STI 33.8 issue never existed or already is fixed? PART 2

[Buford T. Justice]

No MEM-TEK this is not a hypothesis, this is 100% FACT.
Unlike some people on this forum, I do my best not to represent my personal therories or hypothesis as fact, and I didn't do that in this case.

I feel stupid for having to say this, but have you ever considered the idea that that people who run this board just might periodically have some information which isn't available to the general public? Wink (hint hint) That's all the further I can go with it! If you're waiting for Beltronics to make an official announcement/admission regarding this, it isn't likely to happen.

I'll recap by quoting the following FACTS that I've posted previously, for the
benefit of anyone who might be reading this.

This is exactly what causes the problem:

jimbonzzz wrote:
The 33.8 problem is caused by Ka filtering to prevent false alerts from other detectors. The STi looks for a brief "blip" of radar on 33.8 of a certain time duration, which is indicative of the sweeping oscillator from a leaky detector. When it sees this "blip", it raises the threshold or ignores a section of the Ka band for a certain duration in order to prevent a Ka false alert from the leaky detector. The problem is that when you're barely "on the edge" of detecting CW radar (like in our test), the signal will fade in and out of the noise, and can produce the same kind of "blip" that might be seen from another detector, causing the STi to filter out that section of the Ka band. How Beltronics might have "fixed" this, I don't know. Perhaps they decided to use a different method, or they tightened their time constraints a bit.

To the Professor,

Ok so if the 33.8 issue is caused by Ka filtering to prevent false alerts from other detectors and raises the threshold or ignores a section of KA band for a CERTAIN DURATION, then why the HEL where there other Radar Detectors on or other interference around which causes the STI to go into this high threshold mode during the GOL test?

If this is true on the STi shouldn't the test be redone without the STi going into the "high threshold filtering." Why test the STi when the filtering was activated. Why call it an issue? The STi was doing what its design to do??

Im puzzled now on this...

[jimbonzzz]

To the Professor,

Ok so if the 33.8 issue is caused by Ka filtering to prevent false alerts from other detectors and raises the threshold or ignores a section of KA band for a CERTAIN DURATION, then why the HEL where there other Radar Detectors on or other interference around which causes the STI to go into this high threshold mode during the GOL test?

There was NOT any other detectors powered on, nor other interference in the proximity.

"The problem is that when you're barely "on the edge" of detecting CW radar (like in our test), the signal will fade in and out of the noise, and can produce the same kind of "blip" that might be seen from another detector, causing the STi to filter out that section of the Ka band."

If this is true on the STi shouldn't the test be redone without the STi going into the "high threshold filtering." Why test the STi when the filtering was activated. Why call it an issue? The STi was doing what its design to do??

Im puzzled now on this...

The problem is that it went into this mode during normal exposure to actual police radar. It was designed to do this in the presence of other detectors, NOT in regular encounters with real police radar.

Hope this answers your question!

[Buford T. Justice]

To the Professor,

Ok so if the 33.8 issue is caused by Ka filtering to prevent false alerts from other detectors and raises the threshold or ignores a section of KA band for a CERTAIN DURATION, then why the HEL where there other Radar Detectors on or other interference around which causes the STI to go into this high threshold mode during the GOL test?

There was NOT any other detectors powered on, nor other interference in the proximity.

"The problem is that when you're barely "on the edge" of detecting CW radar (like in our test), the signal will fade in and out of the noise, and can produce the same kind of "blip" that might be seen from another detector, causing the STi to filter out that section of the Ka band."

If this is true on the STi shouldn't the test be redone without the STi going into the "high threshold filtering." Why test the STi when the filtering was activated. Why call it an issue? The STi was doing what its design to do??

Im puzzled now on this...

The problem is that it went into this mode during normal exposure to actual police radar. It was designed to do this in the presence of other detectors, NOT in regular encounters with real police radar.

Hope this answers your question!

So maybe the newer firmware raises this threshold up a bit to prevent the STi from going into high band filter mode?

[jimbonzzz]

So maybe the newer firmware raises this threshold up a bit to prevent the STi from going into high band filter mode?

I don't know for sure what they might have done. But, here are some possibilities:

-They could have tightened their timing constraints for the "blip". So for example IF the "problem code" was looking for a blip that lasts from 100-200ms, then the "new code" might look for one that lasts for say 130-160ms (numbers made up of course ) .

-They could look for the "blip" to occur a certain number of times, or at certain intervals, or before "locking out" the 33.8 area.

-Or they could have switched to a different scheme altogether.

