Results 1 to 2 of 2

Thread: Responce

  1. #1
    Newcomer
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Northern IL.
    Posts
    69

    Default Responce

    http://www.radardetector.net/forums/...-pictures.html Closed thread

    Quote by ahmadr: "No. Do you think VR would waste extra metal to reduce performance?!"


    No but when MEM-TEK says he tweaked a V1 I believe him. I know he won't state what he did but I just wondered if anyone knew of anything that could be done.

    http://www.radardetector.net/forums/...tml#post567576

    Quote Originally Posted by MEM-TEK View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Freebird View Post
    MEM-TEK was right.... I hate addictions. Since I was a co runner of this test its only fair I answer some questions.

    STI Driver was a winshield unit date code 2508. Never sent in for ramp-up fix.

    34.7 Look closely at all the V1 runs, DJ's and Mine. On his runs where his scored .4x in distance his V1 was able to see over the hill. My V1 never did scoring .2x etc .
    The Ci saw over the hill each run, as did the STI, and DJ's V1 on 2 runs, but all other units didnt see over it, alerting at .2x closer to the crest of the hill.

    Dj used a handheld gps unit to measure the alert distance with such precision.
    Keep in mind that I did do a very small tweak to DJ's V1 to give its forward antenna a bit more bias. It was the least I could do since he let me borrow it for so long for testing purposes and since he gave me permission to fully disassemble it in order to take photos of its design and construction. I will NOT disclose, publicly or privately, exactly what I did. Yet also keep in mind that the tweak resulted in a relatively minor change in overall performance. In other words, most of the performance difference is due to firmware versions.

  2. #2
    Professional
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,299

    Default Re: Responce

    Quote Originally Posted by MEM-TEK View Post
    I did do a very small tweak to DJ's V1 to give its forward antenna a bit more bias. ... Yet also keep in mind that the tweak resulted in a relatively minor change in overall performance. In other words, most of the performance difference is due to firmware versions.


    Furthermore, if you just change the forward (vs backwards I assume) BIAS, you are not increasing sensitivity, just thowing off the direction detection logic.

    And most of the sensitivity difference between newer (3.813+) V1s is not due to firmware versions, but due to manufacturing variances.

    Finally, I have a bridge to sell

 

 

Similar Threads

  1. Emailed Escort about Ku band - here is their responce
    By LJ01 in forum Radar Detectors - General
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 03-30-2006, 01:58 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •