9500ci - It's safer to LockOut by Autolearn than by hand.

[€]

When you lock-out false alert by hand, every frequency which is presented at the area is LockOut-ed right? I'd notice that when 9500ci locks-out automaticaly by AutoLearn feature, frequency/frequencies NEED to be repeted to be stored in memory as false alert, otherwise we get an alert even when storing is in progress.
Has Enybody had similar oservation?

[djrams80]

When you lock-out false alert by hand, every frequency which is presented at the area is LockOut-ed right? I'd notice that when 9500ci locks-out automaticaly by AutoLearn feature, frequency/frequencies NEED to be repeted to be stored in memory as false alert, otherwise we get an alert even when storing is in progress.
Has Enybody had similar oservation?
I agree. The 9500ci locks out each frequency, one by one, once it has seen each false alert three times, while the manual Truelock locks out everything it sees when you press the mute button three times. So, I agree, the autolearn is safer than the manual Truelock. Also, I think the frequency blocks are smaller than the 30MHz blocks of the 9500i, but that's just a guess as of now, because the 9500ci seems more prone to false alerts that reoccur die to frequency drift than my 9500i was. I also think the lockout radii are smaller.

[RadarKid]

The 9500ci locks out each frequency, one by one, once it has seen each false alert three times, while the manual Truelock locks out everything it sees when you press the mute button three times. So, I agree, the autolearn is safer than the manual Truelock. Also, I think the frequency blocks are smaller than the 30MHz blocks of the 9500i, but that's just a guess as of now, because the 9500ci seems more prone to false alerts that reoccur die to frequency drift than my 9500i was. I also think the lockout radii are smaller.

wow...imagine that DJ.
perhaps thats why YOU with your Ci have such high opinions of the TrueLock reliability and I have to DISAGREE whole-heartedly with it on the 9500i. hmmm?
:deal:
xox

[CJR238]

I haven’t been able to experience Auto Learn yet, but i prefer manually locking out for now. I am so anile about how i lock out a location there is no way an automated TrueLock would make me completely comfortable.

But who knows, when I get a ci I guess I will find out.

[RadarKid]

I haven’t been able to experience Auto Learn yet, but i prefer manually locking out for now. I am so anile about how i lock out a location there is no way an automated TrueLock would make me completely comfortable.

But who knows, when I get a ci I guess I will find out.

although DJ's explanation makes it sound golden....I get chills thinking about letting the device decide whats real and whats not as well CJR...but who knows. I don't own a Ci

and I think you meant Anal....you are ANAL arent you? :D
anile refers to being feeble like an old woman...

[Offshore]

:popcorn::popcorn::popcorn::popcorn::popcorn:

[RadarKid]

:popcorn::popcorn::popcorn::popcorn::popcorn:

5 boxes of popcorn........that'll get pricey nowadays

[CJR238]

wow...imagine that DJ.
perhaps thats why YOU with your Ci have such high opinions of the TrueLock reliability and I have to DISAGREE whole-heartedly with it on the 9500i. hmmm?
:deal:
xox

He had a 9500I first and still does,:cool: well its going to be a ix now.:)

As i have stated and always will TrueLock is reliable if used intelligently and according to the "Risk Scenarios".

[€]

... Also, I think the frequency blocks are smaller than the 30MHz blocks of the 9500i, but that's just a guess as of now, because the 9500ci seems more prone to false alerts that reoccur die to frequency drift than my 9500i was. I also think the lockout radii are smaller.

Agree - frequency blocks are 4-5 MHz and lockout radius has maybe only about 100-200 feets. 9500ci is far more accurate than 9500i/ix.

[CJR238]

although DJ's explanation makes it sound golden....I get chills thinking about letting the device decide whats real and whats not as well CJR...but who knows. I don't own a Ci

and I think you meant Anal....you are ANAL arent you? :D
anile refers to being feeble like an old woman...

I hope i will be getting a ci soon. Auto sounds nice but i prefer some control even if its limited.

Im starting to feel a bit feeble in my old age.:D

[RadarKid]

As i have stated and always will TrueLock is reliable if used intelligently and according to the "Risk Scenarios".





:026:

than I retract my original statement......if he owned the 9500i, there's no reason for him to be as FULL OF #%IT as he is!

BTW - TrueLock works EXCELLENT if you never lock out a location. Try it, you'll notice how reliable it is....

[CJR238]

Agree - frequency blocks are 4-5 MHz and lockout radius has maybe only about 100-200 feets. 9500ci is far more accurate than 9500i/ix.

If this is the case the lock outs would be alerting evry outher day, frequency drift was a problem with 30MHz blocks let alone anything smaller.
Also the radios I believe the ci manual states is 1/2mi. It may not be locking out that particular false for that long but its actively looking for that specific frequency for that 1/2mi radius.

[€]

If this is the case the lock outs would be alerting evry outher day, frequency drift was a problem with 30MHz blocks let alone anything smaller.


But I'm almost sure that drift problem lays by detector's side, not source. If 9500ci measures frequency much more precisely, narrower f-blocks have sence.

