Mike B's Sensitity Testing Part II HERE!

[wanderingmind]

Ok. So the X50 listed in the table right now is Rev 5. But, the "new/GOL" X50 that has not been tested yet, is that going to be Rev 6.1?

I should have made my first post more specific. Sorry.

[AirMoore]

What version of the Rx-65 was tested?

I believe it was the latest versions for all detectors (from Belscort) and V1 is as noted (revs are noted).

I would love to see your V1 tested since you are supposed to have one of their best as they told you (VR)

I would also love to have seen it tested (though its out of tune right now)... so its not being used, because this is exactly what VR told me the last time (actually 2 times when I have sent it in). The tech said he replaced the internals in my unit, with one of their highest tested units.


*Please note that VR only distributes units that when tested are above a certain -db level b(in other words meet VR's minimum spec requirements)... what that level is I do not know, and they will not tell you (for good reason), but it is a very good QC checkpoint for them... so you would be hard pressed to find VR's products varying widely. (Even if they did vary widely, you can still be sure that when it leaves the factory its met the given minimum requirement, then again it all depends on if it stays in tune).


After I get my unit back (detection range on Ka is LOS only) I would like to see its figures sometime. *


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Also I would like to give a BIG THANKS to Michael B for giving us this quality information and putting his time&effort into this task. It seems as if some people are kind of drilling him about it or being a bit skeptical about testing methods and such... so a big thanks for all your work to give us these figures!

[happya$$]

Ok. So the X50 listed in the table right now is Rev 5. But, the "new/GOL" X50 that has not been tested yet, is that going to be Rev 6.1?

I should have made my first post more specific. Sorry.

Yes next one that is being sent by RacerX is 6.1

[wanderingmind]

Ok. So the X50 listed in the table right now is Rev 5. But, the "new/GOL" X50 that has not been tested yet, is that going to be Rev 6.1?

I should have made my first post more specific. Sorry.

Yes next one that is being sent by RacerX is 6.1

Great! I am looking forward to seeing the possible lab number "differences" between the two. Many suspect that the 6.1 will be lower.

[KnightHawk]

Funny how you would dissect my post. All I said was ALL testing helps to determine how each unit performs.

Seems odd to me that one would not want all information or apply more or less weight to any one test.

I'm not picking on you nascar. The fact of the matter is, the lab test will still not work on real world testing when there are variances. Even though michael B test's shows that the V1 is better in 35.5 in the lab over the 9500i, the performance of the 9500i is better in most cases in real world test. Example. 9500i beat the V1 in forward facing, 90 degress angle and over the hill test. I'm just saying that you cannot match lab and real world testing.

[nascar]

Yeah, but you may have misconstrued what I said or maybe meant. :wink:

I was trying to say that the more information, the better. I wasn't saying any one test was better. I think you are proving my point in your post. I believe we are on the same page.

Next...

[Holla]

Mike----Any 3.861 results?

[Veri]

Mike----Any 3.861 results?

Pretty sure he's testing one... could be wrong.

[happya$$]

Mike----Any 3.861 results?

Pretty sure he's testing one... could be wrong.

3.861 and 2.909 have been sent and will arrive at his location by Wed 5/30

[drochebs]

Happy, Any chance he is going to test a V1 with 3.851 since that was the first with the new part?