Objective professional reviews?

[Stealth Stalker]

Where did I say that?

I didn't say you said it. That's why there was a question mark after my question. It was a question, not a statement.

Personally, I think the Whistlers are darn good bang for the buck...

Me too. And that is exactly what most people would surmise from reading the GOL results.

I said I don't trust that there's not bias in GOL, just as with any other tests I've seen. Not saying GOL tests aren't among the best, but I'm not about to commit $$$ to purchases based on one group, individual or company. I don't question the results of GOL, but rather the criteria they use to determine what is tested.

Specifically...? There are only two criteria used by GOL: sensitivity and responsiveness. What is it that you do not like about those criteria? And if you have observed detectors to perform exactly as GOL reports, as you have said you have, then what reason would you distrust them? That's what I'm having a hard time figuring out.

GOL is a great site, but I've found no single set of tests out there (yet) which I would consider the holy grail.

Well there is no site or formal group that is all things to all people, which is what I would ask of a "Holy Grail". And GOL has never claimed to be such either. They claim only one thing, and that is to provide accurate and honest test results, utilising the two criteria mentioned above. Period. They do not address which detector may be best for a given user. They do not address any of the other, more subjective criteria because they would all involve inherent bias. That's why GOL does not publish "reviews". They only publish results. Reviews will always involve a degree of subjectivity. Results are what they are.

If you find any source that claims to be the Holy Grail, that is the first group you should cross off your list of trusted sources. But for black and white, unbiased, honest test results of concrete testing, GOL is indeed the Holy Grail. You are welcome to disagree, as this is a free country, but you do so with bias, which sort of kills your point.

However, even those tests I participated in... I cannot trust them as the sole source for a purchase decision, there are just too many variables for any single test to cover all the bases.

And that is exactly why, even though I believe that Whistlers are admirable performers, and a great value for the money, I often recommend other detectors that offer features and benefits that are not covered by GOL testing.

For instance, how do various detectors perform in noisy environments rather than tests which show raw performance only (which in itself is a biased test since most drivers commute in cities and interstates next to cities), to help people determine which detectors suit how they drive.

You seem bound and determined to paint GOL with "bias", even if it takes bastardising the English language to do so, and you are treading thin ice (again) with this effort. What you describe above is not "bias". Test results are what they are. Period. If you interpret them with a bias, that is YOUR bias, not GOL's bias.

[The Chariot]

Specifically...? There are only two criteria used by GOL: sensitivity and responsiveness. What is it that you do not like about those criteria? And if you have observed detectors to perform exactly as GOL reports, as you have said you have, then what reason would you distrust them? That's what I'm having a hard time figuring out.

As I noted, I don't question the results of the criteria (sensitivity and responsiveness), but rather the criteria itself. Those two factors favor highway detector results over city detectors. I'm curious as to how the various detectors perform in the presence of a false, with obstructions such as buildings, with city filtering, etc. If that, as well as raw sensitivity and reactivity were tested we'd get a more complete picture.

If you find any source that claims to be the Holy Grail, that is the first group you should cross off your list of trusted sources. But for black and white, unbiased, honest test results of concrete testing, GOL is indeed the Holy Grail. You are welcome to disagree, as this is a free country, but you do so with bias, which sort of kills your point.

Agreeing and disagreeing with the criteria are both biased, since everyone has opinions with what the criteria should be. But I digress, as this can rapidly digress into circular logic. lol

You seem bound and determined to paint GOL with "bias", even if it takes bastardising the English language to do so, and you are treading thin ice (again) with this effort.

What do you mean by treading thin ice?

What you describe above is not "bias". Test results are what they are. Period. If you interpret them with a bias, that is YOUR bias, not GOL's bias.

Just like CPU benchmarks: yes the results are what they are, but some types of benchmark tests favor AMD over Intel, and visa versa. Without a complete set of tests one cannot see a complete picture over which CPU is best suited for a particular use. Same thing with browsers, different browsers claim to have the fastest Javascript engine but that does not draw the complete picture as to which browser is best suited for a job. For instance, Opera is the fastest rendering browsers out there, but battery life is longest using Internet Explorer. Plugged in Opera is a better pick for me, on battery I often switch to IE if I know I'll be unplugged for a while. Firefox has the most plug-ins available and is the most useful to me when doing site development due to its debugging tools.

Maybe best to just agree to disagree, since we differ on what the criteria should be.

[Stealth Stalker]

I actually don't see that we disagree. I fully agree that one cannot get a complete picture of which detector is best for a given user by GOL criteria only. Your CPU analogy is a good one. Similarly, only an idiot would choose his family car based solely upon dyno results, because the car with the best dyno isn't going to comfortably accommodate a family.

Had GOL claimed to be the only source necessary for choosing a detector, your charge of bias would be substantiated. They have not. Consequently, your accusations are unfounded, and therefore in violation of Rule #5. That is what I mean by you treading on thin ice. Retract, or pack for banned camp... again.

[ben721364]

You wrote in part, "...only an idiot would choose his family car based solely upon dyno results, because the car with the best dyno isn't going to comfortably accommodate a family."

Dyno tests are technically laboratory tests that do not always predict real world performance. Assuming [admittedly dangerous] that you were speaking of horsepower and/or torque delivery as measured by a dyno, the number of passengers that can be "comfortably" accommodated cannot be extrapolated without more and different information.

I am still where I started when I opened this thread. Where can I go to get useful information on which to make a purchase decision?

I actually don't see that we disagree. I fully agree that one cannot get a complete picture of which detector is best for a given user by GOL criteria only. Your CPU analogy is a good one. Similarly, only an idiot would choose his family car based solely upon dyno results, because the car with the best dyno isn't going to comfortably accommodate a family.

Had GOL claimed to be the only source necessary for choosing a detector, your charge of bias would be substantiated. They have not. Consequently, your accusations are unfounded, and therefore in violation of Rule #5. That is what I mean by you treading on thin ice. Retract, or pack for banned camp... again.

[snoopyc4]

The Whistler issue, BTW, is why I don't use GOL as a sole source but rather as one of many sources.

The POP ON vs. POP OFF issue right? I honestly don't see how this is even an issue. The point of the last GOL test was to test every detector with factory default settings not optimal settings. If they wanted the test to be based off optimal settings, then in addition to turning POP OFF on the Whistler they would have had to turn POP OFF on the V1s (excluding 3.813), band seg the STi-r, turn RDR OFF on the STi-r, and turn Ka Guard OFF on all the V1s.

[CJR238]

I am still where I started when I opened this thread. Where can I go to get useful information on which to make a purchase decision?

That's a different question, PM a few people who you think are knowable and base your decision off the information you accumulate.

Then you can post what you have narrowed it down to and let the public give there opinion for some fun entertainment if you want.

[Stealth Stalker]

I am still where I started when I opened this thread. Where can I go to get useful information on which to make a purchase decision?

Perhaps you can explain to us exactly what it is you are looking for that you are not finding on this forum?

It seems as if you are looking for an authoritative source to lead you by the hand to the promised land, and choosing which detector is best for you. You are looking for something that does not exist. No site knows what your needs or driving style is. No site can tell you authoritatively which detector is going to be best for you. It ain't happening. If it were possible, then this forum would not need to exist. Consequently, you need to man-up and take responsibility for this decision yourself. Ask questions that can be answered, consider the answers you get, then make an educated choice. But again, any source that claims to know what is best for you without knowing anything about you is not to be trusted.

[ben721364]

I think I laid out what I am looking for in the opening (#1) post of this thread, ...objective comparisons without the hint of commercial prejudices.

As stated earlier, I am happy with the detectors that I have, am considering the purchase of a third, am open minded and am looking for data on which to consider the different offerings currently available.

I got a good chuckle from the admonition that I "...man up...", for obvious reasons. Am I now banned?

I am still where I started when I opened this thread. Where can I go to get useful information on which to make a purchase decision?

Perhaps you can explain to us exactly what it is you are looking for that you are not finding on this forum?

It seems as if you are looking for an authoritative source to lead you by the hand to the promised land, and choosing which detector is best for you. You are looking for something that does not exist. No site knows what your needs or driving style is. No site can tell you authoritatively which detector is going to be best for you. It ain't happening. If it were possible, then this forum would not need to exist. Consequently, you need to man-up and take responsibility for this decision yourself. Ask questions that can be answered, consider the answers you get, then make an educated choice. But again, any source that claims to know what is best for you without knowing anything about you is not to be trusted.

[The Chariot]

The Whistler issue, BTW, is why I don't use GOL as a sole source but rather as one of many sources.

The POP ON vs. POP OFF issue right? I honestly don't see how this is even an issue.

Nope. Other issues that I noted above.

[Stealth Stalker]

I think I laid out what I am looking for in the opening (#1) post of this thread, ...objective comparisons without the hint of commercial prejudices.

And I think I laid out the answer pretty well in my last post.

You are looking for something that does not exist.

We're seven pages into this thing now. If there were something more, you would have heard it by now.

I got a good chuckle from the admonition that I "...man up...", for obvious reasons. Am I now banned?

If you are implying that you are female, then yes, you are banned.