# Thread: V1's version of a TrueLock problem...

1. ## V1's version of a TrueLock problem...

I just had an incident that demonstrates the difficulty of seperating two fq's that are close together.

I picked up a K-band LEO from way out and drove past him as he had just finished writing a ticket and sat alone on the other side of the road with his lights on. (doing paperwork, I guess)

The arrows worked and did the front-side-rear bit and the rear horn "held on" to the signal until I was well out of sight. A few minutes later my V1 alerts to weak K-band from the rear. I check the rearview, and see the LEO come into view from around the corner, about 1/2 mile behind me. As he turns toward me the V1 goes nuts and sits on, or close to, a full alert.

The LEO just stayed back there, broadcasting and cruising for many miles until we started to get into town. As we neared a known K-band false, I expected the V1 to alert to a second bogey and point ahead (and behind too, because the LEO was still back there.)

The V1's arrows flipped from rear to side and back a few times, but the bogey counter stayed on 1, and V1 never alerted to the door opener. (I went back without the LEO and the V1 alerted just as it always has.)

I am almost sure the LEO's signal and the door opener's signal were right on top of each other fq-wise.

With the LEO behind me I'm sure the V1 was picking up his signal in both horns, but knew that the strongest signal was coming from the rear and kept pointing in that direction. When we neared the door opener, the signal coming into the front horn apparently looked just like the reflected signals from the LEO behind me, and the V1 did little more than an arrow "dance".

This is why I don't think TrueLock is "broken". (My ix has locked out two LEO's)

When two signals are too close together fq-wise, they are received as one signal.

2. ## Re: V1's version of a TrueLock problem...

An interesting issue and thought....I'll have to watch for this in the next couple weeks. I wonder if any of the local falses are similar to the local K-Band

rc

3. ## Re: V1's version of a TrueLock problem...

Interesting find.. thanks for sharing.

5. ## Re: V1's version of a TrueLock problem...

Would be interesting to run a 9500 in freq mode near that opener to confirm that it's near a known gun freq. Nice find!

6. ## Re: V1's version of a TrueLock problem...

Originally Posted by M6D
Would be interesting to run a 9500 in freq mode near that opener to confirm that it's near a known gun freq. Nice find!
Well my ix is in for repair. I will try to remember to turn off the GPS and drive by that location to check it out.

Or I could just use the wife's X50.....

7. ## Re: V1's version of a TrueLock problem...

Originally Posted by Z1NONLY
...the signal coming into the front horn apparently looked just like the reflected signals from the LEO behind me, and the V1 did little more than an arrow "dance".

This is why I don't think TrueLock is "broken". (My ix has locked out two LEO's)

When two signals are too close together fq-wise, they are received as one signal.
I agree 100% with your conclusions as I have seen a similar example myself while using DJ's V1, but in my case it was two door openers which operate on virtually identical frequencies but are located on opposite sides of a large intersection. The arrows on DJ's V1 would be alerting to the rear with 1 bogey, and then this would switch to the side and then the front arrow but still showing just 1 bogey. These two door openers transmitted almost exactly on 24.150MHz, and there is a third door opener located 1/4 mile away which also transmits almost exactly on 24.150MHz. So this was one particular area which I never locked out on my 9500i.

8. ## Re: V1's version of a TrueLock problem...

Originally Posted by Z1NONLY
The V1's arrows flipped from rear to side and back a few times, but the bogey counter stayed on 1, and V1 never alerted to the door opener. (I went back without the LEO and the V1 alerted just as it always has.)

I am almost sure the LEO's signal and the door opener's signal were right on top of each other fq-wise.

With the LEO behind me I'm sure the V1 was picking up his signal in both horns, but knew that the strongest signal was coming from the rear and kept pointing in that direction. When we neared the door opener, the signal coming into the front horn apparently looked just like the reflected signals from the LEO behind me, and the V1 did little more than an arrow "dance".

This is why I don't think TrueLock is "broken". (My ix has locked out two LEO's)

When two signals are too close together fq-wise, they are received as one signal.
X2, its a limitation of the technology that cant be fixed because its not "broken". So the V1 never alerted to an additional signal with its special alert tone?

If you have 2 half glasses of water and poor one into the other how could you tell the difference between the 2.

9. ## Re: V1's version of a TrueLock problem...

What's the usual strength of the false from the door opener?

The 9500ix uses strength as one of the parameters to determine when to lockout a false. If there is a signal at a different strength level than what is known as the locked out false, it won't alert?

10. ## Re: V1's version of a TrueLock problem...

Originally Posted by Cips
What's the usual strength of the false from the door opener?

The 9500ix uses strength as one of the parameters to determine when to lockout a false. If there is a signal at a different strength level than what is known as the locked out false, it won't alert?
No, not at present with the current algorithms.

#### Posting Permissions

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