I was wondering if Mike B could give us some details. I noticed it when I was viewing this years speed measurement labs test results and they said it was a prototype.
Printable View
I was wondering if Mike B could give us some details. I noticed it when I was viewing this years speed measurement labs test results and they said it was a prototype.
Link? Result of that test?
:confused:
:
Thanks for the link nate!
Here's another question for MB.
From that website here's a quote in the false discussion:
Either a mistake or things are looking up!:)Quote:
Escort/Passport, Cobra, and Whistler offer models with GPS in them.
One thing missing from those tests are the RD's settings. At least I couldn't find that info so i assume they were all set to factory defaults. Which of course would mean POP was enabled in the Whistlers.
:
you're welcome. yeah it would be nice if they gave some more info.
I believe that Michael B usually attends SML, so my guess is that the Whistler settings were set by him.Quote:
Originally Posted by MOPARado
It won't be long and MikeB will have some info. He has to get approval first. I for one will get one as soon as they go on sale. Even if it is just to test. I hope it has a little different display module compared to the last remote unit.
POP was enabled only during the POP test as with every other brand tested.
As for the Whistler remote, it was at a huge disadvantage compared to the other detectors and this information was not reflected in the posted report.
To set the record straight, the GPS only devices were listed as Cobra SL3 and the Whistler RLC-250 however what is not listed is the Whistler RLC-100, the Escort SC55, and the Cheetah C50. I hope SML chooses to include these if they revise the article.
The height of the dash models for Whistler, Cobra and Escort were approx 48"
The height of the V1 was 60" as in was in an SUV
The height of the Bel/Escort remotes were 36" as they were also mounted on the SUV
The height of the Whistler 3600 was 12" as this was the only location I could quickly mount in the Ford Fusion given the time and tools I had at my disposal.
During the over the hill test we took the Pro68SE off the dashboard and tested it outside the vehicle at 12" from the ground. The comparison on X band went from a 6-7 (windshield) to 2-3 (lower grill), the 33.8 test went from 3-4 (windshield) to a 2 (lower grill) indicating the signal at 12” from the ground in the “over the hill test” was significantly weaker. My estimation was approx 12db difference on X band and approx 6db difference at 33.8Ghz. This estimation is based upon the signal strength table.
SML has the results but did not post them not did SML make reference to the height of the Whistler remote.
I hope SML can see the importance of this and decide to revise the report.
They could even spin it off as a story about the importance of choosing the right mounting location. If SML does not, I am sure that someone else will.
A simple statement with the heights and a summary indicating that height can cause lower performance during conditions where the roadway interferes with the path of radar.
As the 9 mile test was an unobstructed view, the height did not create an issue.
The console is completely different.Quote:
Originally Posted by BlinderGuy
As soon as I have approval, I will give more details and a feature list.
I heard this unit can be installed completely inside the vehicle and removed as easy as a window mounted one. Is that true?
This new Whistler, really has my interest peaked.
As much as I'd say it is 99.99% likely-hood it is more of the same pish-posh, I can't hate on Whistler for continually putting out new models with tweaks and revisions... at least they are doing something yearly *cough cough*.
If this thing turns out to be legit (Highly UNLIKELY) it could make its way onto my super-long wish-list.
Price is also a HUGE factor... we don't need another Qi45. :rolleyes:
if they managed to make a more sensitive Rev C platform that is near the big dogs for 1/4 of the price, id get that one for my daily driver, and get a Redline/V1 for travel/highway...
Michael,Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael B
Thanks for bringing this information out, height of one remote compared to another can make a big difference. I really hope SML will revise their report to indicate the differences. Thanks again for mention the differences in height not only on the remotes but also comparing the 3600 to the Pro 68 se.
Whistler1
No that is not trueQuote:
Originally Posted by TRun
Not that they are ever correct about anything, but on the SML test, it implies that the 3600 can be either a dash or a remote detector. Here's the link, last few sentences at the bottom, just above "Laser Counter Measures".Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael BNo that is not trueQuote:
Originally Posted by TRun
Laser can?t be seen. Its narrow beam transmits in the infrared spectrum outside of human vision. The human eye can see between 380-790 nanometers and laser transmits at 904-905 nanometers. Law enforcement is making increased use of police laser gun
It was a comment taken out of context.
