I am looking for a New radar detector for my new car. I was wondering if anyone have any suggestion on the brand, or things i should look into. It seems there are a lot of people using V1. Are there any other choices? What about the law for radar detecotrs in az?
All of the manufacturers' top-of-the-line models are state-of-the-art today. Some just do it better. That's why I recommend Valentine One. You might want to check their website for a demonstration.
No, although I keep up with the technology, I've not read any rumors about anything major in the pipeline.
I really appreciate your reccommendation for the Valentine One. Based on what I've read, that seems to be the elite of the elites. I just wanted to get some inside opinions on actual users. I sometimes don't pay attention to my speed and want to avoid a costly ticket if I happen to be going over the limit on those rare occasions.
Rocky, you can also try Escort passport, which is the second best. But keep in mind that even with this doesn't seems to be ticket proof. as if you still get a ticket if the cops use Laser gun and pinpointed at you. Once your detector detects the signal, its too late to step on the brake. Its best to speed in the open view ahead and not be the first car.
Thats correct, the V1 can detect the Radar/Laser better than any other detector out there but you need laser protection. You can learn more about that at www.laserjammerforums.com and www.radardetector.net (both are free sites)
The article is a fraudulent support of detectors for legal purposes.
If the cop would lie about it, no detector would help. If a judge believes him, you're done.
I've had cops lie twice now - The first time to add additional charge to a drunk that hit a car hard enough to drive it into mine. Cop detailed that both cars were hit separately. Funny enough, I could not attend the trial because the podunk town would not tell me when the trial was. It's a private matter, right?
I don't understand why the cops would risk having the whole thing thrown out. Probably got pleaded down to a tail-light violation. Otherwise I would have been called as a defense witness to the falsification of the report.
The second time was when I needed an accident report after a twit hit me after he ignored a stop sign. The cops didn't write one until I showed up 2 weeks later. Of course they got enough details wrong it would not have helped much. They said it was mis-filed.
It also sounds as if the writer did not mention this malfeasance to the State Highway Patrol or the States Attorney General, meaning that others would be victimized by 'Kenny.' Neither did I, but then I wasn't convicted on false evidence and it would have meant taking on the neighborhood police.
Sometimes while keeping up with the flow of traffic people are being targeted and ticked for speeding. I wish the added protection of a radar detector but know little about them in that I rarely go above the speed limit. Some of my questions are, Which are the most effective? How much do I need to spend? where is the best place to buy (ie: Radio Shack, Best Buy, Napa etc). Can I get a unit that is easily put away if I get stopped? Any of this information will be helpful in protecting myself and staying a safe and defensive driver. I realize that many of these tickets are dismissed if one goes to court and fights the ticket, but the time spent is not worth it. Any vital information appreciated.
You don't have to be intentionally speeding to be at risk of doing so and therefore being issued a ticket. All modern radar detectors can be effective at detecting the four bands; X, K, Ka and Laser, used to measure speed by the police.
The question of effectiveness is how soon, or far distant, a particular detector provides its warning so that you can react and slow down if necessary. Generally, the more you pay, the better the protection. That would preclude the low cost units.
Unless you drive in the District of Columbia or Virginia, the only state in which use of detectors is illegal, there is no reason to put a unit away if you get stopped. They are perfectly legal to own and use.
I bought a Valentine One for my Acura TL and returned it within two days. Waaaaay too complicated for me. It wouldn't stop beeping, arrows pointing in all 4 directions etc. It was distracting me from driving. Replaced it with an Escort 8500 blue (around $350) Best move I ever made. Much more user friendly and more compact, has a convenient silence button right on the cord. Picks up Ka way before you can see 'em.
I'm surprised that you thought that the V1 was complicated. In fact I find that it is totally intuitive. The silence button is the only knob on the unit. Just press it and there is as much silence as you desire. The directional arrows tell me in which direction to look if there is a threat (front, back or to the side).
If you found too much beeping on a street with many stores with intrusion alarms, your sensitivity may have been set to the A (All) or highway mode. I might have set mine, with a simple press of the same button as above, to the L (Local) mode in such an area.
I'm certainly not an expert in the field of radar detection, but I have been using them for about 20 years and the best advice I can give is you get what you pay for. The V1 or the escort are both an excellent choice for those who want the best. I also own a Bell Vector ($250) which isn't worth beans after seeing the performance of the escort. I wish I could sell it. Maybe ebay......
Just saw an interesting experiment w/ a laser shifter, I believe it was an escort, something that has to be custom installed. The guy pointed a laser gun at his car as it was going by and the read out was "--" I think it was on the tv show motorweek or it could have been a video I dug up on edmunds. Anyhoo, I contacted Escort and they told me that laser shifters were currently legal in New York State but then he rattled off a list of states where they're illegal. California was one of them as well as Nebraska, etc I can't remember them all, there must have been a dozen. Does anyone have any experience w/ these laser shifters? $$$$$ to install, $1200 for the stealth radar/laser detector w/ laser shifting. My other concern is that it seems there are many states where they are illegal, is NYS far behind? What a waste of money that would be to have it installed and then have it illegal.
Speaking of laser......I have one of those laser shields on my front plate, supposedly illegal as well. The other day I drove by a sheriff who was parked and monitoring license plates w/ that camera they have on the roof of their cars now. Any way, he gave me a pretty hard look and I wondered later if it was because the computer couldn't read my plate because of the laser shield. Any thoughts?
If you're not willing to put up with the hassle of the LaserShield, then don't use it - it is, in some areas, considered enough of a foul to warrant a pull-over and a "Fix-It Ticket," which, if your time is more valuable than your money, you'd be on the losing end of that argument. :P
With regard to the effectiveness of the LaserShield, yes, it does do its job, but remember that it's a "point-effective" device. Certainly, in many areas, enforcers are taught to target the available front-plate, and as such, this device can offer some help in reducing the tremendous LIDAR return from the typical state-issue metallic/reflective plates - but remember that hand-held (or even "studied") LIDAR devices, particularly when you're trying to track a moving object from rather far away, will effectively target a larger area than that pinpoint: that it's going to wind up covering your entire front "center mass." Here, where your vehicle may have other LIDAR-reflective considerations (hood ornaments, chrome grill, or even metallic silver vehicle paint), the LaserShield cannot cover, and will render you just as vulnerable as if you did not use the device in the first place.
[ Aside: Speed-detection countermeasures enthusiasts have also used items such as 3M's "Clear Duct Tape" to drastically cut-down on LIDAR reflectivity of state-issue metal plates; whether this is acceptable to you in terms of aesthetics or if it is deemed more or less noticeable to passing enforcers is, again, your call. Similarly - and depending highly on the graphical complexity of your state issue tags- you may also try to use a non-metallic replica plate or other facsimile. ]
In-reality, "passive" protection is rather hard to achieve. Starting out with a LIDAR-favorable vehicle, with darker paint - say, a black, late-model 'Vette - puts you ahead of the game (versus, say, a metallic-silver, upright-design, SUV with tons of chrome on the front-end), but the overall theme is still very, very much synergistic. LaserShield will only cover the front plate, but what about the rest of the front end? There, you'll need to put some VEIL (a proprietary IR-absorptive coating) on the lighting elements, dark-out/replace any chrome elements, and perhaps even put a front-end "bra," if your vehicle's base-color is LIDAR-unfavorable.
The only true protection here is via active laser jammers. Currently, Escort and Blinder are the two most recognized US makes of such products, both of which utilize IR-LED elements to effect jamming.
With the Escort (as well as the now defunct, sister, Beltronics product), unfortunately, the technology is quite dated, and unless your local enforcement profile - both in terms of LIDAR hardware used as well as encounter/trap circumstances - is favorable to this device, you will likely suffer rather unacceptable "punch-throughs" (envision the jammer as a shield, and the LIDAR picking up your vehicle speed as the event of having the incoming laser beam "punch through" your protection). For the cost of the Escort products (as well as for their installation cost, of which a professional installation is *required* for valid warranty preservation), you should *seriously* consider your local enforcement profile before you make the purchase.
[ Thus, it's worth noting here that such on-line videos can be skewed to either show the product's effectiveness OR even highlight its shortcomings. For example, that video, with the ZR3/SRX/SR7+ ? I'd well-bet that it was against a Kustom ProLaser III. Be careful of the video's origin (i.e. is it a sponsored/conflicted-interest video, etc.). This industry is truly one of the most cut-throat/dirty that I've ever seen, and trust me, this kind of back-stabbing exists, aplenty. ]
Blinder offers a similar product, with better performance. Their older unit, the M20 or M40 (two jammer heads and 4 jammer heads, respectively), offered acceptable protection under most circumstances. However, it was still prone to shorter-range PTs ("punch-throughs, as I explained above). Their current evolutionary product, the M25/M45, has caused great controversy in the enthusiast/hobbyist community as its effectiveness is being highly debated/questioned. As-such, my current advice would be that if you were to want to go with a Blinder product, to try to source the old/defunct M20/M40, instead, particularly with the increased cost of the M25/M45 also approaching that of the professionally-installed Escort system, and also, moreover, the much, much more technologically advanced and much better performing laser-diode based jammers.
With regard to such items, the laser-diode based jammers, the current contenders are the Laser Interceptor (LI) and the twins of Laser ProPark (LPP) and AntiLaser (AL). Any and all of these three products will provide you with extremely capable protection, and can effect "jam-to-gun" (JTG) and "jam-from-gun" (JFG) scenarios, particularly when good attention is paid to their mounting/configuration.
