Food for thought, ZR4 + STI-r Remote

[djrams80]

I still contend that the 9500i works exactly as advertised:

1) It locks out false alerts, that's a fact I see it every day.
2) It alerts to police radar presense in the same area, that's a fact also, I see this regularly also.
3) There is not one example of this technology failing anyone, anywhere at anytime, ever, as far as I/we know.

Can it be beat by a perfectly executed speed trap, run in the same 30MHz block as a locked out false alert, with a LEO positioned at just the right spot? Absolutely! Is this likely? Absolutely not! And that's a fact, because if it were likely, there would be lots of examples of this happening, yet there are none. I repeat none! In my estimation, a user of any RD would be at least 1000 times more likely to run into a perfectly executed I/O speed trap, then for a 9500i user to run into all the factors combined that would cause the Truelock technology to fail him/her. That's just my guesstimate.

I totally see Racer-X's point that he and GOL as a whole have "outed" many problems with many products, and that is also a fact. He came up with many examples and he is absolutely correct on all of them, and there are probably a lot more he left out. That's why I am happy that you guys do what you do, because it saves the rest of us the hassle of finding this all out for ourselves.

Some of us 9500i users just feel that video's put out by GOL gave the general, uninformed, "video viewing" public the impression(intended or not), that the odds of this scenario happening are much greater than they really are. Heck, you guys probably even thought at the time that you were able to create this problematic scenario so easily, that it would turn out to be a huge problem for 9500i consumers in the "real world". You guys are probably very surprised that it has held up so well for the general consumer. I get that.

I just wish that the fact that it works so well and the problematic scenario has turned out to be much harder for LEO's to recreate during a real speed trap, had also gotten out to that same uninformed public. That's all, at least for me.

[thestaton]

Videos:

Guys of Lidar: Testing Escort 9500i True Lock Feature
Guys of Lidar: Testing Escort 9500i True Lock Feature
Guys of Lidar: Testing the Escort 9500i True Lock Feature
Guys of Lidar - Testing Escort 9500i True Lock Feature
Escort 9500i True Lock being tested by the Guys of Lidar.

[djrams80]

Videos:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...57888047&hl=en
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...25270904&hl=en
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...55705499&hl=en
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...02868514&hl=en
http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...74556085&hl=en

Those videos prove exactly what I have been saying. The 9500i's Truelock feature can be beaten under just the right circumstances. I don't think anyone is denying that, but this has been proven to be much more difficult for LEO's to reproduce than originally thought. Again, there is not one example of anyone, anywhere, at anytime recieving a speeding citation because Truelock failed them. If any laser jammer had the same success rate of the 9500i's Truelock feature, it would dominate the market.

[thestaton]

Back on topic. I'm considering a STi-R + ZR4 if the results look good. Ivan has showed us that you simply can't trust jammer companies outside of the United States no matter how promising.

I just hope that the STi-R has new audible tones, x50 audible ramp up, and better than V1 performance. If all 3 of those conditions are met, and a good working auto mute I would be ready to purchase immediately.

I'm a huge V1 Zombie, but I really do enjoy Cincinnati Microwave Products and I love supporting North American made products. In this day and age to many products are be outsourced to the far east, and I'm proud that CM has not followed the trend.

We give CM a lot of hell, but the way I see it at least they are innovating and are putting their reputation on the line. Who doesn't love productive innovation?

Cheers.

[RacerX]

Maybe "Somewhat Misleading Advertising"?

Sure, I'll agree on that.

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.

I think i can safely say we all agree on that too.

Yeah, back on topic. this thread was about the STI-r. I guess further discussions can go back to some of the other threads on this matter, with a link to this one or something.

Anyway, I'm looking forward to putting a few STI-r's through the paces, as my SR7's are coming close to retirement.

[Lucky225]

You guys are STILL bickering over this?

[Esoterica]

However, if the I/O, which falls within the locked-out frequency block, was used to sporadically target vehicles ahead of you (but out-of-sight), it is a situation where a potential save *is* possible with another detector, but could be missed by the 9500i.

How is this going to be possible with another detector, but missed by the 9500i? As we stated, its more likely you would be saved by having the 9500i because you would see the alert going into the locked out area, any other detector and all you would notice is that you were in a known false area and you would be as the human element in ignore mode.

