Food for thought, ZR4 + STI-r Remote

[jimbonzzz]

Actually I've seen it rather often, I can't speak for other people because I don't think other people drive on a day to day basis nearly as much as I do. I often spend as many as 12 hours a day just driving in a variety of different conditions of both city and highway, in numerous different jurisdictions and even in different states, on a daily basis. I average at least 4-6 confirmed positive LEO alerts a day, often times more, but on average 4-6 a day. In reading from many other people around here it seems many people might see one actual alert a week, maybe even a month.

I have one spot in specific I often drive where there is a cell/radio tower that I have a locked out K false on, in fact, I have 3 locked out K falses on it because the frequency drifts so bad on it that I have had to lock it out three separate times before finally getting it to silence. Its on a county road and in an area that is under shoulder widening construction so there is a County LEO who regularly sets there with K band radar (City and State here all use only Ka band, but our county cops use K).

When he is there I always get an alert, when he's not there all I get is a spinning icon.

Just the fact that I've had to lock the drift out 3 times is the equiv to 3 separate incidents right there is it not, or do you not consider this since the original freq wasn't always present? Its still 3 separate K band frequencies locked out in that area in memory though, the LEO makes a 4th and it always alerts.

Does this prove anything though?

Yes: it proves that your officers radar is not in one of the three frequency blocks that you previously locked out. If he was, you would get the spinning icon, and no alert from your 9500i. And in many similar situations, this is exactly what would have happenened, depending on the frequency of the radar gun and the false alert source.

Yes it does, it proves that locking out a K band false does not lock out the entire band as the videos I have seen, and provided you links for are claiming. Call it what ever you want, it still means the same. the videos are showing that if you lock out a single K false you lock out the entire K band. That's your video's showing that, thats the narration explaining that, no need for any interpretation of what your showing in the videos, the entire K band freq is locked out, not the block, the entire band is what GOL is claiming.

GOL isn't "claiming" anything. And "GOL" certainly never claimed that locking out a false will lock out the entire K-Band. But if you want to continue to repeatedly take different videos out of context in order to further you point, I suppose there's nothing I can do about it :roll:

Even though I replied to your problems with specific videos, in detail, it seems that you won't ever be satisfied until we say that GOL is "against" TrueLock! Sorry, not going to happen, because we have no reason to be "against" features.

Not to mention that one of your original "problems" with one of our videos was due to the fact that you failed to read your 9500i's operator's manual and understand it's features :roll:

That's total BS and you and I both know it.

No, that is you taking things WAY out of context in an attempt to make your point. :roll:

Since you were not able to provide links to these mysterious videos, all we can do is assume that they don't exist and you were making them up to try and further your point.

All the links to the videos are right there on the same page as the links I have provided you, they're GOL's videos, are you telling me your unaware of your own videos.

But certainly, please feel free to say I am making it all up, makes no difference, everyone else still see's them, not sure who you think your fooling with that comment.

I'm very aware of our own videos.
OK, where are the links to the videos you are referring to in this quote:

There are plenty of other videos with the official unofficial GOL name on them that also claim how the TrueLock does not work.

You said this in the same thread as the links you aready posted, meaning that you are referring to other videos in addition to the videos you already posted. Where are the links to these videos?

So far, in your original post and subsequent posts, you still have not even provided one single link to these additional videos! ops: This speaks volumes.

You know though, in computer security, and I use this as an example only because its a similar situation which I am familiar with, its over whelmed with people trying to stand out in the crowd and report some great new security hole they have spent months uncovering. It carries a degree of heightened respect among your peers to be able to report a great finding and present it to the world as your own marvelous discovery.

I believe this holds true in other aspects where thinking minds gather to share thoughts, medical discoveries, astronomy, etc...

There is always though the individuals who come up with what they believe to be just extraordinary findings and rush to file their report before their peers only to have it completely picked apart and discredited. The reason that more often than not happens is because their findings will typically require such a specific set of unrealistic circumstances to occur that the reality of it being even worth mention becomes ridiculous.

They are only fooling the fools who do not know better when their peers find just cause to reject such magnificent findings, it discredits them grossly when they attempt to pursue such things and carry them to a lower understanding level of listeners just so they may be heard and find that praise they sought.

That is very interesting. Too bad it has absolutely no bearing on the issue at hand.

[Lucky225]

For christ sake my only reason for making the post was to point out that perhaps the Ka selectable feature would be more desirable than GPS feature that is prone to flaw with it's 30mhz gaps, what a can of worms I unleashed lol.

[jimbonzzz]

For christ sake my only reason for making the post was to point out that perhaps the Ka selectable feature would be more desirable than GPS feature that is prone to flaw with it's 30mhz gaps, what a can of worms I unleashed lol.

Lucky, I'm sorry we hijacked your thread. ops:

Per the above, you sound like you are well informed about how TrueLock works with it's 30 MHz blocks.

