Speedzones no longer doing general RD testing anymore

[QUOTE=Buckdarma;908889]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nine_c1

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Buckdarma

cherry picking your arguments once again.

Now you come up with a idea about never seeing the course ? Yes, it was obviously all made up and all the radar manufacturers are in on it too. :)

It's a grand conspiracy akin to the Kennedy assassination and you guys are the only ones who know the truth. :)

---

What can I say.....SML's shoddy test methodology and suspect results is a cherry tree loaded with fruit waiting to be plucked.

How can you possibly be involved in this hobby as long as you have and not learned anything Buck?

---

well I know enough to trust the guys that design the stuff to be watching each other like hawks at performance tests

AND you trust them enough that they fry a MPH unit in the HOT Texas sun as well???

You guys got to let the conspiracies you find hiding around every bush go.

Buck, no conspiracies. IIRC, you were one of the first guys to tout how great the Redline BSRDR was and you used it extensively over the past 6 months. NOW that there's a new fashion model before your eyes, you forgot all about the Redline?? Remember man, you gotta dance with who brung ya!!!

The max is a good example

Yes, they promised a lot more then the first models delivered but that will change over time with it's further development


For a guy with such impeccable taste in music (BOC), I find your arguments as to the greatness of SML and crew to be interesting. Its akin to me trashing BOC when I've never listened to any of their music over the years. You'd be all over that like flies on a ship carrying rubber doggie doo from China. Plus, what does the Max have to do with this issue above??? If you'll recall, it was SML that touted the greatness of the greatness UNIT ever built with the greatest range ever had well before it was even out of pre-production. YOU know that Buck and so do I!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Buckdarma

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nine_c1

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Buckdarma

cherry picking your arguments once again.

Now you come up with a idea about never seeing the course ? Yes, it was obviously all made up and all the radar manufacturers are in on it too. :)

It's a grand conspiracy akin to the Kennedy assassination and you guys are the only ones who know the truth. :)

---

What can I say.....SML's shoddy test methodology and suspect results is a cherry tree loaded with fruit waiting to be plucked.

How can you possibly be involved in this hobby as long as you have and not learned anything Buck?

---

well I know enough to trust the guys that design the stuff to be watching each other like hawks at performance tests

You guys got to let the conspiracies you find hiding around every bush go.

The max is a good example

Yes, they promised a lot more then the first models delivered but that will change over time with it's further development

---

Wow Buck.....where did you read that, in my review of the pre-production MAX back in June?

The MAX experience - Escort Radar Forum

You should learn to trust the guys that the guys that design this stuff trust. Remember I told you back in January that you were wrong about Escort simply using old hardware with "new" filtering on the next gen.

http://www.radardetector.net/forums/...tml#post903978

The MAX was good, we helped make it better with credible testing and feedback. Just about every issue I pointed out in that review is being or has already been addressed. Likewise with the RedLine before it.......that expert firmware did not happen without the testing and encouragement from folks like me.;)

SML is going out of business because their tests were meaningless and no longer relevant. They didn't teach us anything about the importance of response time or the advantages of eliminating unnecessary Ka bandwidth and cutting back on cumbersome Ka alert algorithms. Their method of determining a detector's performance soley by the number of LEDs lit on a flat desert highway is below amateur level these days.

Nope. You cannot credit SML for precipitating any of the recent advancements in radar detection technology today. That push came from the fellas you are trying to discredit. Thankfully, Escort and Valentine have taken notes over the past few years and paid attention to OUR tests and listened to OUR recommendations. For those reasons you now have the RedLine with BS/RDR, the Valentine One with custom sweeps, and the blistering quick MAX with it's digital signal processing.

Agree or disagree, but that's the facts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nine_c1

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Buckdarma

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nine_c1

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Buckdarma

cherry picking your arguments once again.

Now you come up with a idea about never seeing the course ? Yes, it was obviously all made up and all the radar manufacturers are in on it too. :)

It's a grand conspiracy akin to the Kennedy assassination and you guys are the only ones who know the truth. :)

---

What can I say.....SML's shoddy test methodology and suspect results is a cherry tree loaded with fruit waiting to be plucked.

How can you possibly be involved in this hobby as long as you have and not learned anything Buck?

---

well I know enough to trust the guys that design the stuff to be watching each other like hawks at performance tests

You guys got to let the conspiracies you find hiding around every bush go.

The max is a good example

Yes, they promised a lot more then the first models delivered but that will change over time with it's further development

---

Wow Buck.....where did you read that, in my review of the pre-production MAX back in June?

The MAX experience - Escort Radar Forum

You should learn to trust the guys that the guys that design this stuff trust. Remember I told you back in January that you were wrong about Escort simply using old hardware with "new" filtering on the next gen.

http://www.radardetector.net/forums/...tml#post903978

The MAX was good, we helped make it better with credible testing and feedback. Just about every issue I pointed out in that review is or has been addressed. Likewise with the RedLine before it.......that expert firmware did not happen without the testing and encouragement of folks like me.;)

SML is going out of business because their tests were meaningless and no longer relevant. They didn't teach us anything about the importance of response time or the advantages of eliminating unnecessary Ka bandwidth or eliminating cumbersome Ka alert algorithms. Their method of determining a detector's performance soley by the number of LEDs lit on a flat desert highway is below amateur level these days.

