector but the 50% increased range thing is definitely bogus.

  7. #7
    Speed Demon
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Radar Land
    Posts
    670

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by brick
    Quote Originally Posted by billgerr
    The X50 with POP on may offer less protection in the real world as its POP alarm does not scale with distance and may mask a real threat.
    That's plausible. Anything that scans very rapidly has less time to process incoming signals which could impact performance against weak constant signals. It could also be that they are using slightly reduced Ka sensitivity to reduce falsing. This doesn't make it a bad detector but the 50% increased range thing is definitely bogus.
    I think it depends I mean I,am not saying its %50 but I think its at least something like %20 or %30 at least these are the kinds of results that I have been getting Vs the first 8500.

    I also notice that the X50 [the one that I'am using] does a much better job at picking up instant on vs the first 8500 I mean this was one of my only issues with the first 8500 and in my opinion the first 8500's only real known weakness.

  8. #8
    Good Citizen
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Tampa bay area
    Posts
    104

    Default Re: My "Hunch" about Escort lying appears to be

    Quote Originally Posted by Radarboy12312
    Your "Hunch" about Escort lying appears to be wrong.
    Proof?

  9. #9
    Good Citizen
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Tampa bay area
    Posts
    104

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Radarboy12312
    Quote Originally Posted by brick
    Quote Originally Posted by billgerr
    The X50 with POP on may offer less protection in the real world as its POP alarm does not scale with distance and may mask a real threat.
    That's plausible. Anything that scans very rapidly has less time to process incoming signals which could impact performance against weak constant signals. It could also be that they are using slightly reduced Ka sensitivity to reduce falsing. This doesn't make it a bad detector but the 50% increased range thing is definitely bogus.
    I think it depends I mean I,am not saying its %50 but I think its at least something like %20 or %30 at least these are the kinds of results that I have been getting Vs the first 8500.

    I also notice that the X50 [the one that I'am using] does a much better job at picking up instant on vs the first 8500 I mean this was one of my only issues with the first 8500 and in my opinion the first 8500's only real known weakness.
    You're great at spouting opinion as fact.

  10. #10
    Good Citizen
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Tampa bay area
    Posts
    104

    Default Re: My "Hunch" about Escort lying appears to be

    Quote Originally Posted by Radarboy12312
    Your "Hunch" about Escort lying appears to be wrong.
    Why do you have www.escortradar.com listed as your home page in your profile? Just curious?

 

 

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 16
    Last Post: 01-22-2011, 09:16 PM
  2. Cell phone "static" from Escort speaker!?!
    By LAC_STS in forum Laser Jammers - General
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 02-02-2010, 02:06 AM
  3. "Souped-up"/"weekend" cars/trucks/bikes
    By TSi+WRX in forum Car Talk
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 01-17-2007, 08:14 AM

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
  •