Are you trying to imply that the 9500i doesn't work against IO like "other" detectors at picking up on IO signals? Thats absolute rubbish, I get hit with actual IO all the time. In fact I was hit three separate times today with 35.705GHz IO and walked away unscathed out of all of them.

In fact, I continually and repeatedly see a strange phenomena take place every time I get hit with IO here, doesn't seem to matter if its 33.XXX, 34.XXX or 35.XXX IO, all frequencies of which are in equal use here.

I call it a "strange phenomena" only because I never read of anyone else noticing or at least mentioning this same thing happening to them when they report IO alerts.

I get a single Ka alert tone on the detector, silence for 2-3 seconds, just enough time for me to drop my speed, then suddenly hear the full blast alert come in. I can't think of a single out of the hundreds of direct and close range IO hits I've taken where this has not occurred in exactly this way. I don't know if they're just always missing me on their first IO attempt and I pick up the faint single ping, or if they are first hitting me with such a short burst that it only registers as a single ping where they possibly notice I'm speeding, then send another longer duration IO burst my way to confirm I am speeding, in which case by that time I've already smoked the tires locking the brakes and the second full force hit has me at or under the PSL. What ever the reason behind it is I don't know for sure, but its saved me every single time I encounter IO, which is annoyingly often.

IO actually makes me mad, it makes me feel like I'm being singled out for a covert police interrogation, they shouldn't be just singling people out, but instead checking everyone. Its racial profiling by the police is what it is. They are singling me out and making the unfair assumption that just because I'm a white guy I must be speeding. They don't IO the hispanic guy in front of me, or the black guy behind me, no, just the white guy all the time. Text book example of racial profiling at work there. All based on the police stereotyping all white guys are speeders.

(But don't worry, I really wasn't going to ban you )

Well that certainly wouldn't be a first for me, or second, or third, or...
Dynamic IP Adresses, unlimited free email accounts, proxy servers, the old ban feature isn't what it use to be back in the day anyhow. :wink:

When I started getting into IO there my post was already getting long even for me, and it was getting late. The comment about really reaching for straws I was laughing when I wrote, sorry for the absence of the emoticons to express that. My only intended point was if a LEO was in that depicted situation with IO, even if you didn't have Truelock your likely going to be coming out of that situation signing the nice officers little piece of paper just because there could be no advance waring under any circumstances.

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.

You can't say "the user" as in covering everyone. Here too the percentage of this actually happening to someone is again yet reduced and not being factored properly into the scenario. There are literally millions of us out there who never even have to concern ourselves with locking out any K or X band signal, its just simply not used in our areas that are dominated solely by Ka band. For myself it works perfectly for my driving conditions, possibly 1% of the areas I drive in have K band as a threat, everything else is 99% Ka band. The only areas patrolled by K band are in the County, all City and State police here use Ka band and you clearly know when your in a County, City or State patrolled area. I don't have to run the risk of completely turning off K band, and its impossible to lockout a Ka band signal even if you wanted to.

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

Sorry about that, I guess that was my doings there, I absolutely agree with everything you said, even under both hats, except for the comments on "As Advertised". I don't say where anything at all about TrueLock has been falsely advertised, or even misleading. Its a better example of Jim's statement that if a user walks away from reading the advertisement and draw their own conclusions that are not there or being expressed then that is the individual persons problem, no fault of Escort.

The only thing that Truelock can't do is survive through what we have all here come to conclude being a rather remarkable and remote set of specific circumstances, in which any other detector user would fair even less likely to survive the outcome from. Even with these extreme circumstances I think we have stated rather well how TrueLock would actually better your odds at surviving this situation over other non GPS detectors.

In actuality and hind sight to the comments now, I can see where the videos would have even a negative effect on Cheetah products, particularly the GPS mirror. I thin all of this has instilled an undue fear to many users of trusting any GPS detector capabilities or in your case interfaces.