So far, these units are unfortunately only available as "gray market" products, since the dog-eat-dog world of speed-detection countermeasures has companies like Blinder, VEIL, and Escort being very, very defensive about their proprietary and patented technologies. As such, while the LPP does have both Canadian and US-based re-sellers, none operate as true "businesses" in the above-board sense (the same can be said of the LI, although its US-based reseller is even more "shady," in the monetary sense, than that). With both the LI or the AL, many hobbyists have chosen to pursue their purchase direct, from overseas sources, on a private/personal-import basis.
Note, however, that this is not to say that any of these companies do not offer good customer-service/warranty support. In actuality, due highly in-part to their status as enthusiast/hobbyist goods which sell primarily via word-of-mouth, the C/S for these products is actually quite excellent - be it from their North-American/Stateside "representatives" or even directly from their makers in Europe (the AL and LI both originate from Croatia, the LPP is now made in the UK). I, myself, can attest to the care given by the Canadian representatives of the LPP, which was nothing short of stellar.
A 2-head LI (which will effect JTG/JFG when mounted both on front or both on rear of just about anything short of a Hummer H1) will run somewhere around $650, purchased Stateside (less purchased direct from Croatia, however, the specter of potential import duties and brokerages presents themselves), with a four-head system (effecting both front and rear coverage) will cost just south of $1200. A dual-head AntiLaser or Laser ProPark system will be appx. $700 to $800, with a four-head system being in the range of $1200 to $1400.
Is it worth the cost? That's totally up to you to decide. :shades:
Thanks for the comprehensive education on laser jammers. One really needs an advanced degree in physics to fully understand these products. The unknown question I think now is how long these devices will be legal. If a cop is unable to get a "lock" on you and then pulls you over to discover you have a jammer, I imagine you could get yourself in some real hot water. Thanks again.
Glad to have helped, blane and upstatedoc - no need to thank me at all! Speed-detection countermeasures are a hobby of mine, so I'm glad to help, whenever I can.
Honestly speaking, upstatedoc, there's no such requirement to understanding how these jammers work - it's really quite simple, and the hobbyist group Guys of LIDAR ( www.guysoflidar.com ) does an excellent job explaining the basics of both LIDAR detection, why its countermeasures work, and the legalities of using laser jammers, by state/district. I'd highly recommend giving it a good read.
To take things back a step, in viewing that particular website, you'll see how poorly the LED-based jammers performed in the "2007 Countermeasures Shoot-Out," as compared to the diode-based jammers (note that after this test, LPP-UK/KMPH-UK upgraded the firmware on the LPP, to successfully address the inconsistencies seen with the 100 PPS Ultralyte police LIDAR, for the US, North-American, and other related markets where automated police LIDAR devices such as the Jenoptik are not relevant concerns). As many users of the Escort ZR3 Laser Shifter will tell you - myself included in this bunch, I've owned my ZR3, now, for nearly 4 years, and it's still resident on my daily-driver vehicle - the biggest benefit of this unit is its integration (either in terms of the comprehensive SRX/SR7+ solutions, or when integrated with the Escort 8500x50 or 9500i detectors), and its ability, when mounted in the traditional/"by-the-books" manner (two heads front, one head rear; note that in the GOL test, they used the "enthusiast's mounting," of having all three heads up-front) to give a clear and quick assessment of the direction from which the LIDAR threat is coming from. Nevertheless, unless your vehicle presents a favorable target profile and your locals do not practice unfavorable engagement tactics, the ZR3 is compromised protection, at-best.
In terms of legality, this is a very, very touchy subject, and one that I personally hesitate to get into due to its "slippery slope" effect. Have I ever broken any laws? Sure - but I can proudly say that none of it involves a Mortal Sin .... it's more like yes, I do often drive, on the highway, 5 MPH or even 10+ the posted speed limit (termed "PSL" in our hobby), and yes, I do own a couple of enthusiast-modified vehicles which are either running catless, or have one or more of their factory cats removed -> but still, no matter how "harmless" these break-points may be, I still think that I have no right to be on a moral high-horse, to preach this or that.
As such, I feel comfortable only in discussing the facts of the technology - I hope you don't mind, and I hope that you can understand my own hardships in this moral/ethical debate.
So, getting back to the legal issue -
Even in states/areas where such active LIDAR jamming is prohibited, enforcement proficiency/knowledge as well as your jammer usage are still the biggest hang-ups in terms of whether or not the jammer is "detected." Currently, *all* LIDAR equipment used in North America will throw spurious "jam-codes." Since both false-positives as well as false-negatives are seen - and seen not infrequently - many enforcers have come to disregard such (and rightfully so, or their average shift would be unbearable, I'd well imagine). Combine this with the ability of some of today's top-flight jammers to not effect true jam-codes to be thrown (i.e. they may produce either no reading, or effect only range/distance reading, etc.), you can thus see where, with good practice of tactical disengagement, the average driver won't necessarily raise any eyebrows, whatsoever.
There are actually many active laser jammer users in various Canadian provinces - as well as here, Stateside - in areas that ban the use of such devices, who have used them to good effect, and without angering the local enforcers by just keeping these considerations in-mind, as well as by, of course, paying close attention to other tactical considerations, such as mounting/concealment (both of the exterior jammer heads as well as internal controls).
The truth of the matter is that if you are a habitual speeder and/or a "hyper-speeder," or practice other forms of more risky behavior (i.e. street-racing), it is my firm belief as a countermeasures hobbyist as well as a driving/car enthusiast that you will, at some point or another, no matter how comprehensive your countermeasures setup, be cited for speeding (or your other behavior[s]). In-essence, the old hot-rodding proverb of "you've gotta pay to play" applies here as well.
LIDAR is only one aspect of the equation - there's also Instant-On RADAR (to which even the top-flight detectors are *still* vulnerable, since the targeted use of I/O RADAR could effectively clock your speed in as deadly of a manner as LIDAR, only with no way to truly protect yourself against it), land and even airborne VASCAR, or even the traditional arts of visual-estimation and pacing - that greatly stacks the odds in-favor of The House, particularly if the enforcer is truly on his/her "A-game."
My wife keeps making fun of me for sticking to the PSL on local surface streets. Even if it weren't for my known personal core-beliefs against speeding in such areas, and even though I'm equipped with a full set of countermeasures -> replica plates (with LaserShield on the front), dual-LI heads up front paired with dual LPPs (there's also one single LPP head out-rear), plus the aforementioned ZR3 (in the "traditional" mounting position, since I have it integrated with my x50, which itself will soon be upgraded to the 9500i); I well-know that I'm *still* vulnerable.
Thanks again for your comprehensive discussion lgtwrx. Based upon your last post, I went to http://www.guysoflidar.com/index.html. I was gratified to read several of the Radar Detector tests and to find that the Valentine One walked away with the honors in the vast majority of testing. The only less-than-stellar results were in the Ka Band-35.5 GHz off-axis test. That surprised me. The overall results confirm my own extremely positive experiences with my Valentine One unit over the past few years.
I've much more to discover on that website and will no doubt be enjoying the work done there.
You are clearly knowledgeable on this subject. What is the superiority of the Escort 9500 over the 8500 other than the fact that the GPS can let you selectively choose areas to inhibit false responses?
Another question. You've been asked your opinion about the legality of jamming devices. You were somewhat non-committal, which is understandable since a jamming device is not passive. What's your opinion on a device that is purely a receiver, like the Escort 8500? The state of Virginia says this is illegal. My personal opinion is that is total BS. How can you tell someone that they can't monitor what's in the air? Then again VA is potentially the most backwards state in the union. Trust me on this, a lot of residents there drive around with license plates that feature a confederate flag.
Again, blane, there's no need to thank me, you're making me blush - I'm really just a hobbyist in that area, and since discovering that not all of my fellow car-lovers know as much about speed-detection countermeasures, I've sorta taken it upon myself to try to bring the rest of us "up to date," even if it is on just the very basic level at which I, myself, understand these devices.
What's interesting is that just as there's car-nuts who don't know the difference between a $40 Cobra and a $400 V1, there's also countermeasures enthusiasts who have no desire to either purchase "fancier" vehicles, or to upgrade/modify their current ride. It's almost like two parallel hobbies, with only select members who choose to bridge both sides! :surprise:
The V1 is still, to this day, considered the "king of the open highway." Its extreme sensitivity, combined with directional capability (I'm not really going to count the "Bogey Counter" in this one, as the Bel/Escort products capable of "ExpertMeter" display can be said to also have this capability) makes it the preferred instrument of those who frequent open highways, as well as those who live in rural/suburban areas where there's not excessive false (non-LEO) signals present.
My firm belief is that no matter how good of a detector (or other countermeasures) one is equipped with, the biggest determinant of whether or not you'll get a ticket is you - the driver. Discounting "behavior" (i.e. habitual or hyper-speeder, engaging in more hazardous forms of driving on public streets, etc.), one must still realize that no matter what, these detectors - even the top-flight ones - are just tools. Without proper instrument setup as well as the proper interpretation of the device's warnings (and appropriate and timely actions to-follow), you're still virtually guaranteed a ticket, some time down the line, when your luck runs out.
Whenever my friends or family ask me if they need a radar/laser detector, I always give them this "canned" answer as my starter:
- Speed smart, and most of the time, I'd say that you're fine even without protection.
- Speed-stupid, and I can virtually guaranty that you'll get a ticket, no matter how much money you spend on a detector.
That's really my core-belief.
