Realistic 9500ci Q/T testing

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by snoopyc4

Interesting test and results. Thank you for sharing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CJR238

"Legit" would require a tracking history however. ;):)

---

:( I wish.

---

Its "Legit" if they acquire a tracking history, if they don't its not. However its almost imposable to prove it. At least if anyone gets pulled over by the guy who did the QT video there is proof hes not getting a tracking history.

If this become an issue in the NY/CT area i can get a long time customer of mine Arnold Diaz to do a "Shame On You" TV news program of LEO's breaking/bending the rules of traffic enforcement.

I'm glad i live where i do, i wouldn't have a license anymore if i lived in CA or TX. Its much easier when they follow the rules. :o

Refering to Silver Bullets post (rocky2). In Western NY, they have installed a traffic "monitor" that uses microwave technology. Their are two sensors about 500' apart on same side of the highway that can read: speed of traffic, type of vehicle, and counts number of vehicles using that highway. There are also cameras to watch traffic. It can do three lanes at one time! It is not legal in NY to use this yet! But with money shortfall here, it's a matter of time before microwave technology - no need for more LEO's - becomes the future.:mad:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Matt

Refering to Silver Bullets post (rocky2). In Western NY, they have installed a traffic "monitor" that uses microwave technology. Their are two sensors about 500' apart on same side of the highway that can read: speed of traffic, type of vehicle, and counts number of vehicles using that highway. There are also cameras to watch traffic. It can do three lanes at one time! It is not legal in NY to use this yet! But with money shortfall here, it's a matter of time before microwave technology - no need for more LEO's - becomes the future.:mad:

---

You could be right :( Speed cameras are a real "cash cow" for local municipalities and those traffic flow sensors probably can be upgraded without too much difficulty!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Matt

Refering to Silver Bullets post (rocky2). In Western NY, they have installed a traffic "monitor" that uses microwave technology. Their are two sensors about 500' apart on same side of the highway that can read: speed of traffic, type of vehicle, and counts number of vehicles using that highway. There are also cameras to watch traffic. It can do three lanes at one time! It is not legal in NY to use this yet! But with money shortfall here, it's a matter of time before microwave technology - no need for more LEO's - becomes the future.:mad:

---

Police radar is microwave technology.

We are aware of this form of monitoring (some of which are not using detectable emissions) and are developing solutions, undoubtedly GPS based, that will most probably be updates to the Defender database.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Silver Bullet

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ghz1

Good to see the $1600 detector is almost keeping up with the $400 one;)

---

Yes, but silence IS golden!

---

And sometimes it's flashing red and blue. :lol:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by swarga

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Silver Bullet

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ghz1

Good to see the $1600 detector is almost keeping up with the $400 one;)

---

Yes, but silence IS golden!

---

And sometimes it's flashing red and blue. :lol:

---

Wouldn't you just love to have a deaf mute bodyguard that might have seen an intruder but would rather filter it out and give you a silent death.:rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by <<JAZZY>>

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by swarga

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Silver Bullet

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ghz1

Good to see the $1600 detector is almost keeping up with the $400 one;)

---

Yes, but silence IS golden!

---

And sometimes it's flashing red and blue. :lol:

---

Wouldn't you just love to have a deaf mute bodyguard that might have seen an intruder but would rather filter it out and give you a silent death.:rolleyes:

---

What I would really love is if V1 users like yourself, and a few of your girlfriends, were mute :cool:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by <<JAZZY>>

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by swarga

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Silver Bullet

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ghz1

Good to see the $1600 detector is almost keeping up with the $400 one;)

---

Yes, but silence IS golden!

---

And sometimes it's flashing red and blue. :lol:

---

Wouldn't you just love to have a deaf mute bodyguard that might have seen an intruder but would rather filter it out and give you a silent death.:rolleyes:

---

If i did i would at least know he was deaf & mute and higher a small guy who can point at the intruder annoyingly over and over again for the big body guard. ;)

That's funny

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Silver Bullet

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by <<JAZZY>>

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by swarga

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Silver Bullet

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ghz1

Good to see the $1600 detector is almost keeping up with the $400 one;)

---

Yes, but silence IS golden!

---

And sometimes it's flashing red and blue. :lol:

---

Wouldn't you just love to have a deaf mute bodyguard that might have seen an intruder but would rather filter it out and give you a silent death.:rolleyes:

---

What I would really love is if V1 users like yourself, and a few of your girlfriends, were mute :cool:

---

I would love to have you drive on an interstate or highway at night and to have 10 people randomly placed up and down the road with radar guns using quick trigger to get your speed. You would drive down the road with your Belscort feeling confident and you would hear complete silence. I would drive down that same road with a V1 and hear 10 alerts with arrows pointing at the people shooting it.

You may like a girl that is mute but I will take a screamer all day long. Just let me know how much more you like your Belscort over a V1 in this situation. Tell me how noisy the V1 is and how bright and distracting the arrows are.

If you did this test with 100 people, 100% of them would choose the V1 over any Belscort regardless of price. This is not some special technique that cops use, this is the real deal and Belscorts really fail in this situation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by <<JAZZY>>

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Silver Bullet

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by <<JAZZY>>

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by swarga

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Silver Bullet

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ghz1

Good to see the $1600 detector is almost keeping up with the $400 one;)

---

Yes, but silence IS golden!

---

And sometimes it's flashing red and blue. :lol:

---

Wouldn't you just love to have a deaf mute bodyguard that might have seen an intruder but would rather filter it out and give you a silent death.:rolleyes:

---

What I would really love is if V1 users like yourself, and a few of your girlfriends, were mute :cool:

---

I would love to have you drive on an interstate or highway at night and to have 10 people randomly placed up and down the road with radar guns using quick trigger to get your speed. You would drive down the road with your Belscort feeling confident and you would hear complete silence. I would drive down that same road with a V1 and hear 10 alerts with arrows pointing at the people shooting it.

You may like a girl that is mute but I will take a screamer all day long. Just let me know how much more you like your Belscort over a V1 in this situation. Tell me how noisy the V1 is and how bright and distracting the arrows are.

If you did this test with 100 people, 100&#37; of them would choose the V1 over any Belscort regardless of price. This is not some special technique that cops use, this is the real deal and Belscorts really fail in this situation.

---

For me i like to have it all with my women, a screamer and the mute, they each have there own advantages and when they are both together its a perfect night.;)

It is "some special technique that cops use" because its something they do that's different than conventional usage of radar and goes against being thorough in there acquisition of a speeder. If this was used everywhere it wouldn't be special and a big common problem, however its rare depending on area so its is special.

At the very least my testing here proves there is more to QT response than the bench tests we have seen over and over. Its the combination of technique of the operator, response and distance of the RD.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Silver Bullet

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by <<JAZZY>>

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by swarga

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Silver Bullet

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ghz1

Good to see the $1600 detector is almost keeping up with the $400 one;)

---

Yes, but silence IS golden!

---

And sometimes it's flashing red and blue. :lol:

---

Wouldn't you just love to have a deaf mute bodyguard that might have seen an intruder but would rather filter it out and give you a silent death.:rolleyes:

---

What I would really love is if V1 users like yourself, and a few of your girlfriends, were mute :cool:

---

Speaking as a 9500ci owner, I'm glad to learn about its weaknesses from the other users of this forum. It's better to know the truth than to drive around in ignorance until you see the disco lights in your rear view mirror, wouldn't you agree?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by swarga

Speaking as a 9500ci owner, I'm glad to learn about its weaknesses from the other users of this forum. It's better to know the truth than to drive around in ignorance until you see the disco lights in your rear view mirror, wouldn't you agree?

---

You missed my point swarga...same song different day by the V1 peanut gallery :rolleyes: This info is not new so maybe they all should just move on! These guys work entirely too hard at persuading the masses that Belscorts suck. If you honestly believe that, you are on crack and need help. I don't know anyone who has a CI and think it's garbage. Does it have short comings? Yes it has a few, but this is by far the most advanced RD to date and it is amazing, flaws and all!!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CJR238

For me i like to have it all with my women, a screamer and the mute, they each have there own advantages and when they are both together its a perfect night.;)

It is "some special technique that cops use" because its something they do that's different than conventional usage of radar and goes against being thorough in there acquisition of a speeder. If this was used everywhere it wouldn't be special and a big common problem, however its rare depending on area so its is special.

At the very least my testing here proves there is more to QT response than the bench tests we have seen over and over. Its the combination of technique of the operator, response and distance of the RD.

---

How can you say that? As Swarga mentioned, there has to be a consistent methodology when testing RDs against Quick Trigger radar shots!

