Some Thoughts About GOL 2008 LIDAR Test

[happya$$]

I have been reading people's comments about our recent test and criticisms. I expected that some would be wondering why one rep was at our test but this was a decision we made as a team. The LI team for the majority part was a pleasure to have at our test. They brought their extensive knowledge and Euro guns to our test. In other words they brought a crucial element. It is very simple on how we make decisions like these. We keep in perspective that we test for ourselves and share our results with the community. We know that we have had a successful test if we learned something new and can sleep at night with a clear mind/no guilty conscious. We are not professionals or ever have the desire to ever be. We are HARD CORE enthusiasts and that is all we will ever be or want to be. I personally walked away from this event knowing VERY CLEARLY the products that will be on my personal vehicles. If people do not trust our results for whatever reason PLEASE ignore them and use other resources on the net. We are not here for anything else than the love of this EXPENSIVE hobby.

[Tambourine-Man]

Based on the info that the reps were not around during the tests, I am Ok with their being there. I actually think there is value to having all classy reps/dealers there as while I think you guys are very knowledgeable, they might be able to diagnose problems with their product or to suggest ways to optimize its performance of which you guys are unaware (well, maybe not). In the past Radar Roy has been involved. In any case the reps/dealers, could keep an eye on each other. The CFL group seems to do Ok with mhhardy and Cliff around.

There are always going to be goons that say you used juiced products.

My biggest thought was "Oh no! Not another prototype test." If it was a private testing, why publish the results at all?

I read that someone thought it was "promising" - with those results, how can it be promising?

I suppose you published it to be fair as that is what you did with the LI, but the point there was that a great new product might be coming out and imminent potential buyers might be well-advised to wait. For the new prototype, no one is going to defer purchasing a jammer until it comes to market.

[spankyaf]

You guys do a bang up job and are an invaluable source of objective testing. The fact that LI was at the test falls under the category of "big whoop" ... they brought knowledge and equipment that gets them a place at the test.

Your credibility is rock solid in my book

[AirMoore]

Originally Posted by spankyaf

You guys do a bang up job and are an invaluable source of objective testing. The fact that LI was at the test falls under the category of "big whoop" ... they brought knowledge and equipment that gets them a place at the test.

Your credibility is rock solid in my book

X2,

I have also never questioned any credibility of any members... as I said in the post awhile back (I believe involving StealthStalker), if someone doesn't wish to trust the results from GOL, then don't! Bottom-line right there. I choose to trust GOL, over any other testing group out there... thats just my opinion. (I went in full-depth in that post/thread why I trust GOL above others... so I won't regress), but the point is, trust whomever you want to... GOL doesn't seem to care, and I surely don't...


I was looking into the ZR4, but after its lackluster results (even though it would do exponentially better on my car) I am starting to look more towards the blinder... So does the LI Rep impact my decision there at all? NOPE. I also am looking at an LI for Christmas, (to use on the front, and move the blinder to the rear for front/rear indication(protection) because I believe the results were not skewed to any extent...


One of the biggest factors that proves to me that GOL is still true to their word is how they represented the P.A.S.S. system, they noted and documented that the unit was defective! If they were going to push any product it (to me) would seem to be the product of their good friend and former GOL member Racer-X. But not only did they note that the unit was defective, they tried other control boxes on it... which turned out to show that it has lackluster performance (now we can only assume that it would do better with its own control box)... but the point still stands, in my book GOL fairly represented the P.A.S.S. and to me thats a class-act from all of them. I was disappointed in the P.A.S.S. results myself (I was hoping so much that it was going to be 'my' jammer)... but the GOL proved to me one thing... I don't want that unit. (That along with the Florida testing group proved that its not the jammer for me, and its not the jammer it should be from such a great company.)





In any-case, GOL thank you so much for this test and I can't wait to see more. This test was not a let-down on any-front in my opinion. Thanks for your time and dedication to this hobby, I know what is (and isn't) going on my car. You guys are truly top-notch IMVHO!