Each of the top-flight detectors have their own points of excellence, which can easily be their justification for anyone to buy *any* of them (i.e. someone who travels many highway miles may select the V1 for its sensitivity/Arrows, versus someone who does most of his/her commute in-city, who might select the 9500i for its filtering algorithm as well as speed-sensitive sensitivity adjustments, versus someone who lives, say, in VA or in certain areas in Canada, who might choose the Bel STi-Driver for its true-stealth capabilities) - and in all honesty, in the real world (particularly when between-unit production variances are taken into the equation), their performances may be so close that it's virtually indistinguishable. For me, as a person who tends to see things in shades-of-gray to begin with, it's very hard for me to say that anyone's choice in their preferred detector is "right" or "wrong" - as long as their detector meets their needs, I would say that they're just fine.
Use such tests as a basic guide - and then superimpose upon them your own usage scenario. That'll lead you to the right detector choice. From there, re-learn through such tests/reviews where your detector's inherent weaknesses and strengths are, and then incorporate that knowledge into your tactical planning. Start your "getting acquainted with the new detector" stages in an area where you're familiar with the true threats as well as ambient noise (i.e. falses), and work to gain confidence in your new instrument - to learn how it responds, and what such signals/warnings may mean. And as time goes on, start implementing the advanced features and experimenting with their settings to achieve maximum end-user confidence, which is what I consider the ultimate goal.
Back when I was much younger and much more fit ( and weighed a lot less, too :P ), my martial arts master ingrained into me the wisdom of the words: "Train like you fight, and fight like you train."
Although that might seem like a non-sequitur, consider this:
My chosen detector, for going on 4 years now, is the Escort 8500x50. I selected this detector because, from the ride-alongs I've had with friends who owned the V1, I determined that there was no way that my wife - my primary passenger - would put up with that much "noise" coming from the device on a daily basis. Over the years, I've often considered supplementing my countermeasures stock with the purchase of a V1, specifically for use on the highway, when we go on long trips (the V1 also appeals to me tremendously as a "car gadget guy," since so many options are available for its customization/optimization) . However, each time I'm about to pick up the phone to call in the order, I'm reminded of what my Si-Fu said ... and honestly, upon reflection, I would have to say that I would not be able to optimize *MY* usage of the V1 - that I would not be familiar enough with it, used in such an occasional and sporadic manner, to use it to its true potential, and that, in-turn, may cause me to be awarded a ticket, through no fault of the detector.
First and foremost, speed-smart. Next, get a good tool, and learn to use it wisely.
tpe - As I've said to blane, honestly, that's just too much. I'm in no way a guru on this topic, and there's are many, many countermeasures hobbyists who are much, much more knowledgeable in this subject than I am - I'd like to think of myself merely as an ambassador to that field, a guide to help my fellow car-nuts enter that world, to first be equipped with some basic knowledge as well as facts, so that they can better digest the overwhelming information available when they first step-over into the countermeasures community.
I thank you for having such a high opinion of me, but honestly, I don't deserve it.
In terms of the 9500i versus the 8500x50, currently, there seems to be a bit of a favor on the 9500i in terms of overall sensitivity - whether this will continue to hold (i.e. will this trickle-down to the x50? or will Escort see this as a way to preferentially maintain a performance-gap to their new flagship model, as some carmakers do?) remains a question. Overall, however, the biggest difference is just as you've cited - the various GPS-enabled advance functions that the 9500i is capable of: speed-sensitive band-sensitivity adjustments, known location-marking, and the "TrueLock" feature.
For me, the biggest advantages to owning the 9500i - of which I am planning its purchase in the next few days, to be totally honest (I'm taking advantage of the Escort "Trade-In/Trade-Up" promotional, I still have an old 4500 SuperWide hanging around from my high-school/college days, and I'll be trading that one in, while keeping my current x50 [an early-make Rev5 unit] for both backup as well as use in my wife's car) - will be the speed-sensitive band-sensitivity adjustments (which will greatly please my wife - as my primary passenger; she *really* hates the "annoyance" of "those detectors" - as well as keep my two-year-old napping comfortably when I'm running errands) and the known location-marking feature (which will help with my local area's red-light/speed cameras (since I don't frequent many of those areas, I have not yet memorized all of their locations).
Currently, I am unable to use the 9500i's TrueLock feature - my local enforcers, in two of my most frequented areas during my daily commutes, do utilize a lot of K-band, and as such, I cannot *safely* lock-out the K-band falses which I come upon in such areas, as the TrueLock technology now stands.
This is perhaps best explained by fellow enthusiast RIP-9500I here:
In my case, I'm a "high risk scenario," as he so well puts it.
---
Per the legalities of the issue:
I hesitate to express my opinions as I truly believe that as a countermeasures user, I am treading on dangerous ground when things are viewed from the perspective of "the slippery-slope."
Like I said previously, as a car-enthusiast, yes, I've got a couple of catless or partially-de-catted vehicles (sure, they're tuned to the point that they pass even the state's sniffer test, but still, breaking a law is breaking a law) and again, yes, as a driving-enthusiast, I have broken my share of speed limits (OK, so I firmly believe that since I don't want my toddler, who may accidentally step out into our street, run-over by someone who is driving 10+ the 25MPH PSL, that I should in-turn return other parents' and my neighbors' the same courtesy and consideration, and myself not speed through areas such as school-zones, residential side-streets, etc. - but I do confess to exceeding the PSL on open freeways; as such, while I strictly obey some traffic laws, I do, undeniably, break others). As such, I don't think I'm any more morally superior than any other average Joe - so I really can't argue for/against any of this based on such high grounds.
However, on a personal level, speaking purely of my own beliefs and feelings, yes, I also feel the same way as you do, that pure, passive DETECTION should not be illegal. I've tried to formulate, in my own mind, many different arguments in this manner, but I guess the best one I came up with is that I just don't see how it's logical - like you said yourself, those "waves" are openly in the air, so why can't we monitor them?
My belief here, in this respect, is thus very much, I think, like my personal view of red-light cameras. Although I've only ever run two RED lights, in both of those cases, an 18-wheeler (one was a fully-loaded dump-truck, so technically, that wasn't a tractor-trailer combo) in full lock-up was bearing down on me. In both cases, I saw this potential threat, and scanned ahead into the intersection, and made my own saving move when it was in-turn most safe to do so, with minimal, if any, potential safety impact to my fellow motorists. I don't understand the logic of why an otherwise law-abiding citizen would have to potentially go to court to explain away such a circumstance - to me, it's illogical.
But then again, I realize that my own arguments here are on a slippery slope - and this is why I tend to simply shut-up when it comes to issues like these. Instead, I prefer to hold discussions based solely on the technical/factual merits of the devices being discussed - where the debates would not center around one's individual moral/ethical convictions or beliefs (of which, as an American, I strongly believe that EVERYONE has a right to express and to hold dear to themselves, no matter how unpopular or dissenting the sentiment may be), but rather on hard facts that cannot be washed-out with feelings or diluted by emotions.
I have a 9500i blue on the way, it really sounds like the way to go for me. Now, the way I interpreted the video on Escorts website was that even if you "lock-out" known false alarms (I live near a grocery store that uses K-band for their auto door openers and it also happens to be a spot that the local sheriff hangs out and K-bands on-coming cars) it will still recognize a new K-band signal and alert you. Or did I totally miss the mark on that one?
I'm eager to get my purchase of the 9500i done, too. But being a family man with a limited "fun" budget - I've been skipping a few lunches. :P
You didn't completely miss the mark, upstatedoc, but there should be a little caution taken here, too.
TrueLock does work, but as the technology stands now, there are still some residual risks.
I honestly think that the best approach to learning about the potential issues that may be caused by TrueLock are explained best by fellow countermeasures hobbyist/enthusiast RIP-9500I, whose post on this issue, on a countermeasures Forum, I referenced above:
Look at his "risk scenarios" presentation - "No Risk," "Low Risk," and "High Risk."
See which of those scenarios best-fits your situation and driving needs, and weigh your own risk-assessment accordingly.
For me, just because of how my local enforcement presents, I fit into the "High Risk" scenario. From the standpoint of how Escort's software/firmware processes TrueLock on the 9500i, I currently, thus, do not feel comfortable using this feature on my daily driving (commute/errands) circuit.
Nevertheless, it can be said that Escort is being very, very professional and very, very responsive to the needs of their product users and enthusiasts/hobbyists (both in terms of cars/driving as well as countermeasures), and have addressed many of the early faults/bugs of the 9500i, at their cost (including shipping), in an effort to truly make this model their flagship item.
Just a few months ago, I was at a point that while I really lusted after the 9500i, I wasn't about to purchase one - and also advised my friends/family of the same - due to the bugs that were still present on the unit. Earlier this month, seeing the evolutionary upgrades/revisions given the 9500i to address the earlier concerns and reading about others' purchases and their satisfaction with the product, I've finally become comfortable with a purchase recommendation, and also had started saving-up for this detector, myself (to replace my Rev5 x50 as my primary detector).
I am honestly going to purchase the 9500i within the next week, taking advantage of their "Trade-In/Trade-Up" program.
I have no doubt that while right now, TrueLock doesn't really fit my precise needs due to the usage-risks involved, that in the near future, this will also be addressed by Escort.
>Then again VA is potentially the most backwards state in the union. Trust me on this, a lot of residents there drive around with license plates that feature a confederate flag.
Would you like to explain to me and others what is wrong with a confederate flag on license plates? And what it has to do with Lidar/Radar detectors?
Although I do have high-hopes for Escort to further refine the TrueLock feature, I am pretty certain that I will not be using that feature, for the time being, on my current everyday drive.
