My "Hunch" about Escort lying appears to be righ

[LS1-Camaro]

Lok at the X50 vs. NON X50 results on Kaband

http://www.kc8unj.com/radar/guysofli...artesting.html

[billgerr]

One measurement missing from this report is the distance to the Cobra XRS9700. The report is excellent from a comparative perspective, but knowing the significance of a foot relative to the total range seems critical wrt comparing the X50 and the original 8500. This need not be an exact measurement either, as the error will be imparted to all results.

[jimbonzzz]

It was roughly 400-500 feet from the radar to the Cobra...

[billgerr]

Thanks Jim,

Looks to me like Escort's 5 y/o detector blows away the 2nd tier new designs. Escort may actually employ these results in supporting their upgrade policy. A "threat" is vague and dimensionless. Risk is not. I'd feel well protected with an 8500. The X50 with POP on may offer less protection in the real world as its POP alarm does not scale with distance and may mask a real threat.

[Radarboy12312]

Your "Hunch" about Escort lying appears to be wrong.

[brick]

The X50 with POP on may offer less protection in the real world as its POP alarm does not scale with distance and may mask a real threat.

That's plausible. Anything that scans very rapidly has less time to process incoming signals which could impact performance against weak constant signals. It could also be that they are using slightly reduced Ka sensitivity to reduce falsing. This doesn't make it a bad detector but the 50% increased range thing is definitely bogus.

[Radarboy12312]

The X50 with POP on may offer less protection in the real world as its POP alarm does not scale with distance and may mask a real threat.

That's plausible. Anything that scans very rapidly has less time to process incoming signals which could impact performance against weak constant signals. It could also be that they are using slightly reduced Ka sensitivity to reduce falsing. This doesn't make it a bad detector but the 50% increased range thing is definitely bogus.

I think it depends I mean I,am not saying its %50 but I think its at least something like %20 or %30 at least these are the kinds of results that I have been getting Vs the first 8500.

I also notice that the X50 [the one that I'am using] does a much better job at picking up instant on vs the first 8500 I mean this was one of my only issues with the first 8500 and in my opinion the first 8500's only real known weakness.

[LS1-Camaro]

Your "Hunch" about Escort lying appears to be wrong.

Proof?

[LS1-Camaro]

The X50 with POP on may offer less protection in the real world as its POP alarm does not scale with distance and may mask a real threat.

That's plausible. Anything that scans very rapidly has less time to process incoming signals which could impact performance against weak constant signals. It could also be that they are using slightly reduced Ka sensitivity to reduce falsing. This doesn't make it a bad detector but the 50% increased range thing is definitely bogus.

I think it depends I mean I,am not saying its %50 but I think its at least something like %20 or %30 at least these are the kinds of results that I have been getting Vs the first 8500.

I also notice that the X50 [the one that I'am using] does a much better job at picking up instant on vs the first 8500 I mean this was one of my only issues with the first 8500 and in my opinion the first 8500's only real known weakness.

You're great at spouting opinion as fact.

[LS1-Camaro]

Your "Hunch" about Escort lying appears to be wrong.

Why do you have www.escortradar.com listed as your home page in your profile? Just curious?