GOL RADAR SHOOTOUT TEST 1/28/06

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Souvaman

The results on the Ku band were questionable. A sample size of 1 RX65 and 1 V1 is statistically unreliable. I also question the use of a non-radar gun for a source. I realize you have to use what is available, but how closely does a Ku band oscillator match the signal (amplitude, pulse duration, modulation scheme, etc) of a real Ku band radar gun? I don't recall reading other information about the Ku band and the performance of the RX 65 or V1. Can anyone else post a link? Since this band isn't used in the US, I don't care too much. But - it would be nice to know if my RX65 is a brick on Ku...

Souvaman

---

If the KU results are questionable, then so are all the others. I think its important to remember that this was in no way a scientific test... but rather just an interesting little experiment.

As far as I know each detector was run against each gun only once (according to the data). Had each been run 10 or so times then we could take the mean or median distance + we could calculate a standard deviation and make more sense.

I suspect that there is more variation within a detector model, than between many detector models. Meaning, I suspect if you take two V1s the variation (on a single test like this) will be greater than the variation betweeen the V1 and other models.

Keep in mind this is a real world test... so if the car did not take the exact same path, even the same detector would have differing results. Other environmental factors could also be coming into play.

Between this informal test and the last informal GOL test, it definitely seems like the Rx65 beats the x50. I'm kindof wishing now I'd bought the rx65 for the wife rather than the x50. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Souvaman

I also question the use of a non-radar gun for a source. I realize you have to use what is available, but how closely does a Ku band oscillator match the signal (amplitude, pulse duration, modulation scheme, etc) of a real Ku band radar gun?

---

There is no "pulsing" or "modulating" with police radar, it is unmodulated continuous wave, just like the oscillator we used. The differences you would see in Ku radar guns would possibly be output power, and a different antenna.

Jim

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lordhamster

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Souvaman

The results on the Ku band were questionable. A sample size of 1 RX65 and 1 V1 is statistically unreliable. I also question the use of a non-radar gun for a source. I realize you have to use what is available, but how closely does a Ku band oscillator match the signal (amplitude, pulse duration, modulation scheme, etc) of a real Ku band radar gun? I don't recall reading other information about the Ku band and the performance of the RX 65 or V1. Can anyone else post a link? Since this band isn't used in the US, I don't care too much. But - it would be nice to know if my RX65 is a brick on Ku...

Souvaman

---

If the KU results are questionable, then so are all the others. I think its important to remember that this was in no way a scientific test... but rather just an interesting little experiment.

As far as I know each detector was run against each gun only once (according to the data). Had each been run 10 or so times then we could take the mean or median distance + we could calculate a standard deviation and make more sense.

I suspect that there is more variation within a detector model, than between many detector models. Meaning, I suspect if you take two V1s the variation (on a single test like this) will be greater than the variation betweeen the V1 and other models.

Keep in mind this is a real world test... so if the car did not take the exact same path, even the same detector would have differing results. Other environmental factors could also be coming into play.

Between this informal test and the last informal GOL test, it definitely seems like the Rx65 beats the x50. I'm kindof wishing now I'd bought the rx65 for the wife rather than the x50. :)

---

Yeah this is far from scientific. Anyway I wish I would have kept the RX65 for my wife instead of buying her an X50

Yeah there's only one place to do a truly "scientific" test: in the lab. And hopefully we'll see more of this in the future too! (Like DET's analysis of the STi!)

Unfortunately, very few people have access to the multi-thousand dollar test equipment required to do testing at these frequencies, outside of the detector manufacturers themselves.

Jim

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jimbonzzz

Yeah there's only one place to do a truly "scientific" test: in the lab. And hopefully we'll see more of this in the future too! (Like DET's analysis of the STi!)

Unfortunately, very few people have access to the multi-thousand dollar test equipment required to do testing at these frequencies, outside of the detector manufacturers themselves.

Jim

---

Perhaps there is some happy medium.

I know there are time constraints... but somethings that can be done would be the following:

Always use the same car for testing,
always use a premarked mounting location
have the car run down the exact centerline of the road each time
Run each Detector/Gun combo at least 10 times. (once its setup, additional runs should be easy to do.)

Then when we have multiple datapoints on each, we could at least run some basic stats to try to see how much variation is coming from just fluctuation and how much is coming from the model of detector.

I would like to see more media coverage of these events. Thank you Outrun for the great pics.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vw242

I would like to see more media coverage of these events. Thank you Outrun for the great pics.