The term Quick Trigger is ambiguous in that it refers to a technique, but the actual transmission time is generally agreed to be anywhere between .2 seconds to 1.0 seconds in transmission duration.

Now if I pull quick triggers of .9 seconds against my RedLine, I'll catch nearly every shot. However, if I reduce the transmission time down to .3 seconds, then I'll only catch 10&#37; of the shots against the Kustom Golden Eagle 35.5 ka.

[ame="http://www.escortradarforum.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6451&postcount=16"]Escort Radar Forum - View Single Post - RedLine QT Testing[/ame]

This was on the bench, but according to you, range drastically improves reaction times on the Belscorts. So I did another test tonight with the RedLine and Kustom Radar to see if distance made a difference.

My results were no different at 900 feet, using 2 cars, than they were at 20 feet with the radar antenna facing away from the RD during bench testing. That is.........at .5 seconds I still caught only half the shots. Unfortunately, I did not have two way radios necessary to document that test, but I did get a video of the Kustom Golden Eagle getting consistent speed readings with just .25 second Quick Triggers.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KkxFYBWZqNA"]YouTube - Kustom Golden Eagle QT's[/ame]

So again, I don't question your results, but I do question the absence of using any means of timing your shots. I doubt the 9500ci is going to catch more than 10% of quick triggers pulled under .3 seconds.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nine_c1

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CJR238

For me i like to have it all with my women, a screamer and the mute, they each have there own advantages and when they are both together its a perfect night.;)

It is "some special technique that cops use" because its something they do that's different than conventional usage of radar and goes against being thorough in there acquisition of a speeder. If this was used everywhere it wouldn't be special and a big common problem, however its rare depending on area so its is special.

At the very least my testing here proves there is more to QT response than the bench tests we have seen over and over. Its the combination of technique of the operator, response and distance of the RD.

---

How can you say that? As Swarga mentioned, there has to be a consistent methodology when testing RDs against Quick Trigger radar shots!

The term Quick Trigger is ambiguous in that it refers to a technique, but the actual transmission time is generally agreed to be anywhere between .2 seconds to 1.0 seconds in transmission duration.

Now if I pull quick triggers of .9 seconds against my RedLine, I'll catch nearly every shot. However, if I reduce the transmission time down to .3 seconds, then I'll only catch 10&#37; of the shots against the Kustom Golden Eagle 35.5 ka.

[ame="http://www.escortradarforum.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6451&postcount=16"]Escort Radar Forum - View Single Post - RedLine QT Testing[/ame]

This was on the bench, but according to you, range drastically improves reaction times on the Belscorts. So I did another test tonight with the RedLine and Kustom Radar to see if distance made a difference.

My results were no different at 900 feet, using 2 cars, than they were at 20 feet with the radar antenna facing away from the RD during bench testing. That is.........at .5 seconds I still caught only half the shots. Unfortunately, I did not have two way radios necessary to document that test, but I did get a video of the Kustom Golden Eagle getting consistent speed readings with just .25 second Quick Triggers.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KkxFYBWZqNA"]YouTube - Kustom Golden Eagle QT's[/ame]

So again, I don't question your results, but I do question the absence of using any means of timing your shots. I doubt the 9500ci is going to catch more than 10% of quick triggers pulled under .3 seconds.

---

Very nice nine_c1, this is what we need more of. I don't disagree the time is important for measurement purposes. But going from missing every QT to getting almost every one was a big surprise for me when we were playing around. It did it very consistently so we videoed it. Obviously decreasing the amount of time radar is introduced will decrease the chances of picking it up, however there is a balance between the technique of the operator, response and the distance of the RD, which is when i noticed a difference.

Note: if you got 1/2 the shots that's much better than most bench tests we have seen. Facing away may have helped.

I will add a thought, we know how to defeat something, but are we realistically testing it? Do we know LEO's use this technique at 2,5? or 6.5? Is it possible the M3 V1 set ups we see aren't just LEO's doing QT but not getting a reading and trying again?

The one thing i noticed doing QT my self is you don't always get a reading by pressing too fast.

One other thing I discovered while doing my testing........since I didn't have two way radios, I tried using two cell phones to capture the audio of the RedLine alerting in the target vehicle..........no dice.

