Results 1 to 6 of 6
  1. #1

    Default corcerning the "Filters" on the Xtr 695

    What is best for Highway mode? Does the filters affect the detection range?

  2. #2
    Professional
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    1,242

    Default Re: corcerning the "Filters" on the Xtr 695

    Filters doesn't affect detection range, it just increases the time that the RD takes to check if a signal is legit or not. First try just Filter mode, then if you get a lot of alerts from other RDs such as Cobras switch to Filter 1 etc. The only difference is the time it takes the RD to process the signal. Filter = 100ms, Filter 1 = 200ms and Filter 2 = 300ms as far as I remember.

    I personally run with Filter 1 due to the loads of leaky RDs in my area and don't see any difference with range/performance

  3. #3

    Default Re: corcerning the "Filters" on the Xtr 695

    I agree with cooljay. I generally used Filter 1 on my Pro78 while testing it since I quickly found out that Filter 1 versus Filter managed to eliminate most falses from Cobras. I too didn't see any noticeable drop in detection range when switching from Filter to Filter 1. Filter 2 did seem to very slightly drop the maximum detection range, but with Filter 2 virtually eliminated all Cobra falses.

  4. #4
    Power User
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    MI / MA
    Posts
    3,594

    Default Re: corcerning the "Filters" on the Xtr 695

    Quote Originally Posted by MEM-TEK View Post
    I agree with cooljay. I generally used Filter 1 on my Pro78 while testing it since I quickly found out that Filter 1 versus Filter managed to eliminate most falses from Cobras. I too didn't see any noticeable drop in detection range when switching from Filter to Filter 1. Filter 2 did seem to very slightly drop the maximum detection range, but with Filter 2 virtually eliminated all Cobra falses.
    Signals at the edge of your detectable range probably appear bursty/lossy in nature, and it probably takes a bit more signal strength to hold steady enough for the filter to accept it.

    I like that Whistler gives us the choice of how much filtering we desire.

  5. #5

    Default Re: corcerning the "Filters" on the Xtr 695

    So I will do some playing around and see what works best, I think Filter 1 will work fine for those leaky rd's and weaker signals for the hwy and city.

  6. #6
    Professional
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,299

    Default Re: corcerning the "Filters" on the Xtr 695

    Quote Originally Posted by jdong View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by MEM-TEK View Post
    I agree with cooljay. I generally used Filter 1 on my Pro78 while testing it since I quickly found out that Filter 1 versus Filter managed to eliminate most falses from Cobras. I too didn't see any noticeable drop in detection range when switching from Filter to Filter 1. Filter 2 did seem to very slightly drop the maximum detection range, but with Filter 2 virtually eliminated all Cobra falses.
    Signals at the edge of your detectable range probably appear bursty/lossy in nature, and it probably takes a bit more signal strength to hold steady enough for the filter to accept it.

    I like that Whistler gives us the choice of how much filtering we desire.
    x2. Filter mode WILL effect your real-world range. However, it will have almost no effect on pure sensitivity tests (low speed, line of sight).

    This is the reason Whistlers perform better in the real world than some tests suggest.

 

 

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 14
    Last Post: 05-24-2010, 12:51 PM
  2. Replies: 10
    Last Post: 03-08-2009, 11:24 AM
  3. "Souped-up"/"weekend" cars/trucks/bikes
    By TSi+WRX in forum Car Talk
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 01-17-2007, 07:14 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
  •