STI and GOL

[Radar Roy]

Been a real busy few days and I have not had time to post, but I’ll provide a short run down on our trip and the GoL testing.

First off we started our 2100 mile trip to Ohio from Arizona, with Outrun’s Valentine One detector and the STi that we obtained from Bel during the CES show earlier this month.

The STi alerted to Ka alerts two to three seconds before the Valentine.

On K, both detectors alerted at the same time.

Upon entering Illinois, we were hit with X band from a Sheriff’s patrol car. X band had been disabled from the STi during this encounter, but was later turned on. On another subsequent X hit in Ohio, the Valentine One alerted first.

We stopped off at the corporate offices of Beltronics and Escort, and we were given the VIP tour!

We met with the engineer who developed the STi, who explained the development and the unique features of this unit. One feature that impressed Outrun, RacerX and I was the laser detection design of the unit. They had taken apart a unit for us and shown us the four laser diodes facing the front, and the one laser diode for the rear. Two of the front facing laser diodes are placed on a 45 degree angle, allowing the unit to receive “scatter” laser signals.

Csteph commented in an earlier post “that his STi was also a Spectre”. We encountered the same concern during our trip. The STi would alert to other radar detectors. The engineers at Bel were aware of this concern and said that he had just completed a software upgrade to solve this falsing issue.

After the tour in engineering, we were given a tour of their quality control area. They showed us that on the RX65 units, that they take one radar detector, out of each case of 10, on the top of each pallet of radar detectors to check quality control of their product.

With the new STi units, EVERY unit is removed from its box and run through a series of three tests, before it is ready for sale!

Their commitment to this quality control has kept their return rate below 2%, and only 10% of these returns, are for performance issues.

Outrun, RacerX and I would like to thank the entire staff at Escort and Beltronics for the hospitality they shown us!

Today (Saturday) we met with the GoL crew and they started their tests of various radar detectors.

Csteph had sent the GoL his retail STi and I provided them my STi for testing.

We were all very impressed with the overall sensitivity tests of the STi and the RX65 units. The GoL are now compiling their results and they will post their observations in a following post.

I obtained a newer Spectre from Roy Zeglers in AU last week, and I performed a test with it, along with my Spectre and a VG2. The STi was completely immune from detection on all nose to nose tests! Both STi units would give a strong Ka alert, when it was in close range to the Spectre units.

The GoL also performed their own Spectre and VG2 tests of the STi and also obtained the same results that I did.

Now to clear up a few issues that others have posted. My STi was not a juiced unit, provided to me by Bel for these tests. And to cover these concerns, the GoL also obtained a retail unit from Csteph. My unit and Csteph were tested separately by the GoL and both gave consistent results.

And to cover what a user commented was my “concern” with the STi’s falsing issue. The STi as well as any radar detector made by any top manufacture is ALWAYS under development as new technology evolves. It would be foolish of me and Bel, rush to fill customers orders just to get them out the door, when we know improvements to the product are just weeks away.

From seeing first had the development of the STi, speaking with the engineers, and seeing the commitment to quality Bel has put into this newly designed detector has totally impressed Outrun, RacerX and myself. When they say that the STi is unlike ANY OTHER RADAR DETECTOR ever made, they are not kidding. It is a complete new platform from the ground up!

[AirMoore]

Roy thanks for letting us in on the GoL trip up... (I saw some pics via Outrun)... but its always nice to hear about the encounters and other such things... so thanks for taking the time to write this up.

Can't wait to see GoL testing results!

That is cool about the trip around Bel...especially the STi part... it is also nice to know that they do have quality control as a main issue with their products.
I also like the fact that Bel has already addressed the concern about falses on the STi and has a correction for this already!

(BTW: 'A short rundown' :lol:) I'm kidding Roy :P

[riley2638]

VERY GOOD TO HEAR!!! I can't wait to get my hands on one now...MY RX65 has been flawless, but if the KA detection on the STi is even better than my 65, I'm sold....Also seems as if the laser detection will be top notch..Can't wait for the results!!! Keep up the good work and I appreciate all of the hard work and time you guys (GOL and Roy) put into these test...

[stalker]

need to test the STI in West Australia where multinovas are everywhere.

[mattvr]

need to test the STI in West Australia where multinovas are everywhere.