The cell phone in the radar car interfered not only with the audio recording on the Sony Webby.........it also kept triggering the RFI (Radio Frequency Interference) indicator on the Radar Unit itself! The microwave emissions from these cell phones are NASTY!:p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nine_c1

One other thing I discovered while doing my testing........since I didn't have two way radios, I tried using two cell phones to capture the audio of the RedLine alerting in the target vehicle..........no dice.

The cell phone in the radar car interfered not only with the audio recording on the Sony Webby.........it also kept triggering the RFI (Radio Frequency Interference) indicator on the Radar Unit itself! The microwave emissions from these cell phones are NASTY!:p

---

Thanks, think a GMRS would be ok? Will bring a set next time i test. Ill also keep phones off just in case.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CJR238

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nine_c1

One other thing I discovered while doing my testing........since I didn't have two way radios, I tried using two cell phones to capture the audio of the RedLine alerting in the target vehicle..........no dice.

The cell phone in the radar car interfered not only with the audio recording on the Sony Webby.........it also kept triggering the RFI (Radio Frequency Interference) indicator on the Radar Unit itself! The microwave emissions from these cell phones are NASTY!:p

---

Thanks, think a GMRS would be ok? Will bring a set next time i test. Ill also keep phones off just in case.

---

GMRS is UHF but the harmonics of the frequencies used would put it in the neighborhood of cellular phones. Can't say for sure, but if your KGE Radar is anything like mine, it will set the RFI indicator if it picks up interference.;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nine_c1

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CJR238

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nine_c1

One other thing I discovered while doing my testing........since I didn't have two way radios, I tried using two cell phones to capture the audio of the RedLine alerting in the target vehicle..........no dice.

The cell phone in the radar car interfered not only with the audio recording on the Sony Webby.........it also kept triggering the RFI (Radio Frequency Interference) indicator on the Radar Unit itself! The microwave emissions from these cell phones are NASTY!:p

---

Thanks, think a GMRS would be ok? Will bring a set next time i test. Ill also keep phones off just in case.

---

GMRS is UHF but the harmonics of the frequencies used would put it in the neighborhood of cellular phones. Can't say for sure, but if your KGE Radar is anything like mine, it will set the RFI indicator if it picks up interference.;)

---

Looks like remote video it is. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nine_c1

How can you say that? As Swarga mentioned, there has to be a consistent methodology when testing RDs against Quick Trigger radar shots!

---

This gets tricky: we need consistent test methodoligies to compare different tests against each other, but in the "real" world, LEO's do not use a consistent method every time...sigh.

As a side comment here, somewhat off track, but worth mentioning, is that if you run a V1 and a Redline in the same vehicle, the V1 absolutely, positively interferes with the Redline. I got a V1 yesterday, and drove home with both units on. I pass 7 known false alerts over a 4 mile stretch on the trip, 6 K and 1 X band, and with the V1 on the Redline only alerted to two of the 7, and I repeated the 4 mile stretch 3 times to be sure. The Redline was almost as quiet as the IX, and the V1 alerted at all the spots where the Redline would normally alert.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Swamp

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nine_c1

How can you say that? As Swarga mentioned, there has to be a consistent methodology when testing RDs against Quick Trigger radar shots!

---

This gets tricky: we need consistent test methodoligies to compare different tests against each other, but in the "real" world, LEO's do not use a consistent method every time...sigh.

As a side comment here, somewhat off track, but worth mentioning, is that if you run a V1 and a Redline in the same vehicle, the V1 absolutely, positively interferes with the Redline. I got a V1 yesterday, and drove home with both units on. I pass 7 known false alerts over a 4 mile stretch on the trip, 6 K and 1 X band, and with the V1 on the Redline only alerted to two of the 7, and I repeated the 4 mile stretch 3 times to be sure. The Redline was almost as quiet as the IX, and the V1 alerted at all the spots where the Redline would normally alert.

---

X2,

We actually need both consistent test methodologies and more random real world. Like you said "LEO's do not use a consistent method every time" and my last comment to nine_c1 about his video, "we know how to defeat something, but are we realistically testing it? Do we know LEO's use this technique at 2,5? or 6.5? Is it possible the M3 V1 set ups we have see aren't just LEO's doing QT but not getting a reading and trying again?"

Its amazing how Belscorts filter like crazy when being interfered by another RD. This is also why i believe close proximity testing causes errors, i saw this with Jim's TrueLock frequency block testing and many other videos.