[MEM-TEK]

I agree with everybody's comments. Happya$$, you are overly worried about GOL's credibility possibly being shot in the foot simply by having the LI people there. Yet the opportunity to test the jammers against several European laser guns was too good to pass up. And you guys made the right decision to have them present during the testing (except for their product) so that you guys could keep your eyes on them and so that they couldn't sneak off and try something fishy.

My only complaint is that the Chevy HHR was an incredible worst case test vehicle! It made the lesser performing units look really bad since most vehicles have nowhere as numerous and strong points for reflecting laser as that Chevy HHR did. You can see the reflected horizon in the HHR's curved and chromed front grille, which means that at all times the front grille was reflecting laser right back to the laser gun! Laser reflections off of that grille were simply overpowering at times for the LED based jammers. So, yeah, the HHR was a great test vehicle for clearly separating the performance of each jammer model, but its numerous reflective areas created some very strong laser reflections which also lead to to some wild variations in the punchthrough numbers on successive runs for the LED based jammers.

But as far as GOL's integrity -- there is absolutely no question in my mind!

[focalcivic]

Originally Posted by MEM-TEK

I agree with everybody's comments. Happya$$, you are overly worried about GOL's credibility possibly being shot in the foot simply by having the LI people there. Yet the opportunity to test the jammers against several European laser guns was too good to pass up. And you guys made the right decision to have them present during the testing (except for their product) so that you guys could keep your eyes on them and so that they couldn't sneak off and try something fishy.

My only complaint is that the Chevy HHR was an incredible worst case test vehicle! It made the lesser performing units look really bad since most vehicles have nowhere as numerous and strong points for reflecting laser as that Chevy HHR did. You can see the reflected horizon in the HHR's curved and chromed front grille, which means that at all times the front grille was reflecting laser right back to the laser gun! Laser reflections off of that grille were simply overpowering at times for the LED based jammers. So, yeah, the HHR was a great test vehicle for clearly separating the performance of each jammer model, but its numerous reflective areas created some very strong laser reflections which also lead to to some wild variations in the punchthrough numbers on successive runs for the LED based jammers.

But as far as GOL's integrity -- there is absolutely no question in my mind!

Granted it was a worst case scenerio, but the heads were mounted in a plain out in the open style, so if they can perform on that type of front end then they can on most expect huge chrome grill pick ups.

[TSi+WRX]

Originally Posted by MEM-TEK

I agree with everybody's comments. Happya$$, you are overly worried about GOL's credibility possibly being shot in the foot simply by having the LI people there. Yet the opportunity to test the jammers against several European laser guns was too good to pass up. And you guys made the right decision to have them present during the testing (except for their product) so that you guys could keep your eyes on them and so that they couldn't sneak off and try something fishy.

But as far as GOL's integrity -- there is absolutely no question in my mind!

+1 to all of that.

As I've said before - what I say here, I'll say everywhere. I'm always the same guy, no matter where I am.

I've said here and elsewhere that I have complete faith in GOL. Total trust.

They've done nothing to even suggest for me to think otherwise. And their actions - both publically here on the Forums and in the personal/private messages we've exchanged, suggests a degree of open-ness and honesty that should be a standard of this hobby, industry, and business.

RE: the 2008 Laser Countermeasures Shootout.....

My only concern - and it is just that, a concern - is that the inclusion of the LI reps did, regardless of their level of participation, opens the scenario for the detractors of the GOL to an avenue of attack.

Be that as it may, I commend the GOL for stating the reason, in an aboveboard manner, why they allowed the LI reps to be there (everyone here knows my stance on "conflict of interest") - and I also commend their effort to give us such a peek into one of the most feared traffic control devices, worldwide.

Without them "standing up" to the poential (and pending, if my gut-feelings are right, unfortunately) onslaught of "the slings and arrows of misfortune," we hobbyists would be the poorer.

