http://i20.ebayimg.com/02/i/000/d1/45/6fd9_1.JPG
Is this product still good? Up to date on detection? I know it is an older model but it is still Vector ....
Would the detector being old make it not work as well?
Do detectors have a life?
Printable View
http://i20.ebayimg.com/02/i/000/d1/45/6fd9_1.JPG
Is this product still good? Up to date on detection? I know it is an older model but it is still Vector ....
Would the detector being old make it not work as well?
Do detectors have a life?
This is almost as good, and in some cases better, than present-model BEL Vector detector. It only lacks POP.
explain better? I have read some topics on quality of the BEL and review on other sites of brand new Vectors.....Quote:
Originally Posted by jimbonzzz
I recently had a Whistler xtr330 NEW MODEL they have and I hated it, it picked up so many false alarms in the DFW area that it was annoying... It however did pick up a accurate LASER detection... but I could see the COP as well.....
Does Vector 940 & up still have false alarms or has this improved?
how does the 985 do on Ka
I still have one of these, it's an excellent RD, it does very well on ALL bands.Quote:
Originally Posted by whistler
1.5 mile IO Ka around a big bend.Quote:
Originally Posted by whistler
985 holds its own.
Does Beltronics service/repair old Vector RDs?
I have Bel 990i which is out of tune and needs to be re-calibrated.
So far I didn't get "service required",only "self cal"message.
Here is a thread about this unit - vector 985.
http://www.radardetector.net/viewtop...761&highlight=
Well of course the old 985 is going to be worst than the V1 and newer 9500, STI, etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by Azonehits
The comment about not picking up radar from the rear is a very poor example, its not a V1, and if there is nothing reflective ahead to bounce back from, neither any other premium detectors would have alerted any better.
If there is a real threat, the 985 will provide the driver ample time to slow. As they say its tried and true.
If the X50 picked it up, I also would expect the 985 should have picked it up too. Why? All the set up were the same with no variables and I stand behind it. I see you have a 985. If you want to, I'll be glad to test your 985 with all 3 main Ka radar frequencies and see how it stacks up with my X50 when hit from the rear.Quote:
Originally Posted by amoney
The test scenarios were real threat using police radar in that particular test. If you just based it on a day to day driving experience, you will never know. Why? You don't have nothing to base it to and won't be able to come up with a solid conclusion when you don't know a radar source was operating in that particular area.Quote:
If there is a real threat, the 985 will provide the driver ample time to slow. As they say its tried and true.
I respect your position, but again your comparing the older 985 to a newer X50. The X50 is a newer generation, there is nothing to proove putting a newer premium detector against an older premium detector.Quote:
Originally Posted by Azonehits
Its the same if you call the X50 shyt comparing it against the sensitivity of the 9500, when you know the X50 is still very good. Great in fact.
All I can say, my Bel has performed above average against Ka bands. I never had any issues, many friends were austounded that a RD can really work, really well.
But as in real life everyones milage will vary. But comparing an older detector to newer generations, naturally it will be last, but the fact that it can still trail all the other top premium detectors still makes it a very good RD.
I think the issue here is not whether it is a newer or older RD. The issue here is, the 985 just has poor rear detection capabilities during that particular test.Quote:
Originally Posted by amoney