Yeah that would be sweet. Roy, wanna send me one for testing? :D

[stalker]

hahaa I though you would pop up scamming a freebie ;)

[Tunkki]

So when will we see the results?

[Road Warrior]

We stopped off at the corporate offices of Beltronics and Escort, and we were given the VIP tour!

https://www.beltronics.com/cp/cgi-bin/cp-app.cgi?usr=4859859&rnd=3244573&pg=contact

Beltronics is a CANADIAN company with its head office located in Mississauga, Ontario, Canada and ALL Bel/Escort products are built up here, I personally visited them twice and they were pretty unfriendly, I posted my impressions in details back in Oct or Nov last year :wink:

[Hessen]

Now to clear up a few issues that others have posted. My STi was not a juiced unit, provided to me by Bel for these tests.

Thanks for clearing that up Roy...... :D

[spankyaf]

Very interested in the Laser capability of the Sti. I guess it wasnt tested in the GOL. Any chance of a "match race" between it and the V1??

[Buz]

RadarRoy wrote

First off we started our 2100 mile trip to Ohio from Arizona, with Outrun’s Valentine One detector and the STi that we obtained from Bel during the CES show earlier this month.

The STi alerted to Ka alerts two to three seconds before the Valentine.


With all due respect RadarRoy, I am amazed at your opening comment!
You of all people know that running more than one detector in a vehicle has detrimental effects on performance! Maybe I'm missing something here.

Yes, I know I'm a V1 owner, but really.....let's review what Professor Jim wrote in an earlier post:

JIMBONZZZ WROTE:
Just because two detectors don't set each other off doesn't mean that they arent interfering with each other. Most people know know that sometimes other detectors will cause falses, right? What is not so obvious, is during their regular sweep, most detectors are also scanning for frequencies that if detected, will BLOCK or PREVENT an alert to real police radar.

For Ka falses, this usually comes from the LO of the other detector producing a harmonic in the Ka band. Detector makers have come up with a novel scheme to filter these falses: If the detector sees Ka radar, and ALSO sees a first or second harmonic that would come from another detector, the alert is blocked, since real police radar does not produce these harmonics like the other detectors do. Just about all of todays detectors use this scheme in some way or another.

OK here's how it works from what I understand:

I won't pretend that I know all of the elaborate methods detectors use to function, because I don't. Detectors receive by mixing the signals down to lower frequencies where regular electronics can easily deal with the signal. They use the first oscillator and it's harmonics to mix with incoming signals like so:

Assuming a 1st LO frequency of 11.5583 GHz:

X-Band
11.558 GHz - 10.525 GHz = 1.033 GHz

K-Band
11.558 GHz * 2 = 23.116 GHz.
24.150 Ghz - 23.116 Ghz = 1.034 GHz

Ka Band
11.558 Ghz * 3 = 34.764
34.764 is right around the center of the Ka band



So, say a detector is receiving Ka at 34.7 Ghz, and it ALSO sees the LO fundamental at 11.558 GHz, or the first harmonic at 23.116 Ghz, (or both!), it would possibly suppress the alert. Usually the detectors also comare signal levels etc so that if the Ka passes a certain threshold in comparison to the harmonic, it will still alert anyway. However, with another detector in the same vehicle, the harmonic will always be very strong compared to the received radar. The detectors might also consider a time frame, the blocking signal does not need to be present at the same time as the police radar signal in order to block it, sometimes if the blocking signal is seen within 10 seconds etc before the police radar it will block the alert.

And it is even more complex than this: the example above is only the center frequencies. The first LO will be sweeping too, and different detectors use countless different schemes to sweep the LO when looking for police radar, AND these harmonics that are the footprint of an interfering signal. There is also the second and third local oscillators, and also mixer products that will leak from the detector. Most of the tinme this doesn't matter, except when two detectors are operated in close proximity.

That is just ONE EXAMPLE of why you shouldn't run two detectors together.


Another reason: with a microwave oscillator operating in close proximity, it likely raises the "noise floor" in different bands. The detectors use singal averaging between multiple sweeps to identify a threat-level signal, so raising the noise floor would have the effect of making it so that a stronger signal would be necessary for the detector to be able to pick out radar signals from the noise.