Still, with the speed-sensitive feature, my hopes is that the 9500i will be even quieter than my x50, given my super-dense-"falsing" locale, combined with the fact that for at least 75% of the time, my road-speeds (oftentimes, parking-lot) in such areas should be low enough to render such falsing concerns a thing of the past.
For me, the x50 was - and the 9500i will be - a compromise that I made/make based on my lifestyle needs. Although I would love a detector as sensitive and as tactically-minded as the V1, the fact of having my wife and/or my child in the car with me for most of my non-commute driving and for the fact that my daily commute is so densely populated with false-alerts, having sufficient filtering is something that helps to preserve my sanity (to say nothing of my wife's).
I think that with a detector purchase, with today's technology, everyone should be honest to themselves when examining their true needs and preferences. The fact of the matter is that any and all of the top-flight detectors (and even select "second tier" models) will easily fulfill the performance needs of every last one of us. It's the other aspects of "living with the detector" - the compromises that must be made - that should, IMveryHO, be the basis of the purchase decision.
"there was no way that my wife - my primary passenger - would put up with that much "noise" coming from the device on a daily basis"
Don't forget that the Valentine One has two operating modes:
A is for All threats and the one that everyone should use on a highway.
L is for Local driving with reduced sensitivity and fewer alerts (i.e. quieter for the wife) on streets with lots of intrusion alarms.
The V1 also has two adjustable volume controls, one for the main alert signal (I always keep that one at maximum) and a second for the follow-up reminder.
I always drive with the unit in the A mode and just tap the mute button to lower the follow-up volume until it shuts off when I'm past the "threat" and all of the signal strength LEDs are extinguished.
With the ability to initially mute audible warnings for the most false-prone band in terms of in-city use, theoretically, the V1 should prove no more "annoying" to detector non-users/detractors than any other instrument of its genre - and with the active participation of the end-user (i.e. hitting the mute button in-time), it should be, theoretically, just as quiet and well-behaved as a "quieter" detector.
This is what I have wished, myself, but in-execution, I have yet to have a ride-along with anyone using the V1, even with such advanced-programming in-place, in which the ride was as false-free as with even my x50, set to "CityLoX," and with POP alert "off."
I honestly can't say whether or not if this is just the fault of those users - i.e. maybe they don't know how or haven't quite managed to (or haven't had the inclination to - and this is something I'll get to in just a moment) get the settings just right in order to minimize the detector voicing un-necessarily in dense urban areas. I'm, quite frankly, still searching for a ride-along with just such a user - who has optimized their settings so as to be able to satisfy my (or rather, the wifey's) needs in this respect.
Similarly, there are those out there - the purists - who see the behavior of the V1, in reporting EVERYTHING and ANYTHING, as a trait that they are not only willing to live with, but as something that they specifically seek. In this manner, they are perhaps the ultimate detection fanatics in that they want the detector to report everything - including false positives, no matter how numerous - and in-turn use their own judgement and experience to act as the final informational/tactical "filter." Unfortunately for me, the few hard-core countermeasures hobbyists whom I've met or have conversed with, whom I've expressed an interest in seeing just how well a well-programmed V1 can handle my noise-filled daily commute, have been of this conviction, and thus unable to help me. While I greatly respect these purists - and that I harbor a desire to be among their ranks - I know that, in the real-world demand of my daily commute as well as from my family/passengers, this kind of usage is impossible.
To me, the Escort detectors that I've chosen are compromises, and I feel that everyone should be honest to themselves in making such decisions and compromises, so that their end-use is, itself, a best-match for their true needs.
Aside: For me, the use of the Escort detectors is also in-part based on my desire to have an integrated threat-indicator/jammer solution when it comes to laser threats. Yes, the V1 is likely the most sensitive detector when it comes to alerting to laser, but it still trails the dedicated laser-receiver models, such as the ZR3 and its fellow Escort sisters, in terms of detection capability (likely due in-part to the V1's typical in-vehicle placement, which will offset it from receiving direct hits and is skewed rather in-favor of trying to catch reflections/deflections/"scatter." In using the ZR3 as a layer of my active laser defense (which includes both the LPP as well as the LI as my true primary jammers), I am actually utilizing its integration into the x50 (and the 9500i) more so that I can get a clear and quick front-vs.-rear threat indication, which will allow me to respond better, tactically, in terms of both locating the threat as well as allowing me to properly disengage from that threat, without compromising protection from the other aspect of the vehicle (note that while my distinct front-and-rear LPP setup, using two separate control boxes, allows for a front-versus-rear set of indicator LEDs to be present on my dashboard, the proximity with which I've mounted them relative to each other does not allow me effective (nor safe/timely) tactical response to an incoming threat in that, visually, it's very hard to reference. This is yet another reason why I am staying with the Escort detectors, yet another reason of my compromise.
^ Yep, there's a lot of different things that one can customize on the V1, if advanced-use is desired.
And that's my personal concern with my proposed scenario of owning both the x50 and the V1, and using the former exclusively for my usual around-town commutes and errands, and the latter exclusively for highway.
I fear that I will not be able to, thus, optimize my use of the V1, in such a scenario, since I so rarely take extended trips anymore. Furthermore, I am fearful that, therefore, my lack of intimacy with the V1 would also mean that I will not be able to interpret its warnings properly (and/or respond properly).
These are the reasons why, in conjunction with the other listed in my previous posts above, that my current detector is the x50 (and why I am seeking the 9500i as an upgrade). Had my lifestyle and driving preferences/needs been different, it is just as likely that I would use the V1 as my primary detector, or, for that matter, the STi-Driver.
I have nothing against the V1 - it's a tremendously capable detector, and probably the most sensitive of the breed, and furthermore, its directional capability is just a marvel. I have nothing but respect for it. Unfortunately, it is just not a good fit for me.
Just had the 9500i delivered yesterday. I will try to keep you posted on my experiences w/ it as I know you are interested in acquiring one (lgtwrx). BTW, I noticed it also picks up Ku band which I've heard got everyone all excited a while back because there were no detectors tuned for it.
Cool! Let me know what you think as the miles roll by.
One item of-interest: if for some reason, your delivered unit isn't delivering a smooth, progressive audio ramp-up, please let me know. A good car-buddy of mine recently purchased the 9500i, direct from Escort, and had specifically requested a ramp-up corrected unit, and was delivered one in which the ramp-up issue was not yet addressed. Escort did go all-out to help him solve the issue, but could not avoid the hassle of having his credit-card charged 2x the purchase amount, until the questionable unit was received by Escort (at which time they took off the extra charge, of course).
In any case, regarding Ku-band....
Currently, the only reason for you to enable Ku-band detection would be if you were going off North-America for travel. Luckily for us, Ku-band is not currently in-use here for speed-enforcement. Enabling Ku-band detection on your detector may cause issues with increased falsing, and may potentially also cause your detector to respond just ever so much slower, as it will have yet another segment to scan through.
The audio alert "ramp-up" from the Escort 8500x50 was considered by many enthusiasts to be the model of perfection - a smooth progression based on threat strength/distance.
Imagine a scale/range of audio output, from 1 to 10, with "10" being the "highest" level of alert - a nearly solid and insistant warning tone, whereas "1" is essentially a single, soft, beep.
With a signal detected far-away, but getting closer, the x50 would thus "ramp-up" its audio warning as follows:
On the early-release 9500i, many complained that the audio ramp-up was non-linear, reflection, in the same situation, this type of report:
1-1-1-1-4-4-4-4-7-7-7-7-10-10-10-10-10-10-10
While later explainations as to why this kind of audible threat report may have both made-sense, based on several different situations, as well as might have been something that the 9500i's engineers were specifically trying to achieve, most of the loyal Escort users still found themselve wishing that the ramp-up was more akin to that of their beloved x50's - and after a number of complaints by end-users as well as product returns where this "defect" was the one cited as the main reason for return, Escort responded by reverting to the more linear audio ramp-up.
Supposedly, units made after the 4007 (40th week, 2007) date-stamp have the revised (old scheme, like the x50) audio ramp-up in-place already, but there have been a few reports of units having "slipped through," and arriving with the non-linear ramp-up. I *believe* that all "Blue" units already have the revised ramp-up scheme in-place, but again, I cannot be completely sure.
Also, please note that this ramp-up progression issue can also be simply a personal-preference issue. I know of several early-9500i adopters who have elected NOT to send their units back for this revision, specifically because they preferred the non-linear audio warning scheme.
Well, i had written a lengthy reply to your post regarding audio ramp-up, however my 2 year old decided to hard boot the computer. My initial impressions of this unit is that it is much more sensitive than my x50. Picking up X and K signals the other did not.(in city mode) So it looks like I'll have to initiate some lock-outs. The great thing about the 9500i is that it is so customizable. You can turn off all or none of the features. Default settings have voice alert on (very annoying at high volume) and Ku,SWS,POP off. I reversed those settings and turned X off all together. BTW, the first visual alert you see is your speed! Pretty cool. You can probably alter that too.
Doh! I'm sorry that your message got deleted - but coming from a fellow "owner of a two-year old toddler" (my beloved baby-Anna will be turning two in just 6 days), I can well-understand, and share the same sigh/laugh that you undoubtedly voiced.
Thank you for your continuing update!
Indeed, the 9500i, by the GOL's latest round of tests, did prove much more sensitive than the x50. I can't help but wonder if this sensitivity improvement may trickle-down to the x50, or if, as with many car manufacturers, they'll keep the x50 "de-tuned" so that there's a performance gap to the flagship model?