---

Your welcome. I had to switch back and forth from video to memory to shoot pics. I thought it would be good if yall could kinda see what was going on and on the same day. Next time if we have Roy's awesome rig we ought to shoot everything live on here. It can be done.

I am playing around with webcam dv right now. Works like a champ. It would be awsome for everyone to log on while I walk around shooting video of the event. You could see everything. Would anyone be interested in that?

Jason

GOL - its all been said already but great work! As I've said before, your method of reporting data & results is far superior to any of the other tests out there. The simple graphs and diagrams (last year) convey results very well.

I think there has been some improvement items mentioned for next year, but this overall is great work and this is truly appreciated. Thanks!

how is the bel 985? thinking of getting one as my backup

V985CS right?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by outrun

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vw242

I would like to see more media coverage of these events. Thank you Outrun for the great pics.

---

Your welcome. I had to switch back and forth from video to memory to shoot pics. I thought it would be good if yall could kinda see what was going on and on the same day. Next time if we have Roy's awesome rig we ought to shoot everything live on here. It can be done.

I am playing around with webcam dv right now. Works like a champ. It would be awsome for everyone to log on while I walk around shooting video of the event. You could see everything. Would anyone be interested in that?

Jason

---

What is AMAZING about jason is his creativity. He has a story that he tells with his video and pictures. This guy is SO passionate about his work. He takes pride in what he does and will not do something if he does not feel it meets his high standards. I would take him as my camera man ANY day of the week over anyone else INCLUDING professionals. IMHO he IS a professional and his work CAN NOT be touched!

One more thing. Next time we have a RADAR test we will keep the group as small as possible since control is so important especially with radar. We might not even announce it just so we can keep the group into a managable level. We will just post the results in a surprise manner.

Thanks for the input with respect to the V1 and RX65. I have gone over the results of several tests and it seems that both models are very comparable when it comes to radar. KU band may be another story, but it's useless on this side of the Atlantic. I know I'm oversimplifying the issue somewhat, but the only real difference is the laser detection capabilities.

Do you use a laser jammer and need the best laser detection? If so, get a V1.

If laser jammers are illegal where you live and laser is not a priority, you're probably better off with an RX65.

Does anyone have an issue with either of those statements?

I'm going to purchase one of these detectors before the end of the day. Price isn't really an issue, so this may very well come down to a coin flip. I'm still leaning toward the RX65, but I'm open to suggestions in the mean time. Also, I'm assuming that if you order direct (or from an authorized seller like Roy in the case of the RX65) you will be getting the latest software revision.

I wasn't aware that there can be a performance discrepency between 2 identical RX65's due to manufacturing- this has me a little concerned.

EDITED

Decision based on Laser Jammer:

NO Laser jammer - you should want a good laser detector

WITH Laser jammer- laser detection shouldnt matter

Looking at the results you will be fine with either RX 65 or V1

I would recommend the RX 65 matched with a good laser jammer + Veil

I am using a V1 + Veil and I am happy. No plans of getting a laser jammer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by f_399

how is the bel 985? thinking of getting one as my backup

V985CS right?

---

The old Vector 985 is good. I just sold mine to Ford Focus over there south of Fort Worth.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Coldrain

Thanks for the input with respect to the V1 and RX65. I have gone over the results of several tests and it seems that both models are very comparable when it comes to radar. KU band may be another story, but it's useless on this side of the Atlantic. I know I'm oversimplifying the issue somewhat, but the only real difference is the laser detection capabilities.

Do you use a laser jammer and need the best laser detection? If so, get a V1.

If laser jammers are illegal where you live and laser is not a priority, you're probably better off with an RX65.

Does anyone have an issue with either of those statements?

I'm going to purchase one of these detectors before the end of the day. Price isn't really an issue, so this may very well come down to a coin flip. I'm still leaning toward the RX65, but I'm open to suggestions in the mean time. Also, I'm assuming that if you order direct (or from an authorized seller like Roy in the case of the RX65) you will be getting the latest software revision.

I wasn't aware that there can be a performance discrepency between 2 identical RX65's due to manufacturing- this has me a little concerned.

---

There are two more things to consider:

Assuming the detection on both the V1 and Rx65 is the same, the V1 has IMO some advantages:

1. Arrows: I don't know about California, but here in Ohio the arrows are critical. Cops often use radar while moving at night. So to determine if that instant on radar blip was the car behind you or an upcoming speed trap, the arrows are critical.