Even enclosing the detectors in metal isn't going to prevent this, since a lot of the leakage comes from the antenna.



And yet another reason:
Some of the detectors will see the interference from the other detector and "park" on the frequency in order to get a better look to try to determine if it is real police radar. It might determine that it isn't polcie radar, and doesn't alert. This will have the effect of slowing down the overall sweep, reducing their effectiveness to real radar (especially POP!) as long as they are in the vicinity of the other detector.


It might be OK on some bands/frequencies but not others, it might work just fine until the sweeps of the two detectors coincide with each other in a certain way. But there's just no way to be sure when it is a problem and when it isn't.

You'll hear some people say that they've done run two together for a long time with no problems, but how do they know for sure? (That is almost like saying that they sped by a cop with an RMR jammer, so it MUST work:))

So bottom line: don't run two detectors in the same vehicle, especially if you are comparing performance. SML and Craig Peterson test with only detector on at a time for a reason, Guys of LIDAR test this way too!

You can have good results or you can have easy results. Detector testing has never been easy.




But you don't have to believe me. Here's what those in the industry have to say:

Michael B, Whistler Engineer:
http://www.radardetector.net/viewtopic.php?t=1119

You should never run 2 or more detectors in a vehicle at the same time. While some models may not interfer with each other, others interfere to a large extent. The interference is not necessarily noticed by self alerting but sometimes it woll cause one or both detectors to not report the presence of radar. Distance can also be compramised.


Mike Valentine
http://www.valentine1.com/lab/DoItYourself.asp

First Problem: Detectors hate each other - Every superheterodyne receiver that includes all of today's radar detectors receives and transmits during normal operation. As you probably know, these detector signals sometimes set off other detectors. Out on the road, other detectors are the most common nuisance signal V1 has to deal with. What's not so obvious is this. Even if a detector isn't set off by another one, it's internal defense system maybe be affecting its radar sensitivity.

Radartest.com, Craig Peterson
http://www.radartest.com/dector_thankyou-quiz.asp

ANSWER: FALSE It's a cardinal sin to operate two detectors anywhere near each other. Their detection circuitry interferes with one another and seriously degrades detection performance.



MAYBE THE STi IS BETTER AT DETECTING Ka, BUT I WANT TO SEE THE ACTUAL TEST RESULTS, NOT A SIDE BY SIDE COMPARASON THAT IS SUBJECT TO INTERFERENCE.


Buz

[csteph]

Buz, Give Roy some credit. I'm sure he knows all about the risks of running two detectors together. He probably factored that into his response when he posted. I myself owning an STi and V1 have run them together and apart and the info Roy posted are correct and apply even when you run the units apart!!!

So i personally appreciate Roy taking time to run them side by side for 2100 miles just to give us on the forum some "real world" feedback.
To me, Side by Side testing in the real world is just as if not more important than any controlled test environment.

Great job GOL and Roy for getting this test done before the market got flooded with STi's. I can't wait for the actual results AND your opinions.

[mattvr]

Wouldn't running a sti and any other detector together be ok, because of the minimal leakage from the sti??

[crazyVOLVOrob]

Wouldn't running a sti and any other detector together be ok, because of the minimal leakage from the sti??

With proper space inbetween the detectors you WILL be fine!!!!! The V1 was on the dash and the STi was hardwired at the tippy top of the windshield

[V1 Dave]

Does not say in Outrun's sig if he has the latest 3.826 firmware which some people have posted more Ka sensitivity. Not a fair comparison if Outrun's V1 is an older version.

[crazyVOLVOrob]

Does not say in Outrun's sig if he has the latest 3.826 firmware which some people have posted more Ka sensitivity. Not a fair comparison if Outrun's V1 is an older version.lets just wait until the results are posted who knows if their is a true difference in Ka sensitivity it hasn't been tested until recently

[SmaartAasSaabr]

RadarRoy wrote

First off we started our 2100 mile trip to Ohio from Arizona, with Outrun’s Valentine One detector and the STi that we obtained from Bel during the CES show earlier this month.

The STi alerted to Ka alerts two to three seconds before the Valentine.


With all due respect RadarRoy, I am amazed at your opening comment!
You of all people know that running more than one detector in a vehicle has detrimental effects on performance! Maybe I'm missing something here.