So, it seems pretty clear to me that you didn't post this thread thinking that TrueLock "just didn't work" or "locked out the entire K band" from watching GOL videos, as Esoterica would have everyone believe

[djrams80]

For christ sake my only reason for making the post was to point out that perhaps the Ka selectable feature would be more desirable than GPS feature that is prone to flaw with it's 30mhz gaps, what a can of worms I unleashed lol.

Lucky, I'm sorry we hijacked your thread. ops:

Per the above, you sound like you are well informed about how TrueLock works with it's 30 MHz blocks.

So, it seems pretty clear to me that you didn't post this thread thinking that TrueLock "just didn't work" or "locked out the entire K band" from watching GOL videos, as Esoterica would have everyone believe

True, but he did say:

the 9500CI seems very attractive for it's GPS capabilities, but if it's anything like the 9500i, I can't afford getting a true signal locked out.

which he could have only gotten from the GOL videos, since there are exactly zero examples of this happening in the "real world" on a nonstaged event. Is it possible for the Truelock system to fail. Yes. It's possible. Does it happen. No. It does not happen. Yet, newbie after newbie(not Lucky225 really with over 1000 posts) comes in to this forum, fearing a technology that has never failed anyone at anytime as far as I know, quoting GOL videos, yet GOL takes no responsibility.

[jimbonzzz]

the 9500CI seems very attractive for it's GPS capabilities, but if it's anything like the 9500i, I can't afford getting a true signal locked out.

which he could have only gotten from the GOL videos

Hmmmm, I guess it's too far fetched to think that perhaps someone actually understands how TrueLock works along with it's limitations. I guess there's absolutely no way he could have learned that TrueLock uses 30 MHz blocks (even though he actually mentioned it!) and understands that if a police radar signal falls within a locked out block there is no alert. Yep, I guess that isn't possible at all, so it must be those darn GOL videos

[Lucky225]

the 9500CI seems very attractive for it's GPS capabilities, but if it's anything like the 9500i, I can't afford getting a true signal locked out.

which he could have only gotten from the GOL videos

Hmmmm, I guess it's too far fetched to think that perhaps someone actually understands how TrueLock works along with it's limitations. I guess there's absolutely no way he could have learned that TrueLock uses 30 MHz blocks (even though he actually mentioned it!) and understands that if a police radar signal falls within a locked out block there is no alert. Yep, I guess that isn't possible at all, so it must be those darn GOL videos

That is exactly my point, I do not want to lock out a K band signal and take the risk that an officer in my jurisdiction has a gun that falls in that 30mhz band, that was ALL I was pointing out, it is a concern for me, even if it is a rare occurance that will most likely never happen in the "real world"


EDIT:

GPS for false alerts sounds good, I just would not trust it, I'd rather the GPS technology be used to store my true speed 30 seconds-2 minutes prior to detection of a signal with location and speed tracking to be used as evidence, that's where I see GPS really having an advantage, tho the speed trap location marking is also great and a part of the 9500i already.

[CJR238]

EDIT:

GPS for false alerts sounds good, I just would not trust it, I'd rather the GPS technology be used to store my true speed 30 seconds-2 minutes prior to detection of a signal with location and speed tracking to be used as evidence, that's where I see GPS really having an advantage, tho the speed trap location marking is also great and a part of the 9500i already.

That’s exactly what Escort mentioned in there patent for the 9500I/ci.

[Esoterica]

THANK YOU RacerX!

I think you just solved the mystery for all of us about the videos with this one single statement you made in another thread...

http://www.radardetector.net/viewtop...=370995#370995

To add, Escort had gone back and forth on this, going from locking out segments, to the whole band, and back to segments.
So the early units did one or the other.

If this is true, and I do trust what you are saying on this, then that does explain what we are seeing in the video's perfectly and why all of us with new and up to date 9500i's are absolutely not seeing the same exact results as all these GOL videos are depicting.

I accept that answer and it does clearly explain why both sides are so determined in this disagreement, because both sides are absolutely correct. When GOL tested TrueLock your findings displayed that the entire K band block was being blocked out because this was happening in your early testing.

We likely then have you guys to thank for Escort obviously since correcting this issue, thus the reason no one is experiencing this same problem anymore and would have reason to think your videos were purposely staged. Clearly we all can see just from your one simple post that this was not the case and it was a real issue with early 9500i's.

Unless someone is buying a very old 9500i (eBay) they will never see this problem take place since Escort has corrected it. This also would mean that it is a false statement by other members of this website when they imply "the only fix out for the 9500i is the ramp up fix". Clearly there is a TrueLock fix that prevents old 9500i's from locking out the entire band.

Again, thank you RacaerX, that has certainly come as a relief to me in trusting and maintaining my confidence in the GOL as a whole. I certainly feel much better now in knowing you guys are not what looked to be purposely skewing your reportings.

Jim,
You wanted an apology from me "for not reading my owners manual", truest me, I've read my owners manual front to back, back to front numerous times and quote out of it here often. I did know that, just wasn't thinking about it. I guess it is of minor importance though to point out, none of us (that I can reference) using 9500i's use City or Highway mode on our detectors in the real world. Its pointless for us to do so, we use them in Auto mode and the primary reason we do so is because Auto mode works very well for us, and it eliminates these false alerts you get when in a shopping center parking lot, as the video was displaying. Yes, I was wrong about that one sentence out of all of the paragraphs of other comments I had made.