The question was asked of me can this be placed inside the vehicle.
My reply was that it was a full install remote and as such was designed for a typical under the hood installation, however the receiver had some style to it and if someone wanted to mount it inside the vehicle, I suppose they could.
Somehow that was spun to the verbiage seen on the SML website :confused:
You can't win with those blokes mate... stay here with us, we welcome you. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Michael B
Just curious... at what point will we be seeing any release details on this (ETA... $$$... PICS). Before the Holidays I hope. ;)
Yes before the holidays..........:)
Still need final approval to release pictures/features/MSRP
I know this is information is overdue but please be patient.
:Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael B
:
I personally question the integrity of this test with statements such as these from the SML report:
Quote:
..We also made a mistake...
Quote:
Beltronics, Cobra, and Whistler have GPS in them to eliminate false alerts, but most importantly warn you of approaching automated enforcement systems.
Quote:
Both Cobra, SL3 (MSRP $99.95), and Whistler, RLC-250 (MSRP $189.95) offer stand alone photo enforcement location products if you don’t desire to buy a radar detector. They also offer units including a radar detector with GPS for red light location.
Quote:
If vehicles were of different heights, we made sure all detectors were at the same elevation.
Quote:
The windshield of the Escort/Beltronics car and the Whistler car contained a composite possibly attenuating signal reception.
My comments on the above quote:Quote:
...Whistler 685 is the dash model of the remote Pro 3600. The detector can either serve as a remote or dash model. This is the only model available to do this.
685??? typo??.
If the 68SE is the dash model of the 3600, does that mean the 3600 isn't based on the Rev.C architecture?
And how about a remote which has the capability of either being remotely or windshield mounted with the appropriate installation kits? Sounds like a great idea!
The test setups and info in that report are anywhere from non-existent, sketchy, misleading or inaccurate.
Twelve inches off the ground is a definite disadvantage especially for overhill tests.
However its unclear how much the height/ground differential contributed to the disparity of the 1.5mi. IO, CO 68SE and 3600 results.
For example:
Ka 33.8
3600 - I = 3/9, C = 3/9
68SE - I = MAX, C = MAX
:
For the 1.5/1.0/.5 mile test, there were light rolling hill on this stretch of roadway and while I believe at the height of the windshield there was no obstruction, my opinion is that yes these light rolling hills would have been obstructed from direct line of sight from a unit at only 12" from the ground however I did not have a chance to run the Pro68SE at a 12" height so do not have supporting data to reflect this.
I do have supporting data on the over the hill test.
As for the 68SE being a dash model of the Pro3600..........again this was taken out of context.
When asked about the Pro3600 I replied it was based on the SE type models with KaMax and as such the performance should mimic that of the 78SE.
When asked about the 68SE I responded its performance is similar to the 78SE but without the KaMax mode.
Again, somehow those two answers were spun into what you read on the website result.
I'm interested in the 3600, if it has directional :p
Mike, will this remote model be any better against K band?
OK with the small rolling hills, that data makes some sense now!Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael B
Just assumed they woulda picked a perfectly flat stretch of road for this kind of test.
Yep, that report should of mentioned the fact that the 3600 was mounted 12 inches off the ground in BIG BOLD TYPE. That omission is a really big deal adding to the overall questionability of this test.
If i published a test report for public consumption with as many holes and flaws as this SML report, my old boss woulda fired me on the spot! :eek:
:
For windshield mounted detectors, the rolling hils do not factor in so it is for all practical purposed flat for those tests.
The remote being mounted as low as it was is a different story and yes I did request the height be mentioned.
I would demand it or threaten to lawyer up!:eek:Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael B
:
Working on a peaceful resolution
I look forward to MSRP and Information on the 3600. My guess the MSRP would be around 239.99? I got really confused on the SML website. They need to redo the entire page.