In any case, again, I thank you for the continued report!
( PS: Yep, you can indeed turn off the visual speed alert. In anticipation of my coming 9500i, I'd already downloaded its manual from the Escort website, and read through it. )
Well, I'll be interested to see what you think of the 9500i being probably one of the most knowledgeable on the topic. Plus, I'll have someone to ask if I can't figure it out. :P
upstatedoc - Again, you truly do think too highly of me, I'm nowhere near as experienced nor knowledgeable as you think I am. I'm just an average hobbyist in this area, that's all.
I did order a 9500i, Red, this afternoon. I requested one with the revised (x50-esque) audio ramp-up. Hopefully, I'll get what I asked for.... To Escort's credit, though, their phone operator was very cordial, and was product-knowledgeable.
I am very eager to give this unit a try, however, I'm also somewhat apprehensive.
The Rev5 x50 is regarded very, very highly among countermeasures enthusiasts, and as such, the 9500i will have big shoes to fill. Also, I was just informed today by a fellow BL/BP-chassis Subaru Legacy enthusiast - someone with whom I've only had "e-contact" with but whom I'd consider a true friend - that his 9500i, using the same hardwire setup as his x50, has come up with the often-reported "false Laser-alert on WOT" issue (his Rev5 x50, of the same vintage as mine, never saw this trouble). Although he kindly advised me to wait-out his trouble/fix report, I decided to take the plunge, nonetheless.
It needs to be said that our Subarus - as with many modern-generation FI Subarus - are considered electrically "noisy" vehicles. Although there are those of us who've never experienced such issues, those who have are not, per se, necessarily a minority. Of that unfortunate group, many have been able to "cure" their woes by splicing in some form of in-line electrical filter (i.e. ferrite choke). However, it is speculated by at least one true guru in this area that RF-interference produced by the VEHICLE itself could also be the root-cause of these issues (and may be the true cause in those specific vehicles for which such in-line filters have not worked), and that in these cases, either shutting off the laser detection or sending the unit back to the manufacturer for "tweaking" (often, this means increased shielding around the laser circuitry, and this in-turn translates into decreased sensitivity; my friend was quoted that his laser sensitivity would be decreased by appx. 1/3 that of his current unit's).
I'm begining to understand what you mean by smooth audio ramp-up. The 9500i (at least mine) definitely has a different alert system. Gone are the days when you here just one beep and search for the source then the alarm slowly gets more frantic. This unit likes to scare you right off the bat when it encounters a signal. It's going to take some getting use to.. With the 8500, that flurry of sound meant you were right on top of the signal, not so with the 9500i, Again this unit is much more sensitive than my 8500, blowing it out of the water with it's Ka performance.
Look at the bottom of your unit - there should be a serial-number, with last four digits in the format of XX07. The "XX" part corresponds to the week of the year in which your 9500i was manufactured.
It is rumored that any unit bearing a manufacture week after week 40 (i.e. "4007" = 40th week, 2007) has, as a part of its production-line revision, the smoother, more x50-like ramp-up scheme. My unit, which I just received this past Thursday, bears a 4307 stamp, and it does ramp-up in a manner which is similar to, but still not quite the same as, my x50.
If you'd like to pursue this issue more with Escort, I know that they will reflash your unit's firmware, at their cost, so that you will receive the smoother ramp-up progression, akin to your x50. Just call their customer-service line, and make them aware of the issue. Typical turn-around is within two weeks, I believe, with many fellow hobbyists having reported that they've received their unit back within only about one week.
I unfortunately have not yet had time to test this unit with regard to Ka band performance. A local township uses 35.5 Ghz Ka-band - which is a frequency that gave the x50 some trouble on - but I have not been able to cruise around to test-out the 9500i.... On K band, I'm pretty happy with the 9500i's performance, even when set to "Auto" mode (which greatly enhances the comfort of my daily commute - more on this in just a minute), it seems to pick up K-band threats as fast as/with similar range as my Rev5 x50.
What I've really been able to enjoy the past few days is the quietness of the 9500i. Even with no GPS TrueLock lockouts set on the first day of my commute, I was able to get to work, and then home again, without *any* false alerts. Apparently, during regular-traffic hours, my road-speed is decreased sufficiently that the falses I do encounter are all successfully filtered via the "Auto"Sensitivity mode's road-speed based real-time sensitivity adjustments. Currently, I have 4 X-band signals locked-out (while the OH State Patrol does occasionally use X-band, my local enforcers are exclusively K, Ka, and LASER shooters), which covers the X-band falses on my normal commute, which I can still elicit when I travel those routes during off-traffic hours, which sees increased road-speed (even though I'm still within the PSL).
A good friend of mine, and a fellow BL/BP-chassis turbocharged Subaru Legacy driver unfortunately reported that he is seeing a laser-alert false at WOT. This is a not-uncommon issue with the top-flight Escort products, and was first noted with their 7000-series detectors, but has seemed to continue to present itself through both the x50 as well as the 9500i. My friend also comes from, as I did, an early-make Rev5 x50, which, on his vehicle (on the same exact electrical wiring setup), did *NOT* false laser alert at WOT.
It's rumored that the 9500i is much more laser sensitive than the x50 (and in-particular, the S7 chassis, early-make, Rev5 x50s) - as a remedial measure, Escort has told my friend that they'll "tune" his 9500i so as to hopefully prevent this falsing from taking place, but it will come at the expense of an appx. 30% decrease in laser sensitivity. We currently do not know exactly where this will place his 9500i, in terms of laser sensitivity, when compared with our old Rev5 x50s.
To-date, luckily, I have not yet seen this concern replicated on my own vehicle and with my 9500i/ZR3-integrated setup.
However, in addition to my friend, there are also more than a handful of others (who either are fellow BL/BP, turbocharged, Legacy drivers or owners of other vehicles) who are suffering from this persistent issue with their Escort detectors (x50, 9500i). To me, this is a big disappointment.
For someone like me, where the detector itself is no longer the first line of LASER defense, it really is more of an academic as well as strategic concern (i.e. that one receiver "up high" could help catch the "lucky scatter"). But for those who are relying on the detector as first-line laser defense, this falsing issue could be a serious concern.
One of the things that really gets to me about a detector that falses too much is that as the end-user, we may become de-tuned/de-sensitized to the detector's falses - in essence "lose confidence" in the detector and trying to second-guess it. The "spooky quietness" of the 9500i is something that many have listed as a tactical advantage, for, in this sense, *every* blip on the detector should then be taken seriously.
Living with falses on a detector that is specifically designed to minimize such - be it for reasons of convenience/sanity or for tactical concerns - is, in my most humble view, unacceptable, and I think that it is something that Escort should work to resolve, without degrading the detector's performance.
---
Note that self/end-user effected "fixes" to address this "LASER @ WOT" falsing issue does exist - typically, one uses an in-line filter, such as a Ferrite Choke - to try to suppress the tapped power line's electrical noise, which is one of the biggest (speculated) causes of this problem. Alternatively, it's also been reported that RF interference could also be an issue - but due to the truly random nature (as well as the difficulty involved in tracing it down) of this type of interference, there currently exists no real end-user effected methods of addressing this problem, short of turning off laser reception on the detector.
Mine is stamped 5007, so I guess it has the updated scheme. Maybe it's just the sensitivity that has it acting more hyper. In regards to laser sensitivity, this may sound funny but if i lower the unit below the level of the top of the dash, the laser alert goes off (presumably secondary to the cd player). My x50 would only do that if I put it right next to the cd input.
Agreed - the 5007 should qualify your unit into the updated/revised ramp-up units. (But if you want to know for sure, you can give Escort's C/S a call, and they should be able to provide confirmation via S/N. )
If you're in "Auto" mode and are at moderate road-speeds (between, reportedly, 25 to 50 MPH), remember that the unit is actively trying to figure-out if the signals it encounters are falses, and this, in and of itself, may cause sufficient temporal delay for you to have traveled "right on top of the target/signal." As-such, if your local speed-limits are in the 35 MPH range, and you habitually speed to 40/45 MPH, it may be worth it to suffer the additional false-signals, but switch to full-sensitivity "Highway" mode to insure full X and K-band coverage (alternatively, if X and K are less-used in your area, you could use "City" mode).
---
That's very interesting, what you're reporting about the laser alert behavior on your 9500i, as well as the x50. One can't help but wonder if this is because of RF interference from the actual player itself, or if it is from laser "peeking out" from, say, the player's physical casing (including the disc slot).
I've nearly always been a "high mount" kind of guy, so I can't really say that I've ever tried this - or had the detector located in such a way that this may have been an issue. I'll give it a run tonight, though.
What I do know, specific to the BL/BP-chassis Subaru Legacy, is that the '06+ models' navigation screen will set off the laser false.
A reporter from a national newspaper is looking to speak to consumers who use radar detectors. Please provide your daytime contact info to ctalati@edmunds.com no later than Wednesday, January 9, 2008.
Hey lgt, What are your first impressions of the 9500i? I'm loving the lock-out feature however have not encountered radar/police car in a locked-out area yet. The alerts sound different so that is taking time to get used to. I have also switched to auto mode in the "city" with X turned off completely. Is there any advantage/disadvantage to this? :confuse:
I'm still forming my "first impression" of the detector. I just don't feel like I've logged enough time nor distance behind-the-wheel, with this detector, to have formed a good "bond" with it, just yet.