If I could further express to you why we are not happy about all of this in the first place though, its because of all the people we keep seeing who have the same ideas as what was started in this very thread, ideas based on outdated videos of an issue that no longer exists. I fully understand that it is not the responsibility of the GOL in any way to update the reports on TrueLock to reflect how current users are going to experience it from a marketing for Escort perspective. Yet, for those of us here who are not associated with Escort in any way and just trying to help other users out with our own time we sure could use your help by releasing more up to date information on TrueLock the next time you guys happen to be doing any testing. Having to deal with what we perceived to of been in accurate, now only outdated information was beginning to become very frustrating for us. It was never a case of "we just didn't like your findings", it was we just were not seeing real world results that even remotely represented your findings, now we know why.

[jimbonzzz]

Believe me, I would like nothing more than to wrap this whole thing up in a nice little package like that. It would be very convenient to just place the blame on Escort and move on. But unfortunately we just can't do that.

Of course I have no reason to doubt what RacerX indicated, he was one of the first with a 9500i, and I'm sure he saw enough scenarios that would make him believe that is the case. But even if what he indicated is true, it would only have affected ONE video that we made: the one made in March 2007 with the gas station that you sais "teed you off the most".

But, it really doesn't have any affect on the following two videos you had a problem with:

1. My bench test video three months later was performed on a 9500i that did not lock out the entire K-Band, and only locked out segments (and I still have that 9500i if there is any doubt!)

Are you still blaming GOL for "spreading misinformation" with this one, even though I explained to you the premise behind it, linked to the original thread, and explained the fact that I didn't post it up on YouTube with the comments and have no way to take it down?


2. Our later batch of videos in August 2007 was performed on a 9500i that did not lock out the entire K-Band, and only locked out segments. One of these was the one where he was parked in a parking lot, and you said we did something "questionable" since the 9500i was alerting under 15 MPH...

Are you still blaming GOL for "spreading misinformation" with this one? I hope not, clearly we didn't do anything "questionable" to make the STi alert under 15 MPH.

If I could further express to you why we are not happy about all of this in the first place though, its because of all the people we keep seeing who have the same ideas as what was started in this very thread,

Not sure if you caught it or not, but the original poster relates above that his fear of using TrueLock is 100% based on factual data on how the 9500i operates, not on GOL videos, even though you took the opportunity to blame us for it in your first reply to him.

I know you love your TrueLock, and probably find it very difficult to believe that someone might choose not to use it after knowing the factual data on how it operates. But it certainly happens, and you can't blame GOL for that.

ideas based on outdated videos of an issue that no longer exists.

And there might be a total of ONE video of a 9500i with an issue (whether an issue actually existed or not). And the same thing could easily occur on a brand new 9500i (with no "issue"), provided the frequencies of the false source and the radar gun fell into the same block.

Yet, for those of us here who are not associated with Escort in any way and just trying to help other users out with our own time we sure could use your help by releasing more up to date information on TrueLock the next time you guys happen to be doing any testing. Having to deal with what we perceived to of been in accurate, now only outdated information was beginning to become very frustrating for us.

We HAVE. All videos that we did after the "gas station video" used 9500i's that definitely did not lock out the entire band, including my batch of bench test videos in May 2007 and the batch videos we did in August 2007 showing several different scenarios.

You wanted an apology from me "for not reading my owners manual", truest me, I've read my owners manual front to back, back to front numerous times and quote out of it here often. I did know that, just wasn't thinking about it. I guess it is of minor importance though to point out, none of us (that I can reference) using 9500i's use City or Highway mode on our detectors in the real world. Its pointless for us to do so, we use them in Auto mode and the primary reason we do so is because Auto mode works very well for us, and it eliminates these false alerts you get when in a shopping center parking lot, as the video was displaying. Yes, I was wrong about that one sentence out of all of the paragraphs of other comments I had made.

Yes, you WERE wrong. But you didn't just make a wrong statement: you in fact used it as a basis to attempt to attack our credibility.
Unbelievable!

[CJR238]

The biggest thing that bothers me is GOL making that many videos of True Lock not working. Its like there trying to totally disprove the technology and focus on what it cant do 10% of the time and ignore what it can do 90% of the time.

These are the things that need to take place to have a problem with TrueLock:

1) Local radar is running in X or K
2) You lock out a location with X or K
3) the location you lock out with X or K happens to be the same 30MHz block the local LEO's are running
4) A LEO is running radar in that same locked out area.
5) His signal is of about the same strength of the false so it doesn’t alert out side the locked out area.
6) and lastly you are speeding in that "High Risk" area.

That’s more variables than what it takes to get a ticket with a RD that has no TrueLock. So why isn’t there a tone of videos showing how a V1 can J out a real threat? Or a cobra missing one because of insensitivity?