Yes, I know I'm a V1 owner, but really.....
Buz

Keep in mind the STI's leakage is supposed to be super extremely low. And the V1 is perhaps the 2nd least leaky and best shielded RD aside from the STI in production right now. And I saw in Outrun's pics that they were pretty far apart. So sounds like the issue should be very minimal.

Now if there was a Whistler involved :shock:

[compu44]

If anything I think it would give the v1 an advantage. The STI should have no leakage, so the v1 shouldn't have any interference to deal with. The opposite would be true for the STI.

[glockman30]

Does not say in Outrun's sig if he has the latest 3.826 firmware which some people have posted more Ka sensitivity. Not a fair comparison if Outrun's V1 is an older version.

I remember reading in one of these threads that GOL would have a 3.826 version at their testing. Let's wait and see.

[lordhamster]

If anything I think it would give the v1 an advantage. The STI should have no leakage, so the v1 shouldn't have any interference to deal with. The opposite would be true for the STI.

Everything leaks... The STI just does not leak at frequencies that Spectre looks for.


That being said, I'm glad that they've gone back to using Metal casings on the STI. If the STI has comparable or better performance than the V1, I would be very excited about that. At the same price or slightly lower than the v1, I'd seriously consider it.

The shielding from Spectre is meaningless for me here in ohio, but if I lived in a non-rd state, I'd definitely pay the premium for the unit.


Overall its a nice looking unit and I can't wait to see what the GOL testing revealed.

[brick]

The thing about the pictures that Outrun posted is that the STi was way up at the top of the windshield and the V1 was lower, on the dash. Still pretty high but that might have made a difference. Waiting for the GOL results because they will tell the real story.

[SmaartAasSaabr]

If anything I think it would give the v1 an advantage. The STI should have no leakage, so the v1 shouldn't have any interference to deal with. The opposite would be true for the STI.

Everything leaks... The STI just does not leak at frequencies that Spectre looks for.


Nah they wouldn't be so stupid as to do that. Cobra tried that years ago. The STI has to be shielded heavily and leak a very small amount.

[happya$$]

The thing about the pictures that Outrun posted is that the STi was way up at the top of the windshield and the V1 was lower, on the dash. Still pretty high but that might have made a difference. Waiting for the GOL results because they will tell the real story.

That was in Roy's RV. On our test vehicle EVERY detector was mounted on the same exact spot

[V1 Dave]

The thing about the pictures that Outrun posted is that the STi was way up at the top of the windshield and the V1 was lower, on the dash. Still pretty high but that might have made a difference. Waiting for the GOL results because they will tell the real story.
Good catch, you would think that after a few encounters they would switch that height advantage.

[brick]

The thing about the pictures that Outrun posted is that the STi was way up at the top of the windshield and the V1 was lower, on the dash. Still pretty high but that might have made a difference. Waiting for the GOL results because they will tell the real story.

That was in Roy's RV. On our test vehicle EVERY detector was mounted on the same exact spot

No doubt. That's why you guys are the pros. :wink:

As I've said before, I almost hope that the STI beats the V1 on Ka datection. Competition is good, and if nobody raised the bar we wouldn't get anywhere!

[lordhamster]

The thing about the pictures that Outrun posted is that the STi was way up at the top of the windshield and the V1 was lower, on the dash. Still pretty high but that might have made a difference. Waiting for the GOL results because they will tell the real story.

That was in Roy's RV. On our test vehicle EVERY detector was mounted on the same exact spot

No doubt. That's why you guys are the pros. :wink:

As I've said before, I almost hope that the STI beats the V1 on Ka datection. Competition is good, and if nobody raised the bar we wouldn't get anywhere!

Amen,

As a V1 guy, I hope the STI beats it also. The RD industry has been in a lull too long

[Buz]

crazyVOLVOrob wrote

With proper space inbetween the detectors you WILL be fine!!!!! The V1 was on the dash and the STi was hardwired at the tippy top of the windshield

Please rob........We ALL get interference form RD's that are 1/4 mile behind us, as well as from vehicles in oncoming lanes!

I don't think separating them 5 feet or so makes this a SAFE test result.