X2!
Not the most professional or easy reading report for sure and i've been around countless technical/test documents including my own.
I'd pay good money to see a written procedure by these SML guys on how to rebuild a 4-barrel carburetor. :D
:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael B
This is such a bummer, and exactly what I figured it was... :(
Guessing the price-point is phasing out the 3450, because I hope it isn't MORE than that... and I was so looking forward to this remote.
Hopefully it is like the Sti > 9500ci where even being M3's there was seemingly a minor performance tweak... otherwise, I am very saddened. :(
Oh well, glad to see them doing some work though that we can see, it just sucks it's soooo exactly what I figured it to be.
That 3450 was way overdue for an update
Fully agreed... especially the interface on it, which I believe M.B. has (somewhere) confirmed has changed (in part at least)... don't remember where though... SO DO NOT MISS-QUOTE THIS LIKE SML... which is likely a huge plus.Quote:
Originally Posted by TRun
Regardless, I really hope there has been minor revisions to the 78SE platform at least... I so wanted to get this detector... soooo wanted it.
Ive been waiting for a remote, at a good price, that I could use for around-town banter day in/out at 10-15+PSL just so I wouldn't have to leave the high-end dash-mounts baking and freezing.
:(
Please M.B. help me with this pal... give me some good news!!!
If this detector can at least handle the X K issue better than current se models then it would be a total win in my book.
X2Quote:
Originally Posted by TRun
I would also like to see increased X\k sensitivity...am more than happy with KA band performance on the C+ platform.
:(Quote:
Originally Posted by TRun
That PLUS:
Depending on the price too... hopefully 1 of two things will be happening:
The 3450 will be replaced by the 3600 at its current price point.
-OR-
The 3600 will take over the 3450's current price point... and the 3450 hits at $189.99 or $175... something like that.
I really didn't mind the part where he said "based off the **** platform"... what worries me is M.B. said "So performance should MIMIC the 78SE"
So to me it sounds like they just took the 78SE, ripped the laser sensors out of it, plopped those in their own unit -or in the same housing- dnk which..., stuffed the rest of a 78SE into the antenna/control box and called it a day...
Big time bummer. Only M.B. can say for sure, but the air really was let out of the sails at that point... at least for me.
I guess at this point being:
A) Poor
B) Desperate
I can't be too picky... but I really don't wan't a 78SE re-hashed, otherwise I'd just buy one...
Its like the Qi-45 all over again... a more expensive M4, that offers less.
Come on M.B. hit us with some trade-winds for the sailing... it's been tweaked a little hasn't it... ;)?
Reading between the lines in this here thread, it sure does appear the 3600 is just a remote version of the SE(Ka-max) architecture with hopefully with at least some refinements.Quote:
Originally Posted by TRun
If the 3600 does nothing else but fix the X-K issue while keeping the sensitivity of Ka-max, i'll buy one. If not, i'll pass and wait for something better down the line.
Extra K-band sensitivity and a new up-dated anti-false strategy would be plus's but not show stoppers in my book.
Somewhere imbedded in that SML report, three filter modes were mentioned in the 3600. If this turns out to be correct and thats a big 'if' based on some of the other inaccuracies in the SML report, my geuss at this point would be that the false filtering stays the same.
Due to the 3600's snafu'd circumstances during the SML testing, the verdict is still out whether K-band sensitivity has been improved, at least for me.
We'll see.
:
I disagree, a Pro-78 rehashed, at the current price point of the 3450 would be worth it to me in conjunction with STi-R. For $250-300 to throw a Pro-78 in the rear of the vehicle for directional alerts might be worth it. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by AirMoore
Let's not speculate until the spec sheet is released.
There is plenty of time afterward for answers.
We are aware of everyones wish lists and did everything we could to address as many of these as possible.
I even added a few surprises that were not on anyones list.
thanks mike! now i'm pumped!!!
Thanks for taking forum feedback into acconut during product development.Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael B
Whistler1