What little I can tell you, so far:
During my commute, I'm finding that leaving the detector on "Auto" mode was allowing "automatic" silencing of just about all of the falses in my area, during my AM commute hours, due to my lowered road-speed at such times.
During my afternoon as well as off-hours commutes/errands, however, I do reach sufficient road-speed where I'm in that "transition zone" of sensitivity in "Auto" mode, and as such, I will sometimes encounter falses. As such, I've utilized, so far, about a half-dozen marked locations. Almost all are X-band, so I don't have to worry about my local enforcers, but for the two K-band related locations, I've yet to be able to test them for responsiveness to true enforcement signals, since none have yet been present, simultaneously. I also don't know when/if I'll *ever* get a chance confirm, as, for those two spots, I truly rarely see any enforcement activity at all.....
Aside from this, I've truly been enjoying the tremendous increase in K and Ka-band sensitivity, compared to my old x50.
---
With regard to your question -
It's stated that in "Auto" mode, X and K-band sensitivities are speed-dependent. At below 15 MPH - i.e. parking lot speeds - you should have X/K-band falsing only if you're within *very* close proximity to the emitter.
Nevertheless, if your local area truly has no X-band enforcement, completely disabling this particular band, which is the most common cause of in-city falsing, will make your commute quite enjoyable, I'd imagine. Just be ABSOLUTELY sure that your locals do not utilize X-band!
Comments
I am looking for a New radar detector for my new car. I was wondering if anyone have any suggestion on the brand, or things i should look into. It seems there are a lot of people using V1. Are there any other choices? What about the law for radar detecotrs in az?
THanks
What is the best unit on the market today ????
Rocky
Rocky
No, although I keep up with the technology, I've not read any rumors about anything major in the pipeline.
Thanx again,
Rocky
But keep in mind that even with this doesn't seems to be ticket proof. as if you still get a ticket if the cops use Laser gun and pinpointed at you. Once your detector detects the signal, its too late to step on the brake. Its best to speed in the open view ahead and not be the first car.
If the cop would lie about it, no detector would help. If a judge believes him, you're done.
I've had cops lie twice now - The first time to add additional charge to a drunk that hit a car hard enough to drive it into mine. Cop detailed that both cars were hit separately. Funny enough, I could not attend the trial because the podunk town would not tell me when the trial was. It's a private matter, right?
I don't understand why the cops would risk having the whole thing thrown out. Probably got pleaded down to a tail-light violation. Otherwise I would have been called as a defense witness to the falsification of the report.
The second time was when I needed an accident report after a twit hit me after he ignored a stop sign. The cops didn't write one until I showed up 2 weeks later. Of course they got enough details wrong it would not have helped much. They said it was mis-filed.
It also sounds as if the writer did not mention this malfeasance to the State Highway Patrol or the States Attorney General, meaning that others would be victimized by 'Kenny.' Neither did I, but then I wasn't convicted on false evidence and it would have meant taking on the neighborhood police.
How much do I need to spend? where is the best place to buy (ie: Radio Shack, Best Buy, Napa etc). Can I get a unit that is easily put away if I get stopped? Any of this information will be helpful in protecting myself and staying a safe and defensive driver. I realize that many of these tickets are dismissed if one goes to court and fights the ticket, but the time spent is not worth it. Any vital information appreciated.
The question of effectiveness is how soon, or far distant, a particular detector provides its warning so that you can react and slow down if necessary. Generally, the more you pay, the better the protection. That would preclude the low cost units.
Unless you drive in the District of Columbia or Virginia, the only state in which use of detectors is illegal, there is no reason to put a unit away if you get stopped. They are perfectly legal to own and use.
There is a lot of good information here: http://www.valentine1.com/
I'm surprised that you thought that the V1 was complicated. In fact I find that it is totally intuitive. The silence button is the only knob on the unit. Just press it and there is as much silence as you desire. The directional arrows tell me in which direction to look if there is a threat (front, back or to the side).
If you found too much beeping on a street with many stores with intrusion alarms, your sensitivity may have been set to the A (All) or highway mode. I might have set mine, with a simple press of the same button as above, to the L (Local) mode in such an area.
Speaking of laser......I have one of those laser shields on my front plate, supposedly illegal as well. The other day I drove by a sheriff who was parked and monitoring license plates w/ that camera they have on the roof of their cars now. Any way, he gave me a pretty hard look and I wondered later if it was because the computer couldn't read my plate because of the laser shield. Any thoughts?
With regard to the effectiveness of the LaserShield, yes, it does do its job, but remember that it's a "point-effective" device. Certainly, in many areas, enforcers are taught to target the available front-plate, and as such, this device can offer some help in reducing the tremendous LIDAR return from the typical state-issue metallic/reflective plates - but remember that hand-held (or even "studied") LIDAR devices, particularly when you're trying to track a moving object from rather far away, will effectively target a larger area than that pinpoint: that it's going to wind up covering your entire front "center mass." Here, where your vehicle may have other LIDAR-reflective considerations (hood ornaments, chrome grill, or even metallic silver vehicle paint), the LaserShield cannot cover, and will render you just as vulnerable as if you did not use the device in the first place.
[ Aside: Speed-detection countermeasures enthusiasts have also used items such as 3M's "Clear Duct Tape" to drastically cut-down on LIDAR reflectivity of state-issue metal plates; whether this is acceptable to you in terms of aesthetics or if it is deemed more or less noticeable to passing enforcers is, again, your call. Similarly - and depending highly on the graphical complexity of your state issue tags- you may also try to use a non-metallic replica plate or other facsimile. ]
In-reality, "passive" protection is rather hard to achieve. Starting out with a LIDAR-favorable vehicle, with darker paint - say, a black, late-model 'Vette - puts you ahead of the game (versus, say, a metallic-silver, upright-design, SUV with tons of chrome on the front-end), but the overall theme is still very, very much synergistic. LaserShield will only cover the front plate, but what about the rest of the front end? There, you'll need to put some VEIL (a proprietary IR-absorptive coating) on the lighting elements, dark-out/replace any chrome elements, and perhaps even put a front-end "bra," if your vehicle's base-color is LIDAR-unfavorable.
The only true protection here is via active laser jammers. Currently, Escort and Blinder are the two most recognized US makes of such products, both of which utilize IR-LED elements to effect jamming.
With the Escort (as well as the now defunct, sister, Beltronics product), unfortunately, the technology is quite dated, and unless your local enforcement profile - both in terms of LIDAR hardware used as well as encounter/trap circumstances - is favorable to this device, you will likely suffer rather unacceptable "punch-throughs" (envision the jammer as a shield, and the LIDAR picking up your vehicle speed as the event of having the incoming laser beam "punch through" your protection). For the cost of the Escort products (as well as for their installation cost, of which a professional installation is *required* for valid warranty preservation), you should *seriously* consider your local enforcement profile before you make the purchase.
[ Thus, it's worth noting here that such on-line videos can be skewed to either show the product's effectiveness OR even highlight its shortcomings. For example, that video, with the ZR3/SRX/SR7+ ? I'd well-bet that it was against a Kustom ProLaser III. Be careful of the video's origin (i.e. is it a sponsored/conflicted-interest video, etc.). This industry is truly one of the most cut-throat/dirty that I've ever seen, and trust me, this kind of back-stabbing exists, aplenty. ]
Blinder offers a similar product, with better performance. Their older unit, the M20 or M40 (two jammer heads and 4 jammer heads, respectively), offered acceptable protection under most circumstances. However, it was still prone to shorter-range PTs ("punch-throughs, as I explained above). Their current evolutionary product, the M25/M45, has caused great controversy in the enthusiast/hobbyist community as its effectiveness is being highly debated/questioned. As-such, my current advice would be that if you were to want to go with a Blinder product, to try to source the old/defunct M20/M40, instead, particularly with the increased cost of the M25/M45 also approaching that of the professionally-installed Escort system, and also, moreover, the much, much more technologically advanced and much better performing laser-diode based jammers.
With regard to such items, the laser-diode based jammers, the current contenders are the Laser Interceptor (LI) and the twins of Laser ProPark (LPP) and AntiLaser (AL). Any and all of these three products will provide you with extremely capable protection, and can effect "jam-to-gun" (JTG) and "jam-from-gun" (JFG) scenarios, particularly when good attention is paid to their mounting/configuration.
So far, these units are unfortunately only available as "gray market" products, since the dog-eat-dog world of speed-detection countermeasures has companies like Blinder, VEIL, and Escort being very, very defensive about their proprietary and patented technologies. As such, while the LPP does have both Canadian and US-based re-sellers, none operate as true "businesses" in the above-board sense (the same can be said of the LI, although its US-based reseller is even more "shady," in the monetary sense, than that). With both the LI or the AL, many hobbyists have chosen to pursue their purchase direct, from overseas sources, on a private/personal-import basis.
Note, however, that this is not to say that any of these companies do not offer good customer-service/warranty support. In actuality, due highly in-part to their status as enthusiast/hobbyist goods which sell primarily via word-of-mouth, the C/S for these products is actually quite excellent - be it from their North-American/Stateside "representatives" or even directly from their makers in Europe (the AL and LI both originate from Croatia, the LPP is now made in the UK). I, myself, can attest to the care given by the Canadian representatives of the LPP, which was nothing short of stellar.
A 2-head LI (which will effect JTG/JFG when mounted both on front or both on rear of just about anything short of a Hummer H1) will run somewhere around $650, purchased Stateside (less purchased direct from Croatia, however, the specter of potential import duties and brokerages presents themselves), with a four-head system (effecting both front and rear coverage) will cost just south of $1200. A dual-head AntiLaser or Laser ProPark system will be appx. $700 to $800, with a four-head system being in the range of $1200 to $1400.
