Technical Expert's Explanation Of Why NOT To Operate Multiple RD's Simulataneously

[CJR238]

Yeah yeah ... Haha. I have been PWNed. I guess the Redline alerted first because of the height?

Yes, an M3 low and high cant be beat.

Its rare to have that much advantage from just one, but they all have done it with each of there positions. The traffic, rain and FF off axis LEO mad this encounter really tough for any RD with the slightest disadvantage.

[happya$$]

The M3's wont interfere under most circumstances, they don't give off the same frequencies as a non M3 rd from the 70's.

Did you read the entire thing or did you pick and chose what you wanted to read? "All superheterodyne radar detectors use a combination of local oscillators to enable conversion of the radar signals to a lower frequency for processing. These oscillators can combine (mix) in various ways inside the detector to produce signals that are in the same frequency bands as those being detected"

Do you ever wonder why a highly technical person from Belscort does not officially come out and say yes or no to testing multiple RD's simultaneously even with their M3's? I got this info from the CREAM OF THE CROP, a technical guru, and EXPERT.

[upstatedoc]

wow, he really dumbed-down that explaination.

[speeddemon]

Who is this person and how did he become the CREAM OF THE CROP, a technical guru, and EXPERT?

[kpatz]

I got this info from the CREAM OF THE CROP, a technical guru, and EXPERT.

But, when did the cream of the crop expert write that? Before the M3s came out? Or after? I think it applies primarily to non-M3 units, because the premise behind the M3 platform is that the LO emissions don't leak, or if they do, it's so minimal to be undetectable within a foot or two by a device DESIGNED to detect such emissions. What little that does leak is at lower frequencies that shouldn't affect adjacent units.

I'm not saying that two M3 units side by side won't interfere, but I expect such interference would be minimal at best, and likely not affect the operation of the units. After all, if RDs were that sensitive to interference, a Cobra a mile away would cause a V1 to miss an alert close up.

[CJR238]

The M3's wont interfere under most circumstances, they don't give off the same frequencies as a non M3 rd from the 70's.

Did you read the entire thing or did you pick and chose what you wanted to read? "All superheterodyne radar detectors use a combination of local oscillators to enable conversion of the radar signals to a lower frequency for processing. These oscillators can combine (mix) in various ways inside the detector to produce signals that are in the same frequency bands as those being detected"

Do you ever wonder why a highly technical person from Belscort does not officially come out and say yes or no to testing multiple RD's simultaneously even with their M3's? I got this info from the CREAM OF THE CROP, a technical guru, and EXPERT.

I appreciate the post but the original poster (expert) did not post it and the M3 reference was not in "his" comment. Escortradar has also posted that there was no interference when multiple M3's were tested, and clearly says they will work fine together. Though i understand the mistrust.

I have seen interference between 2 RD's many times but virtually never with an M3. When Nine_C1 Riptide and I tested the response times of the 9500CI and V1 the V1 was not effected in one bit by the 9500ci in one of the tests, but the 9500ci was effected by the V1. I'm not saying there cant be interference, but it does not fall under normal non M3 radar interference.

I got this info from the CREAM OF THE CROP, a technical guru, and EXPERT.

But, when did the cream of the crop expert write that? Before the M3s came out? Or after? I think it applies primarily to non-M3 units, because the premise behind the M3 platform is that the LO emissions don't leak, or if they do, it's so minimal to be undetectable within a foot or two by a device DESIGNED to detect such emissions. What little that does leak is at lower frequencies that shouldn't affect adjacent units.

I'm not saying that two M3 units side by side won't interfere, but I expect such interference would be minimal at best, and likely not affect the operation of the units. After all, if RDs were that sensitive to interference, a Cobra a mile away would cause a V1 to miss an alert close up.

Good points.

[happya$$]

I got this info yesterday and it was written yesterday

The M3's wont interfere under most circumstances, they don't give off the same frequencies as a non M3 rd from the 70's.

Did you read the entire thing or did you pick and chose what you wanted to read? "All superheterodyne radar detectors use a combination of local oscillators to enable conversion of the radar signals to a lower frequency for processing. These oscillators can combine (mix) in various ways inside the detector to produce signals that are in the same frequency bands as those being detected"

Do you ever wonder why a highly technical person from Belscort does not officially come out and say yes or no to testing multiple RD's simultaneously even with their M3's? I got this info from the CREAM OF THE CROP, a technical guru, and EXPERT.

I appreciate the post but the original poster (expert) did not post it and the M3 reference was not in "his" comment. Escortradar has also posted that there was no interference when multiple M3's were tested, and clearly says they will work fine together. Though i understand the mistrust.

I have seen interference between 2 RD's many times but virtually never with an M3. When Nine_C1 Riptide and I tested the response times of the 9500CI and V1 the V1 was not effected in one bit by the 9500ci in one of the tests, but the 9500ci was effected by the V1. I'm not saying there cant be interference, but it does not fall under normal non M3 radar interference.

I got this info from the CREAM OF THE CROP, a technical guru, and EXPERT.

But, when did the cream of the crop expert write that? Before the M3s came out? Or after? I think it applies primarily to non-M3 units, because the premise behind the M3 platform is that the LO emissions don't leak, or if they do, it's so minimal to be undetectable within a foot or two by a device DESIGNED to detect such emissions. What little that does leak is at lower frequencies that shouldn't affect adjacent units.

I'm not saying that two M3 units side by side won't interfere, but I expect such interference would be minimal at best, and likely not affect the operation of the units. After all, if RDs were that sensitive to interference, a Cobra a mile away would cause a V1 to miss an alert close up.

Good points.

[CJR238]

I got this info yesterday

The M3's wont interfere under most circumstances, they don't give off the same frequencies as a non M3 rd from the 70's.

Did you read the entire thing or did you pick and chose what you wanted to read? "All superheterodyne radar detectors use a combination of local oscillators to enable conversion of the radar signals to a lower frequency for processing. These oscillators can combine (mix) in various ways inside the detector to produce signals that are in the same frequency bands as those being detected"

Do you ever wonder why a highly technical person from Belscort does not officially come out and say yes or no to testing multiple RD's simultaneously even with their M3's? I got this info from the CREAM OF THE CROP, a technical guru, and EXPERT.

I appreciate the post but the original poster (expert) did not post it and the M3 reference was not in "his" comment. Escortradar has also posted that there was no interference when multiple M3's were tested, and clearly says they will work fine together. Though i understand the mistrust.

I have seen interference between 2 RD's many times but virtually never with an M3. When Nine_C1 Riptide and I tested the response times of the 9500CI and V1 the V1 was not effected in one bit by the 9500ci in one of the tests, but the 9500ci was effected by the V1. I'm not saying there cant be interference, but it does not fall under normal non M3 radar interference.

I got this info from the CREAM OF THE CROP, a technical guru, and EXPERT.

But, when did the cream of the crop expert write that? Before the M3s came out? Or after? I think it applies primarily to non-M3 units, because the premise behind the M3 platform is that the LO emissions don't leak, or if they do, it's so minimal to be undetectable within a foot or two by a device DESIGNED to detect such emissions. What little that does leak is at lower frequencies that shouldn't affect adjacent units.

I'm not saying that two M3 units side by side won't interfere, but I expect such interference would be minimal at best, and likely not affect the operation of the units. After all, if RDs were that sensitive to interference, a Cobra a mile away would cause a V1 to miss an alert close up.

Good points.

Than a good question for him would be how does the M3 hide its emissions that are detected by RDD, and why is it not obvious in QT testing and in regular day to day encounters that there is interference between 2 M3's. Any other non M3 will interfere fairly obviously, but the M3's don't.

[happya$$]

The M3's were specifically mentioned in my question. I know at past GOL tests when we got down to two feet or so the Spectre did pick up the STI Driver but we considered that Spectre proof since no cop will be that close when trying to detect you with a Spectre

I got this info yesterday

The M3's wont interfere under most circumstances, they don't give off the same frequencies as a non M3 rd from the 70's.

Did you read the entire thing or did you pick and chose what you wanted to read? "All superheterodyne radar detectors use a combination of local oscillators to enable conversion of the radar signals to a lower frequency for processing. These oscillators can combine (mix) in various ways inside the detector to produce signals that are in the same frequency bands as those being detected"

Do you ever wonder why a highly technical person from Belscort does not officially come out and say yes or no to testing multiple RD's simultaneously even with their M3's? I got this info from the CREAM OF THE CROP, a technical guru, and EXPERT.

I appreciate the post but the original poster (expert) did not post it and the M3 reference was not in "his" comment. Escortradar has also posted that there was no interference when multiple M3's were tested, and clearly says they will work fine together. Though i understand the mistrust.

I have seen interference between 2 RD's many times but virtually never with an M3. When Nine_C1 Riptide and I tested the response times of the 9500CI and V1 the V1 was not effected in one bit by the 9500ci in one of the tests, but the 9500ci was effected by the V1. I'm not saying there cant be interference, but it does not fall under normal non M3 radar interference.

I got this info from the CREAM OF THE CROP, a technical guru, and EXPERT.

But, when did the cream of the crop expert write that? Before the M3s came out? Or after? I think it applies primarily to non-M3 units, because the premise behind the M3 platform is that the LO emissions don't leak, or if they do, it's so minimal to be undetectable within a foot or two by a device DESIGNED to detect such emissions. What little that does leak is at lower frequencies that shouldn't affect adjacent units.

I'm not saying that two M3 units side by side won't interfere, but I expect such interference would be minimal at best, and likely not affect the operation of the units. After all, if RDs were that sensitive to interference, a Cobra a mile away would cause a V1 to miss an alert close up.

Good points.

Than a good question for him would be how does the M3 hide its emissions that are detected by RDD, and why is it not obvious in QT testing and in regular day to day encounters that there is interference between 2 M3's. Any other non M3 will interfere fairly obviously, but the M3's don't.

[Swamp]

The interference cited in this brief is claimed to be of a type that causes one RD to make another RD give false alerts. I did not see anything about one RD causing another to lose sensitivity.
If one RD is causing another to false, I think it would become apparent to the observent operator, since that is how the writer noticed the phenomena in the first place.

PS, My Redline saved me from a 15 over ticket from I/O (70/55) on Monday and the V1 didn't alert until it was too late. I guess the Redline was interfering with the V1 again, and the Whistler 3600 mounted in the grill, LOL.