GOL 2009 Radar WRAPPED UP!!!!!!!!

[jimbonzzz]

The difference in results between their two tests has me boogered and I'm thinking it might have something to do with the conditions of the off axis test.

Personally, I see these as completely different conditions. If the real-world course was a slow curve on a flat, open road out west with no trees etc, them I might be wondering the same thing you are. But the real-world course was a far cry from that.

The horn should have a uniform gain and therefore the results from the right should equal the results from the left. We're not seeing that in every instance. So that led me to believe that the radar detectors angle with reference to the windshield itself might be a factor?

As for the left not matching the right: I'm not sure I understand your line of thinking here. Why do you think the windshield is the reason why results from the left don't match results from the right? The angle with respect to the windshield would be the same on either side. Is there something specific about the design of the detectors, or the windshield, that you think would affect it more on one side than the other? There's plenty of other things could be a factor:

• The test course could be biased one way or the other. Even with our straight test course, there's the possibility for reflections. Obviously the course doesn't have the exact same trees, poles, etc on both sides.
• The radar gun aiming could be a factor. Sure, I DID use a bubble level, and sighted it down the course to the best of my ability. But I'm only human.
• The test fixture - as stated in the results, angles are approximate. It wasn't made to exact specifications.
• Human error: maybe we didn't have the fixture rotated at exactly the angle for the run
• Human error: maybe we didn't hit the brakes exactly the same way on each run.
• Or the fact that we only did ONE run at each angle instead of doing multiple runs and averaging them like last time. Multiple runs would have been ideal, but time didn't allow it.
• Maybe the relative humidity changed between the the time we tested the left and right sides? (OK maybe that's pushing it a bit )

[happya$$]

There is no philosophy here. Only facts. The philosophy is entirely up to you.

There is no philosophy here!

What did they use to develope the test?

Facts are pieces of information presented as having objective reality.

I question whether the facts presented in the scientific off axis test apply to the reality of true off-axis performance. My question as to what does their test prove is valid. It was a question.

What do you think it proved?

Out of curiosity what RD do you drive with and have driven with? What RD's do you own?

[nine_c1]

The difference in results between their two tests has me boogered and I'm thinking it might have something to do with the conditions of the off axis test.

Personally, I see these as completely different conditions. If the real-world course was a slow curve on a flat, open road out west with no trees etc, them I might be wondering the same thing you are. But the real-world course was a far cry from that.

Very good explanation Jimbonzzz!

So due to the tree cover, the around the curve test could really have been more like a straight line test in that the RDs were picking up straight line reflections from objects in the curve. Thats interesting in itself......off-axis sensitivity may not be that much of a factor in around the bend traps depending on the cover.

The horn should have a uniform gain and therefore the results from the right should equal the results from the left. We're not seeing that in every instance. So that led me to believe that the radar detectors angle with reference to the windshield itself might be a factor?

As for the left not matching the right: I'm not sure I understand your line of thinking here. Why do you think the windshield is the reason why results from the left don't match results from the right? The angle with respect to the windshield would be the same on either side. Is there something specific about the design of the detectors, or the windshield, that you think would affect it more on one side than the other? There's plenty of other things could be a factor:

• The test course could be biased one way or the other. Even with our straight test course, there's the possibility for reflections. Obviously the course doesn't have the exact same trees, poles, etc on both sides.
• The radar gun aiming could be a factor. Sure, I DID use a bubble level, and sighted it down the course to the best of my ability. But I'm only human.
• The test fixture - as stated in the results, angles are approximate. It wasn't made to exact specifications.
• Human error: maybe we didn't have the fixture rotated at exactly the angle for the run
• Human error: maybe we didn't hit the brakes exactly the same way on each run.
• Or the fact that we only did ONE run at each angle instead of doing multiple runs and averaging them like last time. Multiple runs would have been ideal, but time didn't allow it.
• Maybe the relative humidity changed between the the time we tested the left and right sides? (OK maybe that's pushing it a bit )

I think the angle of the windshield with respect to the detector is a factor as well as the distance away from the windshield.

Everything else being equal, a sloped windshield will attenuate the radar signal more than a flat windshield. By angling the RD inside the windshield you are now effectively increasing the slope in that you are angling the windshield now on (2) axis as opposed to (1) with respect to the detector. This effect may be more pronounced on certain detectors depending on the design of the antenna lense

Your mount for the off-axis tests position the detector about five or so inches back away from the windshield whereas the detector would normally be right up against it. This might be similar to moving your glasses away from your face. Since not all RD antennas are centered inside the Detector.........M3 for example........a 45 degree angle to the right moves the Ka band antenna closer to the windshield and a 45 degree angle to the left moves the Ka antenna further away from the windshield.

The above is fact mixed with alot of speculation and may amount to squat.

All the points you list are excellent and go a long way into explaining other factors that could of and probably did effect the results. One pass is certainly nothing to hang your hat on.

Thanks for explaining your test methodology Jim. Would it be possible to run a singular test with the radar gun itself pointed at a direct angle to a RD that is in a conventional position on the windshield.......and then try a straight line shot with the RD angled inside the windshield? Just to compare and see if the results are in fact similar.

[nine_c1]

There is no philosophy here. Only facts. The philosophy is entirely up to you.

There is no philosophy here!

What did they use to develope the test?

Facts are pieces of information presented as having objective reality.

I question whether the facts presented in the scientific off axis test apply to the reality of true off-axis performance. My question as to what does their test prove is valid. It was a question.

What do you think it proved?

Out of curiosity what RD do you drive with and have driven with? What RD's do you own?

I've had many.

I've had about 6 different V1s............the last two were a 3.864 and 3.872.
The 3.872 was an animal with Ka guard off but I couldn't live with it that way. I found that my old 8500 X50 S7 was nearly as good with on axis Ka at 34.7 and better at times comparing it to off-axis or forward facing on this frequency.

After the 3.872 I switched to the 9500i and then the 9500ix. I noticed about the same detection range on 34.7 in the area I live in.......no 4 mile alerts around here. GPS was nice.......but don't need it. Still want more Ka range so I returned the 9500ix under the 30 day window and am waiting to try out a RedLine.

Also have an 8500 S7 refurb on order now. My son sold the X50 I had lent him !

I've also had an RX65 and a V995, M4 platforms that were fairly poor performers on Ka band in my opinion. That bubble lens on the 9500 series must do wonders !

I like the V1 and the 9500i. Never had an STi so the RedLine will certainly be a new experience. The funny thing is..........I'll probably get QT'd running it !

[GTO_04]

Thanks for doing the test guys.

I am still keeping my v1 though. BUT, I am stiil running 3.826 version that we have tested at GOL a long time ago. I never upgraded because I heard stories. Now I am wondering if I should or should not upgrade. I didn't know they added a Ka guard on there. That ka guard would come in handy but not if it cost me performance.

Ka guard has been an option on the V1 as far back as the 1.7 model. I found Ka guard off to be intolerable on the 1.7, but not so bad on the 3.826.

GTO_04

[Radar]

Thank You GOL for taking the extra time and effort as most of us base our purchase with your unbias results.

Hear, hear! Thank you GOL. Thanks to you, and others, I am able to come in as a newbie and have the same advantages as the veterans. Great work, and much appreciated!

Glad I have the latest V1 also.

[Radar]

Anyone going to convert their 3.813 to 3.872?

I know I have to have a 3.872, because I just bought directly from VR, but I cannot confirm it. I am told to just press the button, and it will display, but I cannot get it to display the version number.

[mikered30]

Anyone going to convert their 3.813 to 3.872?

I know I have to have a 3.872, because I just bought directly from VR, but I cannot confirm it. I am told to just press the button, and it will display, but I cannot get it to display the version number.

You have to press and hold the power button and then turn the knob.

[Z1NONLY]

Anyone going to convert their 3.813 to 3.872?

I know I have to have a 3.872, because I just bought directly from VR, but I cannot confirm it. I am told to just press the button, and it will display, but I cannot get it to display the version number.

You have to press and hold the power button and then turn the knob.

^^when it's off....press and holde the button and, while holding the button in, turn the knob and keep holding it in until the unit lights up.

When you let go, it shoud be able to press the button once and have the version shown, one number at a time.

[v1user]

This is my thumb today after refreshing this thread Friday night.