[thestaton]

autolearn on my CI is just amazing. I can't imagine every going back to be honest.

[mswlogo]

When you lock-out false alert by hand, every frequency which is presented at the area is LockOut-ed right? I'd notice that when 9500ci locks-out automaticaly by AutoLearn feature, frequency/frequencies NEED to be repeted to be stored in memory as false alert, otherwise we get an alert even when storing is in progress.
Has Enybody had similar oservation?

I totally agree.

I HATED locking out manually and I wiped all manual LockOuts when I received the ix upgrade.

AutoLearn constantly corrects the LockOuts too if they suddenly go missing.

This was a big complaint I had with the 9500i. And it could be done offline if they released software for it.

So far I really like the ix, night and day between i and ix. It's even way more quiet even without the lockouts. It must be the under 20mph thing that helps me alot (most falses are in busy slow areas). It's almost too good to be true and I hope it's working ok.

Now I'm even tempted to upgrade my wifes car from 8500 that I drive occasionally. I hate being with out it and I don't like transferring it.

Can't wait for the next upgrade. 9900ixx (EVDO Real time tracking of boggies).

[djrams80]

:deal:
wow...imagine that DJ.
perhaps thats why YOU with your Ci have such high opinions of the TrueLock reliability and I have to DISAGREE whole-heartedly with it on the 9500i. hmmm?

xoxThis opinion was formed well before I bought my 9500ci. Whatever your reasons are for dispising Truelock, the fact is that there are very few that agree with you. Even three members of GOL that were members during the filming of the video which showed Truelock could be beat, are now owners and users of Truelock equipped RDs and use this feature.

To top it off, just this week, there are two examples of why just having Truelock saves you from tickets. This very experienced RD user almost got a ticket because he turned his volume down on his STi due to false alerts:

http://www.radardetector.net/forums/beltronics/37687-talk-about-getting-luck-wow.html

And this also experienced RD user got a ticket because his V1 volume was turned all the way down, I assume to avoid false alerts. Why else would a RD user turn the volume down?:

http://www.radardetector.net/forums/laser-jammers/37582-my-laserstar-v1-failed-me-okay-well-i-failed-myself.html

Both of these forum members could have easily avoided having to turn down their RD, had their RD been equipped with Truelock. See with Truelock, no false alerts means no reason to ever turn down your RD's volume.

I have a ticket as an example to illustrate my point, while you have no such thing. Truelock saves you tickets and that's a fact. Here's my proof! :deal:

[djrams80]

Agree - frequency blocks are 4-5 MHz and lockout radius has maybe only about 100-200 feets.Have you done any testing to prove this? I know the professor has a K band transmitter that has adjustable frequecy control. I'd love to see this tested. Professor, could you do me a favor and purchase a $1600 RD, then spend hours and hours of your valuable time, just so I can know if this 4-5MHz block theory is true? :lol::lol: Then, once you get those results, could you spend another couple of days of your valuable time doing the same thing for X band? :lol::lol: That would be swell.


9500ci is far more accurate than 9500i/ix.My 9500ci definitely seems to agree with your 4-5MHz theory. I was hoping that this would also be incorporated into the 9500ix.

[djrams80]

I hope i will be getting a ci soon. Auto sounds nice but i prefer some control even if its limited.

Im starting to feel a bit feeble in my old age.:D



If this is the case the lock outs would be alerting evry outher day, frequency drift was a problem with 30MHz blocks let alone anything smaller.
Also the radios I believe the ci manual states is 1/2mi. It may not be locking out that particular false for that long but its actively looking for that specific frequency for that 1/2mi radius.

Even though I'm apparently full of $h!+, I can assure you that Autolearn works very well. You're going to love it.

[lacning74]

:deal:This opinion was formed well before I bought my 9500ci. Whatever your reasons are for dispising Truelock, the fact is that there are very few that agree with you. Even three members of GOL that were members during the filming of the video which showed Truelock could be beat, are now owners and users of Truelock equipped RDs and use this feature.

To top it off, just this week, there are two examples of why just having Truelock saves you from tickets. This very experienced RD user almost got a ticket because he turned his volume down on his STi due to false alerts:

http://www.radardetector.net/forums/beltronics/37687-talk-about-getting-luck-wow.html

And this also experienced RD user got a ticket because his V1 volume was turned all the way down, I assume to avoid false alerts. Why else would a RD user turn the volume down?:

http://www.radardetector.net/forums/laser-jammers/37582-my-laserstar-v1-failed-me-okay-well-i-failed-myself.html

Both of these forum members could have easily avoided having to turn down their RD, had their RD been equipped with Truelock. See with Truelock, no false alerts means no reason to ever turn down your RD's volume.

