Food for thought, ZR4 + STI-r Remote

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by djrams80

The 9500i would save the user in this scenario better than any RD on the market other than the V1(which is just slightly more sensitive than the 9500i). The 9500i would not suppress the alert until it reached the lockout area. The 9500i does not know where the alert is originating from, only where it is detected, so it would alert to these I/O threats just like any other RD(better most likely), then would be quiet once it reached the lockout area only if the 2 frequencies were within the same 30 MHz block. The 9500i user would have a HUGE advantage in this scenario, because every other day othe than this one, the 9500i would have been totally silent, then low and behold, today a blip. I know I'd slow the F down!

---

^ True, but that is assuming that the detector picks up the signal from farther away (which was the hypothetical situation I was trying to convey, with "out of sight"). :) Then, if the signals are close enough to together to fit into the same "block," the detector would essentially only see one signal, the locked-out one, at a time that's too-late, and I think the above post by The Professor clarifies this case very well.

Like every one of these hypothetical scenarios, there's always exceptional cases.

The possibility of this lock-out phenomenon to be problematic is certainly there, but if the detector is used smartly, such instances should be, first of all, greatly reduced - and more importantly, for those areas where this could be a problem, the user should not have set the lock-out mark in the first place. :)

Well, since my name keeps popping up I’m going to add my personal “2 cents”.

First, the videos are what they are. The 9500i came out and was advertised as the solution to false alarms. The videos showed that in the real world, it was and still is entirely possible to lockout out a false and not alert to a real radar gun.
24.150 IS 24.150, period. If there was actually a way for radar detectors to distinguish between the two, we wouldn’t even be having this conversation, but they can’t. Escort advertised back then, and they still do, that you can just lock out sources and still receive “legitimate” threats. Regardless of how “remote” the chance is, it could happen, and if someone is going fast enough, they’ll get stopped. If anything, they should at least explain how to “cautiously” use this feature, and find a way to help educate the consumer. There are some areas where I know I could lock out every false around, and there are others where I would not even trust it.

I Do care about “As Advertised”. If I buy something I expect it to work as advertised, which is why I bough that product in the first place. Unfortunately we have become a “disposable society”. Companies make inflated claims, and products that don’t seem to last like they used to. Nowadays, they hope it lasts just long enough for us to “buy again”.

Manufacturers in this industry (Radar/Laser) don’t like GOL or other similar groups.
Why? Simple, they aren’t paid to “test and review” these products. Does anyone really think a paid tester will actually find in favor of “the other guys product” :lol: not to mention trying to supply "juiced" units. The specifics of this can be for another thread, so we’ll leave it at that for now.

Escort isn’t the only company that has been “called out” so to speak, at least not by me.

When Blinder had that whole issue with the Stealth mode fix, GOL brought that out, and I was the first one to get and test a new unit.

When the V1 had those “J” out issues, I was there. I also did tests showing what could happen if you use the big “L” feature to ignore k band threats.

When the STI was ignoring real alerts on 33.8 that was brought to light.

When the AL’s started failing with the “6 month” time bomb, that was brought out.

Now the LI issue is on the table.

So to say any one manufacturer is being singled out is far from the truth. Fortunately for us, the consumer, these companies can no longer make claims that can’t be backed up anymore. Nowadays everyone goes online and does their own research. Whether it’s a radar detector or digital camera, people want to find honest reviews from other consumers, not inflated claims and “false advertising”.

It’s been a year now and there is NO camera database or USB software available. I’m sure at least 1 person out there bought this unit for those features. There is even an insert in the box that not only congratulates you on your purchase, but as an “added benefit” you will be able to download and install software updates from their website. I’m pretty sure at least 1 person has called asking for the “missing” usb cable, and how to get the updates.
I’m also sure at least one person got this when it first came out and started locking out every false they came across, without thinking twice. For the “uninformed” or first time user, they’ll see the ad and believe it. For us “in the know” we know better and would use it according to the threats in our area.
I think it would be a disservice to the average consumer who doesn’t know or understand the details of how these things work, to not let them see videos showing that they must be careful in how they use this or any other product.

I’ll add, this post isn’t “directed” at anyone specific, everyone has their own opinions and beliefs, but we should all remember, we, as consumers, are on the same side, and want to buy and use a product that does what it advertises, and it is our responsibility as those with a higher understanding, to educate those that don’t understand so they don’t become the “first victim”.

Now, since my “day job” as the Cheetah rep has also been dragged into this, due to my being part of GOL, etc. I’ll switch hats and reply below.

In response to above.

First, We (Cheetah) do things a bit different. We don’t make it a habit of advertising products 4-5 months in advance. We have many things in the works, and some things coming out soon. It has been mentioned that we don’t have any 9500i products, well just because they aren’t out yet, doesn’t mean that hasn’t been in the works. Many 9500i owners want to use that on their motorcycle as well, and have asked for a Vizalert unit for it. Once the Vizalert unit is out, it will, by default, also work with our mirror interface as well. Other things are also slated, but that will be for several other threads. :)

Second, the 9500i doesn’t hurt or “cut into sales” at all. In fact, it would seem the opposite. We DO have a working camera database, thus someone living in an area where all these speed cameras are, will be in the market for “camera protection”.