Is it worth the cost? That's totally up to you to decide. :shades:
I hope this has helped you!
Honestly speaking, upstatedoc, there's no such requirement to understanding how these jammers work - it's really quite simple, and the hobbyist group Guys of LIDAR ( www.guysoflidar.com ) does an excellent job explaining the basics of both LIDAR detection, why its countermeasures work, and the legalities of using laser jammers, by state/district. I'd highly recommend giving it a good read.
To take things back a step, in viewing that particular website, you'll see how poorly the LED-based jammers performed in the "2007 Countermeasures Shoot-Out," as compared to the diode-based jammers (note that after this test, LPP-UK/KMPH-UK upgraded the firmware on the LPP, to successfully address the inconsistencies seen with the 100 PPS Ultralyte police LIDAR, for the US, North-American, and other related markets where automated police LIDAR devices such as the Jenoptik are not relevant concerns). As many users of the Escort ZR3 Laser Shifter will tell you - myself included in this bunch, I've owned my ZR3, now, for nearly 4 years, and it's still resident on my daily-driver vehicle - the biggest benefit of this unit is its integration (either in terms of the comprehensive SRX/SR7+ solutions, or when integrated with the Escort 8500x50 or 9500i detectors), and its ability, when mounted in the traditional/"by-the-books" manner (two heads front, one head rear; note that in the GOL test, they used the "enthusiast's mounting," of having all three heads up-front) to give a clear and quick assessment of the direction from which the LIDAR threat is coming from. Nevertheless, unless your vehicle presents a favorable target profile and your locals do not practice unfavorable engagement tactics, the ZR3 is compromised protection, at-best.
In terms of legality, this is a very, very touchy subject, and one that I personally hesitate to get into due to its "slippery slope" effect. Have I ever broken any laws? Sure - but I can proudly say that none of it involves a Mortal Sin
As such, I feel comfortable only in discussing the facts of the technology - I hope you don't mind, and I hope that you can understand my own hardships in this moral/ethical debate.
So, getting back to the legal issue -
Even in states/areas where such active LIDAR jamming is prohibited, enforcement proficiency/knowledge as well as your jammer usage are still the biggest hang-ups in terms of whether or not the jammer is "detected." Currently, *all* LIDAR equipment used in North America will throw spurious "jam-codes." Since both false-positives as well as false-negatives are seen - and seen not infrequently - many enforcers have come to disregard such (and rightfully so, or their average shift would be unbearable, I'd well imagine). Combine this with the ability of some of today's top-flight jammers to not effect true jam-codes to be thrown (i.e. they may produce either no reading, or effect only range/distance reading, etc.), you can thus see where, with good practice of tactical disengagement, the average driver won't necessarily raise any eyebrows, whatsoever.
There are actually many active laser jammer users in various Canadian provinces - as well as here, Stateside - in areas that ban the use of such devices, who have used them to good effect, and without angering the local enforcers by just keeping these considerations in-mind, as well as by, of course, paying close attention to other tactical considerations, such as mounting/concealment (both of the exterior jammer heads as well as internal controls).
The truth of the matter is that if you are a habitual speeder and/or a "hyper-speeder," or practice other forms of more risky behavior (i.e. street-racing), it is my firm belief as a countermeasures hobbyist as well as a driving/car enthusiast that you will, at some point or another, no matter how comprehensive your countermeasures setup, be cited for speeding (or your other behavior[s]). In-essence, the old hot-rodding proverb of "you've gotta pay to play" applies here as well.
LIDAR is only one aspect of the equation - there's also Instant-On RADAR (to which even the top-flight detectors are *still* vulnerable, since the targeted use of I/O RADAR could effectively clock your speed in as deadly of a manner as LIDAR, only with no way to truly protect yourself against it), land and even airborne VASCAR, or even the traditional arts of visual-estimation and pacing - that greatly stacks the odds in-favor of The House, particularly if the enforcer is truly on his/her "A-game."
My wife keeps making fun of me for sticking to the PSL on local surface streets. Even if it weren't for my known personal core-beliefs against speeding in such areas, and even though I'm equipped with a full set of countermeasures -> replica plates (with LaserShield on the front), dual-LI heads up front paired with dual LPPs (there's also one single LPP head out-rear), plus the aforementioned ZR3 (in the "traditional" mounting position, since I have it integrated with my x50, which itself will soon be upgraded to the 9500i); I well-know that I'm *still* vulnerable.
I've much more to discover on that website and will no doubt be enjoying the work done there.
Another question. You've been asked your opinion about the legality of jamming devices. You were somewhat non-committal, which is understandable since a jamming device is not passive. What's your opinion on a device that is purely a receiver, like the Escort 8500? The state of Virginia says this is illegal. My personal opinion is that is total BS. How can you tell someone that they can't monitor what's in the air? Then again VA is potentially the most backwards state in the union. Trust me on this, a lot of residents there drive around with license plates that feature a confederate flag.
What's interesting is that just as there's car-nuts who don't know the difference between a $40 Cobra and a $400 V1, there's also countermeasures enthusiasts who have no desire to either purchase "fancier" vehicles, or to upgrade/modify their current ride. It's almost like two parallel hobbies, with only select members who choose to bridge both sides! :surprise:
The V1 is still, to this day, considered the "king of the open highway." Its extreme sensitivity, combined with directional capability (I'm not really going to count the "Bogey Counter" in this one, as the Bel/Escort products capable of "ExpertMeter" display can be said to also have this capability) makes it the preferred instrument of those who frequent open highways, as well as those who live in rural/suburban areas where there's not excessive false (non-LEO) signals present.
My firm belief is that no matter how good of a detector (or other countermeasures) one is equipped with, the biggest determinant of whether or not you'll get a ticket is you - the driver. Discounting "behavior" (i.e. habitual or hyper-speeder, engaging in more hazardous forms of driving on public streets, etc.), one must still realize that no matter what, these detectors - even the top-flight ones - are just tools. Without proper instrument setup as well as the proper interpretation of the device's warnings (and appropriate and timely actions to-follow), you're still virtually guaranteed a ticket, some time down the line, when your luck runs out.
Whenever my friends or family ask me if they need a radar/laser detector, I always give them this "canned" answer as my starter:
- Speed smart, and most of the time, I'd say that you're fine even without protection.
- Speed-stupid, and I can virtually guaranty that you'll get a ticket, no matter how much money you spend on a detector.
That's really my core-belief.
Each of the top-flight detectors have their own points of excellence, which can easily be their justification for anyone to buy *any* of them (i.e. someone who travels many highway miles may select the V1 for its sensitivity/Arrows, versus someone who does most of his/her commute in-city, who might select the 9500i for its filtering algorithm as well as speed-sensitive sensitivity adjustments, versus someone who lives, say, in VA or in certain areas in Canada, who might choose the Bel STi-Driver for its true-stealth capabilities) - and in all honesty, in the real world (particularly when between-unit production variances are taken into the equation), their performances may be so close that it's virtually indistinguishable. For me, as a person who tends to see things in shades-of-gray to begin with, it's very hard for me to say that anyone's choice in their preferred detector is "right" or "wrong" - as long as their detector meets their needs, I would say that they're just fine.
Use such tests as a basic guide - and then superimpose upon them your own usage scenario. That'll lead you to the right detector choice. From there, re-learn through such tests/reviews where your detector's inherent weaknesses and strengths are, and then incorporate that knowledge into your tactical planning. Start your "getting acquainted with the new detector" stages in an area where you're familiar with the true threats as well as ambient noise (i.e. falses), and work to gain confidence in your new instrument - to learn how it responds, and what such signals/warnings may mean. And as time goes on, start implementing the advanced features and experimenting with their settings to achieve maximum end-user confidence, which is what I consider the ultimate goal.
Back when I was much younger and much more fit ( and weighed a lot less, too :P ), my martial arts master ingrained into me the wisdom of the words: "Train like you fight, and fight like you train."
Although that might seem like a non-sequitur, consider this:
My chosen detector, for going on 4 years now, is the Escort 8500x50. I selected this detector because, from the ride-alongs I've had with friends who owned the V1, I determined that there was no way that my wife - my primary passenger - would put up with that much "noise" coming from the device on a daily basis. Over the years, I've often considered supplementing my countermeasures stock with the purchase of a V1, specifically for use on the highway, when we go on long trips (the V1 also appeals to me tremendously as a "car gadget guy," since so many options are available for its customization/optimization) . However, each time I'm about to pick up the phone to call in the order, I'm reminded of what my Si-Fu said ... and honestly, upon reflection, I would have to say that I would not be able to optimize *MY* usage of the V1 - that I would not be familiar enough with it, used in such an occasional and sporadic manner, to use it to its true potential, and that, in-turn, may cause me to be awarded a ticket, through no fault of the detector.
First and foremost, speed-smart. Next, get a good tool, and learn to use it wisely.
I thank you for having such a high opinion of me, but honestly, I don't deserve it.
In terms of the 9500i versus the 8500x50, currently, there seems to be a bit of a favor on the 9500i in terms of overall sensitivity - whether this will continue to hold (i.e. will this trickle-down to the x50? or will Escort see this as a way to preferentially maintain a performance-gap to their new flagship model, as some carmakers do?) remains a question. Overall, however, the biggest difference is just as you've cited - the various GPS-enabled advance functions that the 9500i is capable of: speed-sensitive band-sensitivity adjustments, known location-marking, and the "TrueLock" feature.
