Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 12
  1. #1
    Good Citizen
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Central FL
    Posts
    146

    Default "Metalic window tints"

    I know that metalic window tints will affect detector performance if mounted behind them when they are on a windshield strip. Since the car is usually tinted with the same type of tint, will the rear window tint affect the rear reception for radar? It seems that a lot of users like the V1's arrows and 2 antennas, but if they have metalic tint on the rear and side glass, wouldn't that reduce the optimal detection performance? If it does, wouldn't remote mounted sytems like the SR7 & RX75 "less than optimal" mounting locations "bring them up" to the true performance levels for rear detection as the top 3 mounted inside a fully metalic tinted car?

  2. #2
    Advanced Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    7,509

    Default

    The RX-65 and X50 detectors receive radar from the rear when it is reflected into the front antenna off of terrain or other objects. So metallic tint on the sides and rear wouldn't change the rear range on those. The V1 would detect rear radar by reflections as well. But with the V1, it would probably reduce the rear range to be closer to that of the other two, since the rear radar antenna would be much less effective. It would of course also reduce the effectiveness of the arrows as well.

    I believe the remote detectors you mentioned only have a front radar antenna, so if the tint is only on the sides and rear, getting a remote unit won't do anything for you. But if the windshield has metallic film, a remote detector is your only option.

    Jim

  3. #3
    Lead Foot
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    363

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jimbonzzz
    The RX-65 and X50 detectors receive radar from the rear when it is reflected into the front antenna off of terrain or other objects. So metallic tint on the sides and rear wouldn't change the rear range on those. The V1 would detect rear radar by reflections as well. But with the V1, it would probably reduce the rear range to be closer to that of the other two, since the rear radar antenna would be much less effective. It would of course also reduce the effectiveness of the arrows as well.

    I believe the remote detectors you mentioned only have a front radar antenna, so if the tint is only on the sides and rear, getting a remote unit won't do anything for you. But if the windshield has metallic film, a remote detector is your only option.

    Jim
    So on a 2005 Corvette Coupe that has the darkest tint in the rear and moderate tint on the side windows the V-1 would be the least effective and the X-50 and RX-65 would work better in that scenario? Plus if you mount any detector in a Corvette low as suggested isn't the rear blocked by the seats as it is located very low.

  4. #4
    Advanced Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    7,509

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LS2
    So on a 2005 Corvette Coupe that has the darkest tint in the rear and moderate tint on the side windows the V-1 would be the least effective and the X-50 and RX-65 would work better in that scenario? Plus if you mount any detector in a Corvette low as suggested isn't the rear blocked by the seats as it is located very low.
    No. Only V1's rear antenna would be effected. Fromt detection range would not change at all.

    Since X-50 and RX-65 don't even have a rear antenna, and depend on radar reflections from terrain to detect radar from the rear, you don't have to worry about blocking the rear of the units with low mounting.

    Also, all tint isn't bad, only METALLIC tint.

    Jim

  5. #5
    Power User
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    In Car RamRod
    Posts
    4,001

    Default

    I have a very dark metallic tint and i was being pinned by instant on radar yesterday and he was about 500mtrs behind me going in the same direction, my radar was alerting to a K8 on the RX65 everytime he was hitting me with the radar....so i do get very good range from hehind....

    When he passed me i was still picking him up when i was almost a KM behind him...I was very happy.

  6. #6
    Lead Foot
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    363

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jimbonzzz
    Quote Originally Posted by LS2
    So on a 2005 Corvette Coupe that has the darkest tint in the rear and moderate tint on the side windows the V-1 would be the least effective and the X-50 and RX-65 would work better in that scenario? Plus if you mount any detector in a Corvette low as suggested isn't the rear blocked by the seats as it is located very low.
    No. Only V1's rear antenna would be effected. Fromt detection range would not change at all.

    Since X-50 and RX-65 don't even have a rear antenna, and depend on radar reflections from terrain to detect radar from the rear, you don't have to worry about blocking the rear of the units with low mounting.

    Also, all tint isn't bad, only METALLIC tint.

    Jim
    I don't know how to tell if it is metallic but it is the darkest black tint you will ever see. When trying to hook up one of those glass antennas to a scanner I was told I would have to cut a hole out of the tint for the antenna to work it is one of those window glass small antennas.

  7. #7
    Power User
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    In Car RamRod
    Posts
    4,001

    Default

    thats crap...I mounted one of those thru metallic tint and never had a prob...

  8. #8
    Lead Foot
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    363

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by stalker
    thats crap...I mounted one of those thru metallic tint and never had a prob...
    :roll:
    :roll: If so I wonder why the guy who's been in the business over 35 years high clientle teaches course would not sell me one of those antennas because it would not work without cutting it out..

  9. #9
    Power User
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    In Car RamRod
    Posts
    4,001

    Default

    Maybee he wanted to sell you a more expensive one :roll: :roll: :roll:

    I am only telling you the first hand experiance I had with one....all i can do is tell you...its up to you weather you beleive me or not

    I actually did a test...I had it on the front window and got signal strength readings then put it on the window with the tint and got the exact same signal strength...so I dunno m8....worked the same for me and I ran it on the window tint for over 3 years and never ever had a problem...

    Ive actually had the same setup on 3 different cars and got same results from all. :idea:

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

    Default

    Basically metallic surfaces reflect microwave energy. This is how a radar gun can read the speed of your car. If you wrap the detector in tinfoil it won't work...

 

 

Similar Threads

  1. Medical "exemption" for my CA window tint.
    By Oyusan in forum Driving, Speeding & Traffic
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 03-07-2011, 05:31 PM
  2. "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
  •