So, thanks, GOL - and don't sweat the crap that's gonna come, no matter what.

After all, this *is* the Internet.

----

BTW: Just a piece of constructive criticism....

As happya$$ undoubtedly noted in his Web-travels, there was concern raised on RR.net regarding this particular sentence, in the "The Laser Guns" section

The following laser guns were used in this test:

• LTI Ultralyte 100 LR, 100pps
• LTI Ultralyte 100 LR, 125pps
• LTI Marksman, 125pps
• Kustom ProLaser III, 200pps
• Kustom ProLaser II, 238pps
• Kustom ProLite, 200pps
• Stalker LZ-1 (II), 130pps
• Laser Atlanta SpeedLaser (III), 238pps (normal), 68pps (Stealth)
• Robot Traffipatrol, 100pps
• Robot Traffipatrol XR, KHz range (varies)

These guns represent every type of handheld laser gun on the IACP Approved List except for one: the new LTI TruSpeed.

Highlighted in RED.

It was suggested by a fellow hobbyist on RD.net that this could be read as the IACP Approval List as having included the Traffipatrol devices, which is clearly not the case, but that as the GOL article is read by both novices as well as experienced hobbyists, the former grouping may misconstrue the meaning of the highlighted sentence, and thus should be re-worded.

FWIW, I agree with this hobbyist, and I think that, for the sake of clarity, the sentence should be reconstructed.

[jimbonzzz]

Originally Posted by TSi+WRX

BTW: Just a piece of constructive criticism....

As happya$$ undoubtedly noted in his Web-travels, there was concern raised on RR.net regarding this particular sentence, in the "The Laser Guns" section



Highlighted in RED.

It was suggested by a fellow hobbyist on RD.net that this could be read as the IACP Approval List as having included the Traffipatrol devices, which is clearly not the case, but that as the GOL article is read by both novices as well as experienced hobbyists, the former grouping may misconstrue the meaning of the highlighted sentence, and thus should be re-worded.

FWIW, I agree with this hobbyist, and I think that, for the sake of clarity, the sentence should be reconstructed.

You have a point. I guess me (and my proofreaders) have been doing this for so long that sometimes we might overlook something like this that is so obvious to us, without realizing that it isn't obvious to new users. Clearly, I didn't intend to imply that the Traffipatrol and Traffipatrol XR are on the IACP list, and I even linked to the actual list so people could look for themselves! However, I want ahead and re-worded it slightly to make things more clear.

[YTCD]

Originally Posted by jimbonzzz

You have a point. I guess me (and my proofreaders) have been doing this for so long that sometimes we might overlook something like this that is so obvious to us, without realizing that it isn't obvious to new users. Clearly, I didn't intend to imply that the Traffipatrol and Traffipatrol XR are on the IACP list, and I even linked to the actual list so people could look for themselves! However, I want ahead and re-worded it slightly to make things more clear.

Do you mind removing the STI Radar test?

[TSi+WRX]

Originally Posted by jimbonzzz

You have a point. I guess me (and my proofreaders) have been doing this for so long that sometimes we might overlook something like this that is so obvious to us, without realizing that it isn't obvious to new users. Clearly, I didn't intend to imply that the Traffipatrol and Traffipatrol XR are on the IACP list, and I even linked to the actual list so people could look for themselves! However, I want ahead and re-worded it slightly to make things more clear.

^ Thanks, Professor Jim.

BTW, it wasn't me - I also read right over that one....I saw IACP, and immediately thought "American," and totally missed that the list also included the Traffipatrol, just as you and your proofreaders did.

The thanks for this spotting should go out to RadarNutt, with whom I debated your wording, and was finally convinced, by his eloquence and logical presentation of his side of the "argument" (it wasn't one - it was really only a friendly academic debate - but I can't find different words), that the GOL presentation would likely be more accurate and better for LIDAR novices, if the original wording was clarified.



Don't thank me! Thank RadarNutt!