I have become such a believer in the benefits and advantages of the marriage of GPS into detection capabilities that this was my primary motivation in attempting to clear the air from the further development of false thoughts that severe problems exist within it. I absolutely can not believe that other people have not focused on the advantages of this capability. Even if I did not use the 9500i and instead preferred one of the many other non GPS capable detectors I'd absolutely have to obtain the Cheetah GPS mirror in order to just tolerate the use of another detector. Price shoppers may not see the benefit of buying a $300-$400 detector then taking on another couple hundred for the Cheetah mirror over just buying the 9500i, but for those who use a particular detector because its their favorite for a variety of reasons then I would think the GPS mirror would become an absolute must have item for them.

I just wish I could express enough how well GPS capabilities married into any detector is of significant benefit to people. It just amazes me to no end how we could have more people trying to knock it than embrace and appreciate what it can do for them.

I love the products Cheetah offers, someone at that company is a great thinker and innovator of genius capacity. I look forward to seeing what kind of great ideas and products they are possibly going to come up with for the 9500i.

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

I don't even see where its any bit a play on words or misleading in any way. They are describing exactly what the purpose of this feature is, how else would or could or should it be worded. Its like people think they should advertise that under some very extreme and remotely well orchestrated conditions that 99% of users are never likely to experience nor after one year on the market 100% have not, that you could potentially lockout a true police radar source.

I sure hope not a single person thinking this is involved in marketing or advertising in any way, your families would be going hungry from not having any food on your table and I doubt you'd even be qualified for a job as a WalMart Greeter.

[<<JAZZY>>]

Those videos prove exactly what I have been saying. The 9500i's Truelock feature can be beaten under just the right circumstances. I don't think anyone is denying that, but this has been proven to be much more difficult for LEO's to reproduce than originally thought. Again, there is not one example of anyone, anywhere, at anytime recieving a speeding citation because Truelock failed them. If any laser jammer had the same success rate of the 9500i's Truelock feature, it would dominate the market.

Do you think the average Joe who buys a 9500i is going to know when it doesn't work as advertised? The average person will just think that they were hit with instant-on, POP radar, or paced by the cop. Just because you don't know anybody that received a ticket from the faulty 9500i TrueLock feature doesn't mean that is doesn't happen every day.

There are plenty of people riding around with a RMR jammer thinking they are a stealth fighter and they have never received a speeding ticket. This is proof to them that their "jammer" must work really good.

[djrams80]

Those videos prove exactly what I have been saying. The 9500i's Truelock feature can be beaten under just the right circumstances. I don't think anyone is denying that, but this has been proven to be much more difficult for LEO's to reproduce than originally thought. Again, there is not one example of anyone, anywhere, at anytime recieving a speeding citation because Truelock failed them. If any laser jammer had the same success rate of the 9500i's Truelock feature, it would dominate the market.

Do you think the average Joe who buys a 9500i is going to know when it doesn't work as advertised? The average person will just think that they were hit with instant-on, POP radar, or paced by the cop. Just because you don't know anybody that received a ticket from the faulty 9500i TrueLock feature doesn't mean that is doesn't happen every day.

There are plenty of people riding around with a RMR jammer thinking they are a stealth fighter and they have never received a speeding ticket. This is proof to them that their "jammer" must work really good.

That's a total reach. If it happened every day, someone would be here crying! And exactly how is it faulty if there is not one account of it ever failing anyone, anywhere at anytime, EVER?

[<<JAZZY>>]

Those videos prove exactly what I have been saying. The 9500i's Truelock feature can be beaten under just the right circumstances. I don't think anyone is denying that, but this has been proven to be much more difficult for LEO's to reproduce than originally thought. Again, there is not one example of anyone, anywhere, at anytime recieving a speeding citation because Truelock failed them. If any laser jammer had the same success rate of the 9500i's Truelock feature, it would dominate the market.

Do you think the average Joe who buys a 9500i is going to know when it doesn't work as advertised? The average person will just think that they were hit with instant-on, POP radar, or paced by the cop. Just because you don't know anybody that received a ticket from the faulty 9500i TrueLock feature doesn't mean that is doesn't happen every day.

There are plenty of people riding around with a RMR jammer thinking they are a stealth fighter and they have never received a speeding ticket. This is proof to them that their "jammer" must work really good.

That's a total reach. If it happened every day, someone would be here crying!

I am sure people receive a ticket every day with their Cobra radar detector but they don't seem to be showing up here on this forum to talk about it.