[SmaartAasSaabr]

crazyVOLVOrob wrote

With proper space inbetween the detectors you WILL be fine!!!!! The V1 was on the dash and the STi was hardwired at the tippy top of the windshield

Please rob........We ALL get interference form RD's that are 1/4 mile behind us, as well as from vehicles in oncoming lanes!

But they aren't V1's.

[ES13Raven]

Does not say in Outrun's sig if he has the latest 3.826 firmware which some people have posted more Ka sensitivity. Not a fair comparison if Outrun's V1 is an older version.
Well, as Roy said... the STi already has a software upgrade coming - so it did not have the latest firmware either.

And most V1s out there do not have the latest firmware as well :wink:

[carlito]

The thing about the pictures that Outrun posted is that the STi was way up at the top of the windshield and the V1 was lower, on the dash. Still pretty high but that might have made a difference. Waiting for the GOL results because they will tell the real story.

That was in Roy's RV. On our test vehicle EVERY detector was mounted on the same exact spot where>?

[RacerX]

Please rob........We ALL get interference form RD's that are 1/4 mile behind us, as well as from vehicles in oncoming lanes!

I don't think separating them 5 feet or so makes this a SAFE test result.

No offense but you are SADLY mistaken. the STI isn't an upgrade of outdated technology. it's a new era. leakage or interference is NOT an issue with this detector.

[stalker]

Please rob........We ALL get interference form RD's that are 1/4 mile behind us, as well as from vehicles in oncoming lanes!

I don't think separating them 5 feet or so makes this a SAFE test result.

No offense but you are SADLY mistaken. the STI isn't an upgrade of outdated technology. it's a new era. leakage or interference is NOT an issue with this detector.

Exactly, as Roy said, it is new technology built from the ground up ;)

In Roys RV the detectors would have been 15 feet apart...that thing is HUGE :shock: :shock: :shock:

[crazyVOLVOrob]

Please rob........We ALL get interference form RD's that are 1/4 mile behind us, as well as from vehicles in oncoming lanes!

I don't think separating them 5 feet or so makes this a SAFE test result.

No offense but you are SADLY mistaken. the STI isn't an upgrade of outdated technology. it's a new era. leakage or interference is NOT an issue with this detector.he is just scared that the V1 wasn't first to alert Ka!!!!! I am going to wait for full results though.

[SmaartAasSaabr]

Please rob........We ALL get interference form RD's that are 1/4 mile behind us, as well as from vehicles in oncoming lanes!

I don't think separating them 5 feet or so makes this a SAFE test result.

No offense but you are SADLY mistaken. the STI isn't an upgrade of outdated technology. it's a new era. leakage or interference is NOT an issue with this detector.

Nah lots of interference. At least that the STI would recieve.

[Holla]

The fact that Roy posted the STI alerts to KA 2-3 seconds before the V-1 scares me :shock: Thats some distance when traveling at 80MPH

[SmaartAasSaabr]

The fact that Roy posted the STI alerts to KA 2-3 seconds before the V-1 scares me :shock: Thats some distance when traveling at 80MPH

80 mi/h in a RV! :shock: :shock: :D :D

I remember reading in an RV forum, "what's the fastest you've been up to", there were a few people that had their bus-based RV's going 85 :shock: downhill :lol:

[crazyVOLVOrob]

The fact that Roy posted the STI alerts to KA 2-3 seconds before the V-1 scares me :shock: Thats some distance when traveling at 80MPHThe argue ment could be made that becuse the STi is mounted alot higher it recieved the radar earlier...Lets all wait until the results

[carlito]

Please rob........We ALL get interference form RD's that are 1/4 mile behind us, as well as from vehicles in oncoming lanes!

I don't think separating them 5 feet or so makes this a SAFE test result.

No offense but you are SADLY mistaken. the STI isn't an upgrade of outdated technology. it's a new era. leakage or interference is NOT an issue with this detector.he is just scared that the V1 wasn't first to alert Ka!!!!! I am going to wait for full results though. I dont think he is scared but this is ture running 2 radar detectors is not a good idea
some says is bad some say is ok but VR SAYS IS NOT OK!!ANYWAY I WOULD LOVE it if THE STI DRIver has alot more range than the v1 unit
that way mike v can do a nother boost on ka band.

[SmaartAasSaabr]

Look at the sensitivity numbers we've seen about the STI. Should blow away everything on Ka.