Plus, instead of “upgrading” an X50, or STI, or V1, to a 9500i, people don’t have to. They can still use those detectors alongside our mirror. In fact, they can even integrate alerts through the mirror. For example, someone has a V1, they could use the (RDI) Radar interface, and get the alerts through the mirror, along with all the camera alerts. They can even use our F.A.S.T. (False Alarm Suppression Technology) setting to have it not give audible alerts under a certain speed limit, say 15 mph for example. Thus they don’t have to push any extra buttons in every parking lot, they just drive in, the V1 is silent, and when they pull out, it goes back to full alerts. Of course this combined with some of the “L” mode settings, would make the V1 nice and quiet for many people, and give them the performance they like from it.

Now that many cameras are also “speed on green” it goes beyond the person who says “I don’t run red lights anyway..” well, I bet they don’t remember how fast they have been driving through a green light, and if they go too fast, now they will get a speeding ticket in the mail. Plus, many places use cameras that operate on strips in the roadway, so a radar detector won’t work for them, unless that detector has GPS technology AND an actual database of not only those locations BUT, also what the speed limits are, to remind you to slow down if needed.
We have a unique market perspective, without going into details, we have markets that detector and jammer companies don’t, and since our products work with many of them, which could also bring in potential new buyers in that market, that is a “win win” for them and us.

Nicely put, RacerX.

Very well-put, RacerX.

Indeed, even on remote car-enthusiast Forums, when the V1 is brought up, many refer to the "J-out" error. Similarly, there are also references on such sites to the "AL 6-month time bomb" issue and the "LI concerns" as well.

I do think, even as a 9500i owner and primary-detector user, that things have been carried to too much of an extreme here - and that the reaction was un-necessary.

Simply put:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RacerX

Regardless of how “remote” the chance is, it could happen, and if someone is going fast enough, they’ll get stopped. If anything, they should at least explain how to “cautiously” use this feature, and find a way to help educate the consumer. There are some areas where I know I could lock out every false around, and there are others where I would not even trust it.

---

This is precisely how I feel, too.

I think that CJR's "Risk Scenarios" should be mandatory reading for all 9500i users.

Indeed, the chance for such a problematic lock-out are very real, no matter how remote. It's just a limitation of the "resolution" of the machine, and it is something that each end-user should understand, and take measures to prevent against this issue from becoming a true problem (i.e. receive a ticket).

I don't think that the instrument is faulty - it's just that it's "resolution" isn't what it's advertised to be.

I think that Escort oversimplified things (and painted a brighter picture) to favor marketing to the lowest-common-denominator; and I think that not only should this be changed, but also, the instructional manual of the detector be edited to include more in-depth analysis of scenarios where TrueLock should/should not be used.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RacerX

I Do care about “As Advertised”. If I buy something I expect it to work as advertised, which is why I bough that product in the first place.

---

The 9500I works "As Advertised" this is there standard advertisement...

"The PASSPORT 9500i radar detector puts an end to false alarms. Its new GPS-powered TrueLock™ feature allows you to simply press the mute button a couple of times and never hear a radar-based automatic door opener or motion sensor again. Our patented design captures the location coordinates and the exact frequency of the signal and stores them in memory. Once stored, TrueLock™ will reject these signals, but is intelligent enough to warn you of a new or different signal in that same location. That's right, no more false alarms!"

Yes it’s a bit of a play on words but it’s not really false advertising.

"radar-based" = what all radar is, false or gun.

"will reject these signals" = not alert to them, radar false or gun.

"new or different signal" = Not the same as before, different.

They never say if you lock out a false it will always alert to any radar from a cop (may be implied but doesn’t state it). They clearly state it has to be different from the false previously locked out.

Maybe "Somewhat Misleading Advertising"? :lol:

^ I can agree with that. :)

I think that it's marketing at-play, that they need to market to the lowest common denominator, while also trying to, of course, maximize profits.

I don't think that it's necessarily wrong, how they worded things. But is it misleading? Maybe.....

I hate "Somewhat Misleading Advertising" even more than simply lying. It's like watching those stupid supplement commercials on the Health channel (of all things) and thinking of the hundreds of stupid people buying that bull.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loiosh

I hate "Somewhat Misleading Advertising" even more than simply lying. It's like watching those stupid supplement commercials on the Health channel (of all things) and thinking of the hundreds of stupid people buying that bull.

---

:lol: :lol: :lol: lol, Me too, im in the fitness industry and hate those advertisements because what they say may be true, but there is no way in hell there product can do it. :lol: :lol:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CJR238

:lol: :lol: :lol: lol, Me too, im in the fitness industry and hate those advertisements because what they say may be true, but there is no way in hell there product can do it. :lol: :lol:

---

No kidding :)

Just save your money and eat better and WORK OUT. OMG, weight loss.