I have a ticket as an example to illustrate my point, while you have no such thing. Truelock saves you tickets and that's a fact. Here's my proof! :deal:

I just sent my 9500i in for the upgrade and when I was driving "naked" today I forgot that I didn't have my 9500i since I'm so used to it being quiet anyway. Now if I had a noisy V1, I would immediately remember that it wasn't there. :)

[Arashi666]

Agree - frequency blocks are 4-5 MHz and lockout radius has maybe only about 100-200 feets. 9500ci is far more accurate than 9500i/ix.


but at nearly 3 times the cost it damn well better be worth it, I mean GOD that thing is expensive

[FlyinZX-10R]

but at nearly 3 times the cost it damn well better be worth it, I mean GOD that thing is expensive


If I could buy one at a lower price by getting rid of the ZR4's, I'd do it.

quick question about frequency drift/lockout/autolearn. Someone correct me if Im wrong.

If you drive by a false alert 3 times, it will lock it out. If that false alert frequency starts to drift, the CI will alert to it again and then lock it out again after 3 passes. When it locks it out the second time, does it erase the frequency block from the first time it locked it out? If not, and the false source keeps drifiting, pretty soon it may have a large amount of the K band range locked out and may not alert to a real threat.

[djrams80]

If I could buy one at a lower price by getting rid of the ZR4's, I'd do it.

quick question about frequency drift/lockout/autolearn. Someone correct me if Im wrong.

If you drive by a false alert 3 times, it will lock it out. If that false alert frequency starts to drift, the CI will alert to it again and then lock it out again after 3 passes. When it locks it out the second time, does it erase the frequency block from the first time it locked it out? If not, and the false source keeps drifiting, pretty soon it may have a large amount of the K band range locked out and may not alert to a real threat.The original lockout will eventually be erased, but I have not figured out what it takes to unlock it, meaning, how many passes or days or what. I did some testing a while back trying to figure this out, but I failed:

http://www.radardetector.net/forums/escort/37279-performed-autotruelock-test.html

http://www.escortradar.com/pdf/9500ciOwnersManual.pdf (http://www.escortradar.com/pdf/9500ciOwnersManual.pdf)




AutoLearn/Auto UnLearn

(X and K-bands only)

AutoLearn constantly analyzes all
incoming signals as you drive. If the same
signal is detected at the same location
approximately (3) three times, the 9500ci
will automatically lock it out as a false
alarm. Once this signal has been locked
out, no alert will be given at this location
unless it’s a new or different signal.
Once a signal has been locked out and
stored in memory, the 9500ci will also
automatically unlock a signal if it is not
present the next time you pass that
location. This reduces the chances of
locking out a real threat.

http://img390.imageshack.us/img390/9048/9500ciownersmanualrj0.png (http://imageshack.us)

[CJR238]

If I could buy one at a lower price by getting rid of the ZR4's, I'd do it.

quick question about frequency drift/lockout/autolearn. Someone correct me if Im wrong.

If you drive by a false alert 3 times, it will lock it out. If that false alert frequency starts to drift, the CI will alert to it again and then lock it out again after 3 passes. When it locks it out the second time, does it erase the frequency block from the first time it locked it out? If not, and the false source keeps drifiting, pretty soon it may have a large amount of the K band range locked out and may not alert to a real threat.

Just befriend a dealer and the CI will be totally worth it. Now if i can sell my new 9500I for list price i only need to throw in a few more and i got the new CI.

Well from my understanding yes. If a false alert frequency starts to drift, the CI will alert to it again and then lock it out again after 3 passes. When it locks it out the second time, at some point in those 3 pases it will erase the old frequency block from the first time it locked it out.

[FlyinZX-10R]

I just skimmed the CI's owners manual and it sounds impressive.
Now I just have to figure out which bank im going to hit to pay for it. :D

I wish we could fast forward to 2011 to see the model with a rear antenna and directional arrows.

[€]

Have you done any testing to prove this?

I can't proof it as "Proofessor" :D since have no such great microwave transmitter.

It's only based on my observations of 9500ci behaving compared to 9500i.
When I had notice "drift" at 9500i, frequency of one source changed for example from 24.118 to 24.148. Now, when the same source drifts at 9500ci, frequency change from 24.119 to only 24.123.

And now - isn't it a proof of both:
- narrower f-blocks of 9500ci
- drift is a detector's accuracy problem, not real frequency shift of a source?

It's also interesting that sometimes variation has 4 and sometimes 5 MHz (or maybe even 6 MHz). It looks for me like the closest to center of K band frequency is, the smaller blocks are. But it's hard to regard without special hardware.



I know the professor has a K band transmitter that has adjustable frequecy control. I'd love to see this tested. Professor, could you do me a favor and purchase a $1600 RD, then spend hours and hours of your valuable time, just so I can know if this 4-5MHz block theory is true? :lol::lol: Then, once you get those results, could you spend another couple of days of your valuable time doing the same thing for X band? :lol::lol: That would be swell.

Help us Obi Wan... sorry... Proofessor, you're our only hope :D

[jimbonzzz]

Someone send me a 9500ci, and I'll check it out ;)

[djrams80]

Someone send me a 9500ci, and I'll check it out ;)Alright happya$$, time for you to take a trip to Michigan, for research sake. :D

[CJR238]

Has anyone just asked Escort? An engineer not a sales person.