[carlito]

Look at the sensitivity numbers we've seen about the STI. Should blow away everything on Ka. I sure hope it does blow the V1 on KA band!!!!!!!!!and i mean it to:wink:



Carlito

[lordhamster]

Please rob........We ALL get interference form RD's that are 1/4 mile behind us, as well as from vehicles in oncoming lanes!

I don't think separating them 5 feet or so makes this a SAFE test result.

No offense but you are SADLY mistaken. the STI isn't an upgrade of outdated technology. it's a new era. leakage or interference is NOT an issue with this detector.

Um what are you basing this on? Did you see some secret scientific analysis the rest of us didn't?

Leakage will always be an issue for ANY electronic device. Whenever you have a changing current, EM radiation is created... there is no way around it. You can shield it as much as you want, but something will escape.

Please note, I'm not saying that the STI nessesarily interfered with the V1, all I'm saying is that its not possible to make a truely leakproof detector.

I happen to know in my experience of trying to run a x50 and V1 at the same time, the two would make each other false quite often... and whats much worse is that they would also supress alerts to (cvs for example) until I was much closer than usual.

In my case, I had them mounted on opposite ends of the windshield.

[Buz]

crazyVOLVOrob wrote

he is just scared that the V1 wasn't first to alert Ka!!!!! I am going to wait for full results though.


Honestly, If the STi does prove to be better than the V1 on Ka, then great.
But I'll still hold on to my V1 until Mike raises the bar as well.

The reason I originally posted in this thread was because.....Let's face it we've all been on the edge of our seats waiting to hear about the STi, so to read what I read BEFORE the test results was disheartning since it may or may not be true, and alot of people may formulate opinions that may not necessarily be correct based on this statment.

It's like announcing the new president before all the votes are in. :?

Buz

[RacerX]

Um what are you basing this on? Did you see some secret scientific analysis the rest of us didn't?

something like that.

[CactusMan]

I would be interested to see the results of the Ku band testing between the STi and the V1. oh. wait. Thats right, STi doesnt have Ku capabilities.

[SmaartAasSaabr]

I would be interested to see the results of the Ku band testing between the STi and the V1. oh. wait. Thats right, STi doesnt have Ku capabilities.

ahaha ! Gotta add "biotch" to the end of that :lol: :lol:

[AirMoore]

I would be interested to see the results of the Ku band testing between the STi and the V1. oh. wait. Thats right, STi doesnt have Ku capabilities.

It would also be interesting to see both detectors get owned by Spectre. oh. wait. Thats right, the STi wouldn't.

"Officer you can't take my V1 away it can detect Ku band"

[SmaartAasSaabr]

Yeah well they both have their strong points. Oh wait - that's right Ku band doesn't exist yet :D

Dunno what this "Ku at GOL" thing was, is that that plastic toylike think Jim had affixed to his Firebird?

[nvr2fast]

Well I'm not sure Mike Valentine has the same resources and funding as Bel/Escort combined.

Belscort claim this new STi design costed millions. Now say millions means at least 2-3million USD minimum. Thats not pocket change. I think someone actually mentioned the number?

The V1 design, for better or worse, hasn't changed much over the years at all. If I recall the various pics and stuff, the V1 went through 1 horn revision from the early 90s to now... thats 10 years!

Anyway, I'm just interested to see the STi's performance against photo radar like the Multanova 6F at 34.3Ghz. If it isn't much better than the existing V1/RX65/X50, then i'm going to get a Bel 795R.

[ES13Raven]

I would be interested to see the results of the Ku band testing between the STi and the V1. oh. wait. Thats right, STi doesnt have Ku capabilities.
Roy said that the Bel rep said there is a way to turn Ku on if they wanted to. It was speculated that there might be a certain button combination to turn it on...

[FLYBOY!!!!!]

When are the results of this weekends testing going to be posted on the forum, Roy's website or GOLs site :?: :?: :?: :?:

[nvr2fast]

Yes we aaaaall want to know where it will be posted first?!

[CactusMan]

lol :lol: ^5

[stalker]

has anyone got a copy of the DVD,s from the last one they wanna send me ;)

[Buz]

nvr2fast wrote

The V1 design, for better or worse, hasn't changed much over the years at all.

Yeah, maybe on the outside. :evil: