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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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.

---

I think manufactures would love to promote operating multiple RD's simultaneously since this would generate more sales for their RD's but they do not, I wonder why?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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

---

So i guess the real question is at what distance is there interference and how much, and if there is any at all, weather it be normal EMI interference or what was stated in the Experts comments. The RedLine also appears to be more stealthy than the STi Driver.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by happya$$

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 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.

---

I think manufactures would love to promote operating multiple RD's simultaneously since this would generate more sales for their RD's but they do not, I wonder why?

---

Its odd, but i guess in reality who is going to buy more than 1 RD, they cost sooo much. Its not as if they don't have features that have inherent risks already, and probably more so than running 2 M3's at the same time. They could totally promote it, but again how many people really feel the need to run 2 or can afford 2.

I don't get it. There will always be differing opinions on this topic much like which is better the Redline of V1. Each user can make their own decision. Stop trying to force it on people that running two detectors together is a terrible idea. Half of the videos posted involve more than one detector and they still provide enough alert even if there is interference, look at my videos for instance. Do multiple RD users condone the other users using one at a time? I get keeping up on the topic but its been beaten to death almost as much as when is the V2 coming out. How bout we all do what we think is best and I receive a ticket due to my detectors not going off because I have them both on I'll accept it. In reality there is no way to prove one side or the other.

Just to add another 2 cents to the discussion... in my experience (and experimentation), I've tried running various combinations of detectors to see what the net effect is. Well, I've run combinations of Belscort and V1 at least, and one thing I've noticed that seems pretty consistent, is that the Belscort units seem to be only minimally affected by the V1's emissions, in terms of falsing and sensitivity. But, Belscort emissions do interfere with the V1 and cause it to miss alerts. I observed this in a test run when I ran my S7 X50 and V1 together and separately. The V1 missed alerts when the X50 was turned on, but the X50 still alerted fine.

So, based on this, the combination of M3 Belscort + V1 seems to work pretty well. The M3 has minimal/no emissions to interfere with the V1, and the V1's emissions don't seem to affect the Belscort's sensitivity all that much if at all.

Interestingly, I run my V1 and Redline side by side with no apparent ill effects to either detector. But others have had to separate their detectors more. I wonder if the V1 version has something to do with it. I'm running a 3.858 V1.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dtraill27

I don't get it. There will always be differing opinions on this topic much like which is better the Redline of V1. Each user can make their own decision. Stop trying to force it on people that running two detectors together is a terrible idea. Half of the videos posted involve more than one detector and they still provide enough alert even if there is interference, look at my videos for instance. Do multiple RD users condone the other users using one at a time? I get keeping up on the topic but its been beaten to death almost as much as when is the V2 coming out. How bout we all do what we think is best and I receive a ticket due to my detectors not going off because I have them both on I'll accept it. In reality there is no way to prove one side or the other.

---

Oh trust me I ran a V1 and a 9500CI together for over a year. This is America everyone can chose to do what they want BUT I just what everyone to have as much info as possible that is all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by happya$$

Oh trust me I ran a V1 and a 9500CI together for over a year. This is America everyone can chose to do what they want BUT I just what everyone to have as much info as possible that is all.

---

Totally agree, and don't take our skepticism wrong. Its just seems different than what most 2 M3 or M3/V1 owners have noticed.
Thank you for getting that information, it does enlighten us on what is actually going on inside any RD in general. And why there is interference in the first place, weather it interferes a lot or a little.