Thought: If one RD sitting next to another can cause filtering (delay or no alert at all) why would we believe using a radar gun close in proximity wouldn't do the same thing? Cobras give off strong short KA falsing which the Belscorts filter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Silver Bullet

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by swarga

It's better to know the truth than to drive around in ignorance until you see the disco lights in your rear view mirror, wouldn't you agree?

---

You missed my point swarga...same song different day by the V1 peanut gallery :rolleyes: This info is not new so maybe they all should just move on!

---

I understand, you're a little sensitive. It's kinda like when your wife tells you that she didn't have the Big O for the umpteenth time; it gets really old after a while. :lol:

However, you shouldn't take it so personally. The ones who should be upset are the ones who made a $1600 RADAR detector that is outperformed in some categories by a $400 detector. :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Swamp

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nine_c1

How can you say that? As Swarga mentioned, there has to be a consistent methodology when testing RDs against Quick Trigger radar shots!

---

This gets tricky: we need consistent test methodoligies to compare different tests against each other, but in the "real" world, LEO's do not use a consistent method every time...sigh.

As a side comment here, somewhat off track, but worth mentioning, is that if you run a V1 and a Redline in the same vehicle, the V1 absolutely, positively interferes with the Redline. I got a V1 yesterday, and drove home with both units on. I pass 7 known false alerts over a 4 mile stretch on the trip, 6 K and 1 X band, and with the V1 on the Redline only alerted to two of the 7, and I repeated the 4 mile stretch 3 times to be sure. The Redline was almost as quiet as the IX, and the V1 alerted at all the spots where the Redline would normally alert.

---

I agree on both counts.

LEO's are not going to be consistent across the board using this technique, so that leaves us with defining the raw capabilities of the Radar Equipment itself and how our RDs measure up. I'm more comfortable with the added range of the RedLine vs. it's susceptability to missing shots under .5 seconds. However, if I lived in Texas instead of New York, I might have a different view.:p

The point is, the M3 platform is slower than the competition in it's current form. However, Belscort has the ability to improve response times on the M3 platform and close that gap with the V1 by adding Band Segmentation and RDR to all M3s! Thats why I think it's important to continue to key on this issue until they see fit to provide these features on detectors in the US.

And thanks for posting your experience with the V1 / RedLine combo! No matter how many times this is mentioned, people still think they can get away with running these detectors together by mounting them on opposite sides of the windshield! If an RDD can detect a V1 at 900+ feet, then a RedLine inside the same car cabin can certainly see harmonics being bled out the front and rear horns!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CJR238

Its amazing how Belscorts filter like crazy when being interfered by another RD. This is also why i believe close proximity testing causes errors, i saw this with Jim's TrueLock frequency block testing and many other videos.

Thought: If one RD sitting next to another can cause filtering (delay or no alert at all) why would we believe using a radar gun close in proximity wouldn't do the same thing? Cobras give off strong short KA falsing which the Belscorts filter.

---

A strong signal from a real Radar source should never create a delay in response...........just the opposite in fact...........unless your SO CLOSE that you overdrive the input on the RD and get no alert at all. The LNA's and Mixers are set up to find very weak signals..........so introducing a full strength signal at 25 milliwatts can saturate the input and dummy up the detector. However, your not going to see this in most cases unless your within a few feet of the detector pointing the Radar gun right at the receivers antenna or getting a very strong bounce within the car. In any case, this is why I use an extended radar antenna cable and point the transmitters antenna away from the RD when bench testing.

As for Cobra's vs a Strong Radar signal.........two entirely different things. The Cobra's leaked LO emissions are just that, leaked! They are not amplified for transmission like police radar and are in fact very weak signals.

The filtering on all RDs is always present and being run as part of a program instruction set. Some of the criteria in that instruction set include signal strength AND presence of multiple signals detected. Belscort's filtering is essentially an oversweep of both X and K bands to find either the primary or 2nd harmonic of another detectors Local Oscillator. If it finds one, it will not alert to a relatively weak signal in the Ka frequency range as that could be the 3rd harmonic of the leaky LO being detected. However, if the signal being detected in the Ka frequency range exceeds a certain power threshold, the Belscort will disregard the 1st and 2nd LO detections and alert to the strong Ka signal. This is why running two detectors in the same cabin does not entirely kill the detection capability of either detector.........it just kills the range one would normally expect.