[happya$$]

Well after all of the negative vibe we have received for this 33.8gh bug I can promise you what GOL will do in the future. We will keep any info like this in the future to ourselves and confidential and use it to make sure we buy products that perform to our expectations. I am so happy we have not shared some of the other info of other serious issues from other manufacturers that we are aware of. We gain nothing and lose everything. I hope this solution makes most of the forum members happy. I know the manufacturers will be ecstatic since we are now going to be doing what the “professionals” have done for years!

[jimbonzzz]

Buford:

It's clear to me that you're pretty skeptical about this, and that's OK... But, I have an idea that might help: I extend you the inviatation to meet up with me and happya$$ in the Cleveland area this weekend, and we'll demonstrate the 33.8 issue for you on your very own detector! Then, if you do send it in for a fix in the future, we can do the same thing again for you afterwards, just to be sure it was taken care of. If you can't come to Cleveland, then you're welcome to ship us your STi and we'll do it on video (of course we can guarantee it's safety). If you're interested in coming or sending your STi, PM me or happya$$.

[carboncopy]

Well after all of the negative vibe we have received for this 33.8gh bug I can promise you what GOL will do in the future. We will keep any info like this in the future to ourselves and confidential and use it to make sure we buy products that perform to our expectations. I am so happy we have not shared some of the other info of other serious issues from other manufacturers that we are aware of. We gain nothing and lose everything. I hope this solution makes most of the forum members happy. I know the manufacturers will be ecstatic since we are now going to be doing what the “professionals” have done for years!

I think this would be a very bad thing for the RD industry and the consumer. Granted you can't please everyone, but look at it like this... had you not made this information public, BEL might not have ever addressed this issue.

CC

[Buford T. Justice]

Buford:

It's clear to me that you're pretty skeptical about this, and that's OK... But, I have an idea that might help: I extend you the inviatation to meet up with me and happya$$ in the Cleveland area this weekend, and we'll demonstrate the 33.8 issue for you on your very own detector! Then, if you do send it in for a fix in the future, we can do the same thing again for you afterwards, just to be sure it was taken care of. If you can't come to Cleveland, then you're welcome to ship us your STi and we'll do it on video (of course we can guarantee it's safety). If you're interested in coming or sending your STi, PM me or happya$$.

Thank you for the invite. Your correct in saying about my skepticism soley based on what I have experienced with my STi. Twice I had 33.8 hits at exactly 1 mile. One being a stationary IO up the road and the other was moving.

Base on your info my STi does have the issue and it very well could, thus limiting my STi at only 1 mile detection. So would the upgrade be worth it for me, I have no clue and will wait to see what others find out when sending theirs in for the upgrade.

I never have tried to blanket all STi's as not having the 33.8 issue as I cant speak for others. I also understand GOL has allot riding on their test to be pulling "crap" to promote various detectors and consider the GOL test as fact thus declining your invitation.

For now I will settle on my STi having the 33.8 issue limiting me to 1 mile detection.

[TQUILL]

Well after all of the negative vibe we have received for this 33.8gh bug I can promise you what GOL will do in the future. We will keep any info like this in the future to ourselves and confidential and use it to make sure we buy products that perform to our expectations. I am so happy we have not shared some of the other info of other serious issues from other manufacturers that we are aware of. We gain nothing and lose everything. I hope this solution makes most of the forum members happy. I know the manufacturers will be ecstatic since we are now going to be doing what the “professionals” have done for years!

I think this would be a very bad thing for the RD industry and the consumer. Granted you can't please everyone, but look at it like this... had you not made this information public, BEL might not have ever addressed this issue.

CC

Agreed. I mean how about GOL says every detector is awesome and perfect in every way, that way no one gets upset. Everything from the Cobra to the Valentine, you can't go wrong.

The quickest way to failure is to try and please everybody all the time. Yeah everytime you say the truth about something you may upset people, but whatever happened to "Honest, real, and legit results: With no hidden agendas." NO detector is perfect, people just need to get over it. Remember all the greatest truths were blasphomies when they were first discussed.

Edit: I have no idea about the STi issue. I had one and I can't say one way or the other about the issue... I just wanted to input on whether or not GOL should keep things hidden as to not to upset people. (I don't blame them for feeling the way they do though)

[kpatz]

1 mile on Ka is pretty good under average conditions. I wouldn't consider that a problem, unless you make another pass with a different detector (V1 perhaps) and get 2+ miles.

In fact, where I live, 1+ mile Ka detection is a rare treat, even with a V1.