2. Remote display. Given that you have such a pimped out ride as an S4, you might opt for mounting the V1 very high (almost concealed). Then using a remote display. The V1 uses a remote display which shows the same info as the main display. The rx65 does not have a meaningfull remote display (just an led).

Check out the following photos:
The first is the V1 mounted in the upper right part of my windshield, out of sight. http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v7...r/DSCN0569.jpg
The second photo is a view of my dash. Notice the location of the remote display by the shifter.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v7...r/DSCN0565.jpg

I even had my remote display modified by a guy on this board so that it would use color LEDs rather than the standard red ones.

Anyway... I'm sure you'll be happy with both detectors, I just feel that the V1 adds a few unique features to the mix you won't find elsewhere.

If you do order the rx65, be sure to order from Roy. If you sign up for his mailing list, you get a discount code sent to you in the email. Or, you could simply email Roy and ask....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by happya$$

One more thing. Next time we have a RADAR test we will keep the group as small as possible since control is so important especially with radar. We might not even announce it just so we can keep the group into a managable level. We will just post the results in a surprise manner.

---

Good idea.... I have to wonder the role of unseen environmental factors on the results and it also underlines the need for multiple runs spread at different times in the test.

Questions about this test....

- Was only one car used to test each detector?
- Were the detectors mounted in the exact same location each time a detector was switched?

Reason I bring this up is due to some windshields having metalic sections in them "car related question"

As far as the mounting location, I find this to be critical for each detector. I'd say to do propper testing each detector should be tested High, Mid Level Low. This would show the detectors strength and weaknesses. I have noticed when driving to my second job the difference between signal strength on my x50. Some days the automatic doors will set off my x50 full strength , sometimes only a low to mid signal. If you want to do some good testing on your own to prove mounting is critical, take your detector to a supermarket and point it directly at the doors, then slowly turn it from right to left also up and down. You will notice a huge difference.

The test done were great to show the average of how each detector worked, however as happya$$ said, "these are not scientific". Don't get too upset with these results.

Same car was used and same location was used for all of the detectors

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by outrun

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by f_399

how is the bel 985? thinking of getting one as my backup

V985CS right?

---

The old Vector 985 is good. I just sold mine to Ford Focus over there south of Fort Worth.

---

what do you think its worth now?

I guess about a 100 bucks or so. I payed $200 something new about 2 years ago.

I still think the test was very telling, however I'd like to see what each detector would do mounting them at the 3 different locations. May not make too much of a difference but you might be supprised. Like I said, "this test is a good basic test!"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Coldrain

Thanks for the input with respect to the V1 and RX65. I have gone over the results of several tests and it seems that both models are very comparable when it comes to radar. KU band may be another story, but it's useless on this side of the Atlantic. I know I'm oversimplifying the issue somewhat, but the only real difference is the laser detection capabilities.

Do you use a laser jammer and need the best laser detection? If so, get a V1.

If laser jammers are illegal where you live and laser is not a priority, you're probably better off with an RX65.

Does anyone have an issue with either of those statements?

I'm going to purchase one of these detectors before the end of the day. Price isn't really an issue, so this may very well come down to a coin flip. I'm still leaning toward the RX65, but I'm open to suggestions in the mean time. Also, I'm assuming that if you order direct (or from an authorized seller like Roy in the case of the RX65) you will be getting the latest software revision.

I wasn't aware that there can be a performance discrepency between 2 identical RX65's due to manufacturing- this has me a little concerned.

---

I don't know if this will help you or not, but I ordered a V1 today, partly based on the results of the test. I have used an X50 since June 2004 (many really, but that's a long story). I was honestly hoping for a dominant victory by the STI or V1, but since that didn't happen my decision came down to history, upgradeabilty, and the loyalty the V1 guys have for their product. The 30 day trial is a no-brainer too. If I don't like it I can send it back.

Living in California with a cop magnet for a car and a serious lead foot, Ka, K and Laser are my top priorities. In this test the V1 performed well in Ka, dominated K and by all accounts is the superior Laser detector. In the 2005 test it was the clear and dominant winner on all bands.

The performance discrepancy with the Bel products does not surprise me in the least ... since they are they same makers of the X50, and I am 99.9% sure my latest X50 has no ability to pick up Ka band whatsoever. None, nada, zilch. Some of my previous X50's startled me with their Ka range ... so I'm a believer that Bel/Escort has possibly huge variances from one unit to another.

Time will tell, but I'm eagerly awaiting delivery of my V1 tomorrow.