The funny part about whan all the QT hype is said and done the factors involved are:

1- The LEO needs to be running QT in your area frequently.
2- The LEO needs to trigger it fast enough so not to alert your RD.
3- They also need to do it slow enough so they can get a reading.
4- They need to see the quick speed reading and know which car is doing the speeding.
4- They need to hide the fact that they are using such a technique. (easy part)

Then add the Radar Detector factor if it can pick up QT:

1- The LEO needs to QT a car ahead of you to get any warning.
2- Your RD needs to be sensitive enough to pick up that QT at a good distance.
3- You need to be the obvious one speeding when in a group.

Boy are we diehard fanatics. :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nine_c1

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CJR238

Its amazing how Belscorts filter like crazy when being interfered by another RD. This is also why i believe close proximity testing causes errors, i saw this with Jim's TrueLock frequency block testing and many other videos.

Thought: If one RD sitting next to another can cause filtering (delay or no alert at all) why would we believe using a radar gun close in proximity wouldn't do the same thing? Cobras give off strong short KA falsing which the Belscorts filter.

---

A strong signal from a real Radar source should never create a delay in response...........just the opposite in fact...........unless your SO CLOSE that you overdrive the input on the RD and get no alert at all. The LNA's and Mixers are set up to find very weak signals..........so introducing a full strength signal at 25 milliwatts can saturate the input and dummy up the detector. However, your not going to see this in most cases unless your within a few feet of the detector pointing the Radar gun right at the receivers antenna or getting a very strong bounce within the car. In any case, this is why I use an extended radar antenna cable and point the transmitters antenna away from the RD when bench testing.

As for Cobra's vs a Strong Radar signal.........two entirely different things. The Cobra's leaked LO emissions are just that, leaked! They are not amplified for transmission like police radar and are in fact very weak signals.

The filtering on all RDs is always present and being run as part of a program instruction set. Some of the criteria in that instruction set include signal strength AND presence of multiple signals detected. Belscort's filtering is essentially an oversweep of both X and K bands to find either the primary or 2nd harmonic of another detectors Local Oscillator. If it finds one, it will not alert to a relatively weak signal in the Ka frequency range as that could be the 3rd harmonic of the leaky LO being detected. However, if the signal being detected in the Ka frequency range exceeds a certain power threshold, the Belscort will disregard the 1st and 2nd LO detections and alert to the strong Ka signal. This is why running two detectors in the same cabin does not entirely kill the detection capability of either detector.........it just kills the range one would normally expect.

---

Exactly, close proximity testing causes errors. That's exactly what i experienced (no alert at all within 5ft). And some pretty weird stuff at 20ft.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nine_c1

If an RDD can detect a V1 at 900+ feet, then a RedLine inside the same car cabin can certainly see harmonics being bled out the front and rear horns!

---

nine_c1, wouldn't be safe to say running a V1 with either a CI, or STI-R, would interfere with both remotes? Especially considering a RDD can detect a V1 at 900+ feet as you said.

I've see comments on here saying that a V1 wouldn't interfere with the remotes, but even with the metal & engine between the remotes and a windshield RD your still only talking about a distance of 4-5 feet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nosbusa

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nine_c1

If an RDD can detect a V1 at 900+ feet, then a RedLine inside the same car cabin can certainly see harmonics being bled out the front and rear horns!

---

nine_c1, wouldn't be safe to say running a V1 with either a CI, or STI-R, would interfere with both remotes? Especially considering a RDD can detect a V1 at 900+ feet as you said.

I've see comments on here saying that a V1 wouldn't interfere with the remotes, but even with the metal & engine between the remotes and a windshield RD your still only talking about a distance of 4-5 feet.

---

It depends if what a RDD picks up from V1 interferes with the remote. And from the amount of people running remotes with V1's is any indication it definitely doesn't effect it enough to make any real difference.
However I found my 9500ix interfered with my CI in certain rare circumstances, but the V1 hasn't yet.
I also found that hood cover helped reduce any effect they have on the remote.


Also i believe the RDD distance for the V1 was around 5-600ft?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CJR238

The funny part about whan all the QT hype is said and done the factors involved are:

1- The LEO needs to be running QT in your area frequently.
2- The LEO needs to trigger it fast enough so not to alert your RD.
3- They also need to do it slow enough so they can get a reading.
4- They need to see the quick speed reading and know which car is doing the speeding.
4- They need to hide the fact that they are using such a technique. (easy part)

Then add the Radar Detector factor if it can pick up QT:

1- The LEO needs to QT a car ahead of you to get any warning.
2- Your RD needs to be sensitive enough to pick up that QT at a good distance.
3- You need to be the obvious one speeding when in a group.

