# Thread: GuysofLidar Test Jan 06

1. ## GuysofLidar Test Jan 06

I looked at the results posted at http://www.guysoflidar.com/testjan06.html . Am I correct in thinking that the numbers shown are the number of feet before the radar source?

Assuming that's correct, another variable that I would find interesting is "Seconds to Radar Source @ xx MPH after First Detection." One can then compare the time that the RD is buying you.

Even better.... how close does one have to be to these various radar guns to be locked and clocked? Is it a shorter distance than the detected range? If so, it would be good to see the amount of time between first detection and when the the Enterprise's phasers had a lock on you, so to speak. This variable might be "Seconds to Lock (i.e. destruction)." This is the real metric of value.

Additionally, it wouldn't hurt to replicate the each test scenario more than once. (e.g. Using V1 on Ka 33.5 drive up and take measurements three times, perhaps varying the conditions). Perhaps you did that. I dunno. My guess is that the readings will vary from test to test. In that you could get an average response for each test situation.

Also, what was the difference between your test and the infamous, was it 1992, Car and Driver test that V1 always relies on?

2. ## Re: GuysofLidar Test Jan 06

I looked at the results posted at http://www.guysoflidar.com/testjan06.html . Am I correct in thinking that the numbers shown are the number of feet before the radar source?

Assuming that's correct, another variable that I would find interesting is "Seconds to Radar Source @ xx MPH after First Detection." One can then compare the time that the RD is buying you.

Even better.... how close does one have to be to these various radar guns to be locked and clocked? Is it a shorter distance than the detected range? If so, it would be good to see the amount of time between first detection and when the the Enterprise's phasers had a lock on you, so to speak. This variable might be "Seconds to Lock (i.e. destruction)." This is the real metric of value.

Also, what was the difference between your test and the infamous, was it 1992, Car and Driver test that V1 always relies on?

I would also like to see point of detection vs point at which they are able to clock your speed. Also, showing the time from detection to the point you are being clocked. I think it would give the reader a better idea of how it works in the real world. It would add a level of greater understanding IMO. Just an idea.. maybe it is crap.. **shrug**.

CC

3. That's precisely what I'm thinking.

4. In this test they were shooting radar praticaly perpendicular to the road so there was no way that they could get a reading , and it was makin the RDs job a lot harder.

5. Today's radar detectors can detect police radar much further than radar units can obtain a speed reading, usually many times the distance. If all police ran constant-on radar, almost any detector would provide you with full protection. To detect the radar, it only has to travel from the gun to the vehicle. To get a speed reading, it has to travel twice the distance: from the gun, to the vehicle, and back to the gun again. The detector has a clear advantage here.

So, the test was set up in such a manner to try to determine which detector was the most sensitive, not to address whether a person "has enough time to slow down".

A sensitive detector is important because a lot of times police are sneaky, and use "instant-on" where they only target certain vehicles which appear to be speeding. In this case, the detector must be sensitive enough to detect the radar being used against traffic ahead, otherwise you won't get a warning until you're being targeted yourself, and by then it is too late: he's already got you.

Our January '06 test was very different from Car & Driver's test in 2002.

One one hand, the test we did in August 2005 was better than our January 2006 test, in that the results might have coincided more with the known lab sensitivity numbers of the detectors. Testing over a hill is far superior for testing relative sensitivity than the "steep angle" we used in Jan '06.

But on the other hand, the "steep angle" test setup we used in Jan. '06 could have easily been a real-world situation (such as where an officer running moving radar was getting ready to pull onto the road etc). If the same detectors were used in a similar real-world situation, they might respond similarly.

Jim

6. how close does one have to be to these various radar guns to be locked and clocked? Is it a shorter distance than the detected range? If so, it would be good to see the amount of time between first detection and when the the Enterprise's phasers had a lock on you, so to speak. This variable might be "Seconds to Lock (i.e. destruction).
RadarTom , your analysis is right , as explained by Jim , the one way advantage plays on our side.

If you car is moderately stealth and you step on the brake as soon you get alerted , being shot by instant-on , you ''could'' gain a good drop of speed , where the ticket would have been 80 mph it can be shaved by 2 to 10 mph ... all depending the initial distance between source and the car ... the larger the distance the better ... obviously.

By stealth I mean driving a low profile car compare to a huge SUV with fullchrome facia...huge Rcs.

To my knowledge not one single car manufacturer has yet implemented
basics stealth in their design or use on purpose Ram , radar absorbing material... :roll:

7. Jim,
Sensitivity is important, of course. But, the knowledge of the "reach" on the different guns/bands is critical.

Do you have any specs on the maximum distance from which the different guns/bands can get a speed lock? I would love to examine this along side of your test results.

If there are differences, then the whole question about which is the "best detector" is altered. Which is the "best" detector? It's the one that provides the earliest alert for the farthest reaching guns/bands. Right?

Of course, this whole hypothesis is built upon the possibility that the guns have different lock ranges. Perhaps this is all academic?

8. I do have some information, but comparing the numbers directly to our test results isn't going to tell you too much, and it isn't really relevant. Our tests were done at a steep angle or over a hill to make things difficult for the detectors, and these radar maximum range tests were straight-on line of sight.

First, the maximum possible target range will vary from vehicle to vehicle depending on the radar cross section. For example, here's a Car & Driver test from way back in 1979(!). They used a Kustom KR-11, results are in feet.

But of course, different models etc will have different maximum ranges against the same vehicle.

Here's a more recent study against some current guns. The target vehicle for the Stationary-Mode Maximum Range test was a Special Service Package Ford Expedition. This vehicle was otherwise used as the radar vehicle. For the Moving-Mode Maximum Range and Same Direction Maximum Range tests a Nissan Maxima was used as the target. All guns were Ka band except the Genesis II Directional which was K-Band.

Judging the "best detector" is subjective, and is always going to vary from person to person. For many, the best detector is the most sensitive detector, but not always. One always has to weigh performance, features, price etc etc.

Jim

9. One cool test yall could run would be to send a rabbit down a similar course and blast it with a typical real world Ka instant on trap with a car and a detector following to see how they stack up that way, maybe include some hills and even other traffic to make it as realistic as possible.

Or even try out the V1 scatter theory and see how detectors stack up at detecting laser scatter. Just a thought, probably a repeated one at that.

10. Thanks Jim. That's very interesting. Maybe something to consider for the next test.... after you get the initial detection, you could let the vehicle keep moving towards the gun until you get a lock and then do a second measurement. Of course, all of these findings would be primarily applicable to your test scenario, but could still be of value.

I guess another consideration is that even if a gun has a very high range, it's likely to be quite less in real world conditions. Too many other vehicles, obstructions, hills, beam dispersion, etc. But, if the point of lock is different, it really seems like it should be part of the consideration.

#### Posting Permissions

• You may not post new threads
• You may not post replies
• You may not post attachments
• You may not edit your posts
•