If you are really that undecided though, why not get both the RX-65 and the V1 and send back the loser after 30 days?

-Obsidian-

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spankyaf

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by happya$$

One more thing. Next time we have a RADAR test we will keep the group as small as possible since control is so important especially with radar. We might not even announce it just so we can keep the group into a managable level. We will just post the results in a surprise manner.

---

Good idea.... I have to wonder the role of unseen environmental factors on the results and it also underlines the need for multiple runs spread at different times in the test.

---

I am not saying its not a great idea (and I thank you guys for all your hard work dont get me wrong)... but the only problem would be: Where are you going to get all the detectors from? You got detectors from sources outside a 'small group'.

Just like what happened with the results of the X50 in this test...only one was tested (in each category)...so it didn't test performance of X50's in general (because manufact. variance is an issue), instead what was tested was the performance of a single detector.
It was good to see at least two of each kind tested (V1, STi, RX65) so you could average it(detection) out and get the logical probable results from any certain model detector, without having to guess (is this just a 'good' RD of that model or a 'bad' RD of that model.)

Don't get me wrong HappyA$$ I am not trying to rip on the testing of course, you guys did an amazing job and I can't thank you enough (you even said its not really scientific, just unbiased)... and GOL is really one of the only places to find unbiased RD info... with that said I think you understand what I am saying?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AirMoore

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spankyaf

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by happya$$

One more thing. Next time we have a RADAR test we will keep the group as small as possible since control is so important especially with radar. We might not even announce it just so we can keep the group into a managable level. We will just post the results in a surprise manner.

---

Good idea.... I have to wonder the role of unseen environmental factors on the results and it also underlines the need for multiple runs spread at different times in the test.

---

I am not saying its not a great idea (and I thank you guys for all your hard work dont get me wrong)... but the only problem would be: Where are you going to get all the detectors from? You got detectors from sources outside a 'small group'.

Just like what happened with the results of the X50 in this test...only one was tested (in each category)...so it didn't test performance of X50's in general (because manufact. variance is an issue), instead what was tested was the performance of a single detector.
It was good to see at least two of each kind tested (V1, STi, RX65) so you could average it(detection) out and get the logical probable results from any certain model detector, without having to guess (is this just a 'good' RD of that model or a 'bad' RD of that model.)

Don't get me wrong HappyA$$ I am not trying to rip on the testing of course, you guys did an amazing job and I can't thank you enough (you even said its not really scientific, just unbiased)... and GOL is really one of the only places to find unbiased RD info... with that said I think you understand what I am saying?

---

Well as for the X50 dont forget you can always refer to the prior test that the GOL team did also. Between the two tests I beleive there is great a volume of data for people to use to make an informed decision as to what detector will best for their situation.

Was the V1 set to maxium sensitivity on Ka during the Test?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dx2995

Was the V1 set to maxium sensitivity on Ka during the Test?

---

Excellent question, especially considering that I've just been told that the Advanced Logic ("L") mode does add Ka filtering despite no mention of it in the manual. Were they tested in All Bogeys ("A") mode? Any other programming changes or all defaults?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by o2bad455

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dx2995

Was the V1 set to maxium sensitivity on Ka during the Test?

---

Excellent question, especially considering that I've just been told that the Advanced Logic ("L") mode does add Ka filtering despite no mention of it in the manual. Were they tested in All Bogeys ("A") mode? Any other programming changes or all defaults?

---

There is no such thing as advanced sensitivity on Ka on the V1. That setting is just for the urgency of LED's the V1 will give you. This is one of the biggest misconseptions about this setting!

I was wondering about settings also, I always admired Car & Driver for testing filtered and non filtered modes.
According to the Car & Driver 02 test Ka actually performed better in a logic mode (filtered) with instant on by about .2 and only lost about .2 miles on a continuous radar mode.
http://valentine1.com/lab/cd_radar_detectors.pdf

Well, it's possible that I ended up speaking with the wrong person at VR, but the info I got was direct from "Joe" at VR when I called yesterday specifically to ask about the effects of logic modes and programming options on Ka.

Joe said, point blank, that Advanced Logic mode DOES add additional filtering to Ka band! We're NOT talking about option "5" here, which is just more LEDS faster.

In addition, I did notice a special programming option "6" that removes some Ka false filtering and might also increase range.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by happya$$

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by o2bad455

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dx2995

Was the V1 set to maxium sensitivity on Ka during the Test?

---

Excellent question, especially considering that I've just been told that the Advanced Logic ("L") mode does add Ka filtering despite no mention of it in the manual. Were they tested in All Bogeys ("A") mode? Any other programming changes or all defaults?

---

There is no such thing as advanced sensitivity on Ka on the V1. That setting is just for the urgency of LED's the V1 will give you. This is one of the biggest misconseptions about this setting!

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by o2bad455

Well, it's possible that I ended up speaking with the wrong person at VR, but the info I got was direct from "Joe" at VR when I called yesterday specifically to ask about the effects of logic modes and programming options on Ka.

Joe said, point blank, that Advanced Logic mode DOES add additional filtering to Ka band! We're NOT talking about option "5" here, which is just more LEDS faster.

In addition, I did notice a special programming option "6" that removes some Ka false filtering and might also increase range.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by happya$$

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by o2bad455

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dx2995

Was the V1 set to maxium sensitivity on Ka during the Test?

---

Excellent question, especially considering that I've just been told that the Advanced Logic ("L") mode does add Ka filtering despite no mention of it in the manual. Were they tested in All Bogeys ("A") mode? Any other programming changes or all defaults?

---

There is no such thing as advanced sensitivity on Ka on the V1. That setting is just for the urgency of LED's the V1 will give you. This is one of the biggest misconseptions about this setting!

---

---

There is really no reason to reduce Ka performance between A mode vs. the logic modes it would have no value so why would VR engineer that into their software. Also from speaking with a technition at VR in the past he stated there is no reduction in Ka in the logic modes

Hmm, would someone else mind calling tomorrow to ask the same question (i.e., do the logic modes add any Ka filtering)? Honestly, from experience and the manual, I didn't think they did but called just to be sure after getting nailed last week. I was surprised at the answer, and that's why I posted it in the Valentine subject forum.

Just finished rendering the STi and Spectre video that was taken this weekend in Ohio

Will upload it to the server tonight so everyone can watch

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lordhamster

There are two more things to consider:

Assuming the detection on both the V1 and Rx65 is the same, the V1 has IMO some advantages:

1. Arrows: I don't know about California, but here in Ohio the arrows are critical. Cops often use radar while moving at night. So to determine if that instant on radar blip was the car behind you or an upcoming speed trap, the arrows are critical.

2. Remote display. Given that you have such a pimped out ride as an S4, you might opt for mounting the V1 very high (almost concealed). Then using a remote display. The V1 uses a remote display which shows the same info as the main display. The rx65 does not have a meaningfull remote display (just an led).

I even had my remote display modified by a guy on this board so that it would use color LEDs rather than the standard red ones.

Anyway... I'm sure you'll be happy with both detectors, I just feel that the V1 adds a few unique features to the mix you won't find elsewhere.

If you do order the rx65, be sure to order from Roy. If you sign up for his mailing list, you get a discount code sent to you in the email. Or, you could simply email Roy and ask....

---

That was most helpful. The remote display is definitely cool and could make all the difference when I decide to purchase. Lots of people say that the arrows don't make a huge difference because 99% of the threats you encounter will be coming from in front of you. Then again, the arrows don't hurt either. I also like the idea that the v1 can be easily upgraded. Sheesh, this is a tough decision.

One more thing. Laser jammers are illegal in CA, so I have been considering the VEIL. Does it paint on clear, or does it slightly discolor the plastic headlight covers? I'm driving w/o a front license plate since I don't feel like defacing the front of my car by punching holes in it. I'll risk the $10 fix-it ticket, but the dealer who sold me my S4 said that he's been driving his Audi for 3 years w/o a front plate and has yet to be hassled about it. That said, the front headlights are the only thing I really have to worry about.

It's looking like a V1 may be the radar detector for me. Sorry Roy, if you sold it I'd order it from ya.

Ok, the new video is now online


http://www.radarbusters.com/support/spectre/Default.asp

looks like whoever was holding those curtains was getting a little tired :lol:

Good video Roy!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RadarRoy

Ok, the new video is now online


http://www.radarbusters.com/support/spectre/Default.asp

---

When you click on thepicture its the video to the Escort X50 - BEL RX 65 comprison

Without the sheet on the window, the sun would wash out the display

I think I could just make out in the background, Sethy saying "damn are you guys finished filming yet? it's fecking cold out here and I need my trenchcoat back!" :lol:

Quote:

---

When you click on thepicture its the video to the Escort X50 - BEL RX 65 comprison

---

Fixed
Thanks