Boy are we diehard fanatics. :D

---

:D Hey, sh*t happens. Come on down to the great state of Texas and see for yourself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by snoopyc4

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CJR238

The funny part about whan all the QT hype is said and done the factors involved are:

1- The LEO needs to be running QT in your area frequently.
2- The LEO needs to trigger it fast enough so not to alert your RD.
3- They also need to do it slow enough so they can get a reading.
4- They need to see the quick speed reading and know which car is doing the speeding.
4- They need to hide the fact that they are using such a technique. (easy part)

Then add the Radar Detector factor if it can pick up QT:

1- The LEO needs to QT a car ahead of you to get any warning.
2- Your RD needs to be sensitive enough to pick up that QT at a good distance.
3- You need to be the obvious one speeding when in a group.

Boy are we diehard fanatics. :D

---

:D Hey, sh*t happens. Come on down to the great state of Texas and see for yourself.

---

I have some relatives in TX, was always fun visiting them. We got to sit in the back of the pickup and drink beers while getting a sun tan driving down the highway, go tubing down the Guadalupe River and drink beers, sit on the water and drink beers. Come to think of it we drank beer allot.... Ill triad that for QT any day.:D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nosbusa

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nine_c1

If an RDD can detect a V1 at 900+ feet, then a RedLine inside the same car cabin can certainly see harmonics being bled out the front and rear horns!

---

nine_c1, wouldn't be safe to say running a V1 with either a CI, or STI-R, would interfere with both remotes? Especially considering a RDD can detect a V1 at 900+ feet as you said.

I've see comments on here saying that a V1 wouldn't interfere with the remotes, but even with the metal & engine between the remotes and a windshield RD your still only talking about a distance of 4-5 feet.

---

I think it's possible for a V1 inside the car cabin to interfere with an M3 remote, but overall, a relatively safe combination to run. Reason being is that there is no direct path for emissions from the V1 to the M3's receiver. Any signal emitted from the V1 has to strike an object in front of the vehicle and reflect back into the M3's horn. LO emissions are fairly weak and that strength gets cut down in mutliples considering only a fraction of the power is reflected off objects in front. So I would say the risk is negligable unless your running close behind another vehicle.

Running both detectors inside the cabin is another story. There are side lobes in the radiation pattern of the antennas that cover the full 180 degrees (or 360 degrees in the case of the V1) and the windshield itself acts as a reflector.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by snoopyc4

:D Hey, sh*t happens. Come on down to the great state of Texas and see for yourself.

---

I just made a trip from Houston Texas to Upstate New York two weeks ago. Me and the RedLine made it out of Texas in one piece (I thought I saw Fritter on his bicycle).:p

Ran all the way across Louisiana and Mississipi, then up through Alabama and the corner of Georgia into Tennessee........then all the way across Virginia and then up through West Virginia, Maryland and Pennsylvania and finally back into New York.

The RedLine did great except on two occasions where it could not be faulted. One Lidar trap in Alabama that was a hum-dinger. Two apparent miscreants on an overpass (one sitting in a chair!:eek:) and I figured the one had something in his hand he might be thinking of dropping onto the next car. So I speed up to get past (85 in a 65)..........only to find about 8 Alabama State Cruisers sitting on the other side, 5 of them with customers. I'd of been toast but for other countermeasures I was running at the time. More on that later......

The other let down was in PA where I got zapped doing 15 over on I-81. Again, my alternate countermeasures kicked in to save my butt. Again, no fault of the RedLine as I had begun ignoring ALL K-band alerts after encountering numerous K-Band drones on I-81 in PA. For this reason, I have PA as the worst state for RD users. They put so many drones up that you just give up on reacting to your RD when it goes off. Funny, both PA and NJ use the cheapest most basic radars, and yet they find a way to be among the most effective at sniping speeders.:rolleyes:

Oh yes...........the other countermeasures I was running............a P71 Crown Vic!:p

http://i991.photobucket.com/albums/a...CE-1155069.jpg

Quote:

---

Oh yes...........the other countermeasures I was running............a P71 Crown Vic!

---

That's wrong.

Just plain wrong.

Gawd I love it!

LOL:D