Nope. You cannot credit SML for precipitating any of the recent advancements in radar detection technology today. That push came from the fellas you are trying to discredit. Thankfully, Escort and Valentine have taken notes over the past few years and paid attention to OUR tests and listened to OUR recommendations. For those reasons you now have the RedLine with BS/RDR, the Valentine One with custom sweeps, and the blistering quick MAX with it's digital signal processing.

Agree or disagree, but that's the facts.

---

Better yet, where are all of these findings below on Speedzones or any other site??

" In an advanced new product test overseen by the category’s leading authority, Speed Measurement Labs (SML), PASSPORT Max™ established three new benchmarks for the detector category. Setting new records for longest range, fastest response time and greatest sensitivity, PASSPORT Max™ displayed the best performance that SML had ever witnessed.

“In 30 years of impartial testing, we haven’t seen this level of reporting range or immediacy of alerts by any other radar detector,” said Speed Measurement Labs President and CEO.

In one test, physicists used an extremely low powered radar gun to test sensitivity. Typically, detectors do not see this source beyond the one mile mark but PASSPORT Max™ reported the same source from beyond seven miles!

In another SML test, PASSPORT Max™ proved its extremely fast response time by alerting to measured test signals more than four times faster than any competitor detector ever tested.

To determine how far PASSPORT Max™ could alert, SML engineers used the longest physical distance on the range. PASSPORT Max™ reported every gun, every signal, to more than fifteen miles (standard detector testing for the SML range ends at nine miles as detectors predictably cannot pick up such weak test signals). PASSPORT Max™ simply reported alerts from the longest distance ever tested.

double post

Nine/C " Wow Buck.....where did you read that, in my review of the pre-production MAX back in June?"

Nope, I have had this opinion from the beginning actually and for the reasons I have sighted.

Nine/C " You should learn to trust the guys that the guys that design this stuff trust. Remember I told you back in January that you were wrong about Escort simply using old hardware with "new" filtering on the next gen."

Strawman argument. :)

I didn't know if they had implemented this new patent at the time is all. You have a "in" to them. Not me. It has nothing to do with trust whatsoever.

I trust the guys that engineer these products and who often show up at these S/S tests to observe their products in actual use.

They all seem to STILL trust S/S enough to test their products in fact to this day

Let me address this last bit

nine c " SML is going out of business because their tests were meaningless and no longer relevant. They didn't teach us anything about the importance of response time or the advantages of eliminating unnecessary Ka bandwidth and cutting back on cumbersome Ka alert algorithms. Their method of determining a detector's performance soley by the number of LEDs lit on a flat desert highway is below amateur level these days."

(1) The first sentence is totally unproven basher rhetoric.

(2)The second bit has NOT been shown to increase max alert distances whatsoever. Not in any videos I have ever seen. It just deals with sorting out the false alarms a bit better. The only way one can even come close to judging a rd's sensitivity is by signal strength of the detector without going in a lab to do it.

Unfortunately some rd manufacturers tried to game the tests andd their owners by making their detector read max signal no matter what the difference. Carl adjusted his tests to deal with it though. Something you omitted to mention. :)

Nine c "Nope. You cannot credit SML for precipitating any of the recent advancements in radar detection technology today. That push came from the fellas you are trying to discredit. Thankfully, Escort and Valentine have taken notes over the past few years and paid attention to OUR tests and listened to OUR recommendations. For those reasons you now have the RedLine with BS/RDR, the Valentine One with custom sweeps, and the blistering quick MAX with it's digital signal processing. "

Actually the "discredit part" is far more on your side then mine nine. I am fine with anyone testing detectors on their own and having fun doing it as long as they don't go around saying the professionals are dishonest and receive bribes to do their work.

These tests have more then enough cross checks between the manufacturers that that idea is truly a Microwave proof hat reading thought.

custom sweeps are great for faster detection time and to get rid of a lot of crap signals

they have little to do with max detection range. You should know this.

testing this too PROPERLY would send S/S costs threw the roof ! :0

What I truly believe happened besides the very large costs it takes to do a real professional test of rds is that Carl probably just got sick of all the e-mails from his bashers and haters that have nothing to do other then bash people like him when they don't hear what they want to here.

He probably just decided he was far too old for this silly SH-T anymore ! :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Buckdarma

(2)The second bit has NOT been shown to increase max alert distances whatsoever. Not in any videos I have ever seen. It just deals with sorting out the false alarms a bit better. The only way one can even come close to judging a rd's sensitivity is by signal strength of the detector without going in a lab to do it.

---

You've been living in a hole if you haven't seen or heard about the increased detection range people are experiencing with these new options.

Ignorance....plain and simple. You have it in spades Buck.

Stick with your old uninformative and grossly inaccurate SML reports, you deserve to remain in the dark.;)

Frankly, from the videos I have seen I am not impressed with the increases whatsoever.

The highest performing detectors still are the highest performing for range. What a surprise !

But do see some evidence that playing with the bands to lower false alerts can let one in for some rather nasty surprises

The ignorance is on your part not mine here but you keep believing what you like to believe as you obviously always do.

I don't believe anyone or anything will ever will change that. ;)

Wow Buckdarma i have never seen so many misinformed, biased and manipulative posts from one person before. Its like you just say things to argue and spread bad information?

Reminds me of someone....

Yeah, this thread has more than run its course.

Cliff