For me, the biggest advantages to owning the 9500i - of which I am planning its purchase in the next few days, to be totally honest (I'm taking advantage of the Escort "Trade-In/Trade-Up" promotional, I still have an old 4500 SuperWide hanging around from my high-school/college days, and I'll be trading that one in, while keeping my current x50 [an early-make Rev5 unit] for both backup as well as use in my wife's car) - will be the speed-sensitive band-sensitivity adjustments (which will greatly please my wife - as my primary passenger; she *really* hates the "annoyance" of "those detectors"
Currently, I am unable to use the 9500i's TrueLock feature - my local enforcers, in two of my most frequented areas during my daily commutes, do utilize a lot of K-band, and as such, I cannot *safely* lock-out the K-band falses which I come upon in such areas, as the TrueLock technology now stands.
This is perhaps best explained by fellow enthusiast RIP-9500I here:
http://www.radarreviews.net/forums/escort-passport-radar/56-9500i-truelock-trick- s.html
In my case, I'm a "high risk scenario," as he so well puts it.
---
Per the legalities of the issue:
I hesitate to express my opinions as I truly believe that as a countermeasures user, I am treading on dangerous ground when things are viewed from the perspective of "the slippery-slope."
Like I said previously, as a car-enthusiast, yes, I've got a couple of catless or partially-de-catted vehicles (sure, they're tuned to the point that they pass even the state's sniffer test, but still, breaking a law is breaking a law) and again, yes, as a driving-enthusiast, I have broken my share of speed limits (OK, so I firmly believe that since I don't want my toddler, who may accidentally step out into our street, run-over by someone who is driving 10+ the 25MPH PSL, that I should in-turn return other parents' and my neighbors' the same courtesy and consideration, and myself not speed through areas such as school-zones, residential side-streets, etc. - but I do confess to exceeding the PSL on open freeways; as such, while I strictly obey some traffic laws, I do, undeniably, break others). As such, I don't think I'm any more morally superior than any other average Joe - so I really can't argue for/against any of this based on such high grounds.
However, on a personal level, speaking purely of my own beliefs and feelings, yes, I also feel the same way as you do, that pure, passive DETECTION should not be illegal. I've tried to formulate, in my own mind, many different arguments in this manner, but I guess the best one I came up with is that I just don't see how it's logical - like you said yourself, those "waves" are openly in the air, so why can't we monitor them?
My belief here, in this respect, is thus very much, I think, like my personal view of red-light cameras. Although I've only ever run two RED lights, in both of those cases, an 18-wheeler (one was a fully-loaded dump-truck, so technically, that wasn't a tractor-trailer combo) in full lock-up was bearing down on me. In both cases, I saw this potential threat, and scanned ahead into the intersection, and made my own saving move when it was in-turn most safe to do so, with minimal, if any, potential safety impact to my fellow motorists. I don't understand the logic of why an otherwise law-abiding citizen would have to potentially go to court to explain away such a circumstance - to me, it's illogical.
But then again, I realize that my own arguments here are on a slippery slope - and this is why I tend to simply shut-up when it comes to issues like these.
You didn't completely miss the mark, upstatedoc, but there should be a little caution taken here, too.
TrueLock does work, but as the technology stands now, there are still some residual risks.
I honestly think that the best approach to learning about the potential issues that may be caused by TrueLock are explained best by fellow countermeasures hobbyist/enthusiast RIP-9500I, whose post on this issue, on a countermeasures Forum, I referenced above:
http://www.radarreviews.net/forums/escort-passport-radar/56-9500i-truelock-trick- - - s.html
Look at his "risk scenarios" presentation - "No Risk," "Low Risk," and "High Risk."
See which of those scenarios best-fits your situation and driving needs, and weigh your own risk-assessment accordingly.
For me, just because of how my local enforcement presents, I fit into the "High Risk" scenario. From the standpoint of how Escort's software/firmware processes TrueLock on the 9500i, I currently, thus, do not feel comfortable using this feature on my daily driving (commute/errands) circuit.
Nevertheless, it can be said that Escort is being very, very professional and very, very responsive to the needs of their product users and enthusiasts/hobbyists (both in terms of cars/driving as well as countermeasures), and have addressed many of the early faults/bugs of the 9500i, at their cost (including shipping), in an effort to truly make this model their flagship item.
Just a few months ago, I was at a point that while I really lusted after the 9500i, I wasn't about to purchase one - and also advised my friends/family of the same - due to the bugs that were still present on the unit. Earlier this month, seeing the evolutionary upgrades/revisions given the 9500i to address the earlier concerns and reading about others' purchases and their satisfaction with the product, I've finally become comfortable with a purchase recommendation, and also had started saving-up for this detector, myself (to replace my Rev5 x50 as my primary detector).
I am honestly going to purchase the 9500i within the next week, taking advantage of their "Trade-In/Trade-Up" program.
I have no doubt that while right now, TrueLock doesn't really fit my precise needs due to the usage-risks involved, that in the near future, this will also be addressed by Escort.
Would you like to explain to me and others what is wrong with a confederate flag on license plates? And what it has to do with Lidar/Radar detectors?
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Although I do have high-hopes for Escort to further refine the TrueLock feature, I am pretty certain that I will not be using that feature, for the time being, on my current everyday drive.
Still, with the speed-sensitive feature, my hopes is that the 9500i will be even quieter than my x50, given my super-dense-"falsing" locale, combined with the fact that for at least 75% of the time, my road-speeds (oftentimes, parking-lot) in such areas should be low enough to render such falsing concerns a thing of the past.
For me, the x50 was - and the 9500i will be - a compromise that I made/make based on my lifestyle needs. Although I would love a detector as sensitive and as tactically-minded as the V1, the fact of having my wife and/or my child in the car with me for most of my non-commute driving and for the fact that my daily commute is so densely populated with false-alerts, having sufficient filtering is something that helps to preserve my sanity (to say nothing of my wife's).
I think that with a detector purchase, with today's technology, everyone should be honest to themselves when examining their true needs and preferences. The fact of the matter is that any and all of the top-flight detectors (and even select "second tier" models) will easily fulfill the performance needs of every last one of us. It's the other aspects of "living with the detector" - the compromises that must be made - that should, IMveryHO, be the basis of the purchase decision.
Don't forget that the Valentine One has two operating modes:
A is for All threats and the one that everyone should use on a highway.
L is for Local driving with reduced sensitivity and fewer alerts (i.e. quieter for the wife) on streets with lots of intrusion alarms.
The V1 also has two adjustable volume controls, one for the main alert signal (I always keep that one at maximum) and a second for the follow-up reminder.
I always drive with the unit in the A mode and just tap the mute button to lower the follow-up volume until it shuts off when I'm past the "threat" and all of the signal strength LEDs are extinguished.
http://www.valentine1.com/lab/MikesLabRpt3.asp
With the ability to initially mute audible warnings for the most false-prone band in terms of in-city use, theoretically, the V1 should prove no more "annoying" to detector non-users/detractors than any other instrument of its genre - and with the active participation of the end-user (i.e. hitting the mute button in-time), it should be, theoretically, just as quiet and well-behaved as a "quieter" detector.
This is what I have wished, myself, but in-execution, I have yet to have a ride-along with anyone using the V1, even with such advanced-programming in-place, in which the ride was as false-free as with even my x50, set to "CityLoX," and with POP alert "off."
I honestly can't say whether or not if this is just the fault of those users - i.e. maybe they don't know how or haven't quite managed to (or haven't had the inclination to - and this is something I'll get to in just a moment) get the settings just right in order to minimize the detector voicing un-necessarily in dense urban areas. I'm, quite frankly, still searching for a ride-along with just such a user - who has optimized their settings so as to be able to satisfy my (or rather, the wifey's) needs in this respect.
Similarly, there are those out there - the purists - who see the behavior of the V1, in reporting EVERYTHING and ANYTHING, as a trait that they are not only willing to live with, but as something that they specifically seek. In this manner, they are perhaps the ultimate detection fanatics in that they want the detector to report everything - including false positives, no matter how numerous - and in-turn use their own judgement and experience to act as the final informational/tactical "filter." Unfortunately for me, the few hard-core countermeasures hobbyists whom I've met or have conversed with, whom I've expressed an interest in seeing just how well a well-programmed V1 can handle my noise-filled daily commute, have been of this conviction, and thus unable to help me.
To me, the Escort detectors that I've chosen are compromises, and I feel that everyone should be honest to themselves in making such decisions and compromises, so that their end-use is, itself, a best-match for their true needs.
Aside: For me, the use of the Escort detectors is also in-part based on my desire to have an integrated threat-indicator/jammer solution when it comes to laser threats. Yes, the V1 is likely the most sensitive detector when it comes to alerting to laser, but it still trails the dedicated laser-receiver models, such as the ZR3 and its fellow Escort sisters, in terms of detection capability (likely due in-part to the V1's typical in-vehicle placement, which will offset it from receiving direct hits and is skewed rather in-favor of trying to catch reflections/deflections/"scatter." In using the ZR3 as a layer of my active laser defense (which includes both the LPP as well as the LI as my true primary jammers), I am actually utilizing its integration into the x50 (and the 9500i) more so that I can get a clear and quick front-vs.-rear threat indication, which will allow me to respond better, tactically, in terms of both locating the threat as well as allowing me to properly disengage from that threat, without compromising protection from the other aspect of the vehicle (note that while my distinct front-and-rear LPP setup, using two separate control boxes, allows for a front-versus-rear set of indicator LEDs to be present on my dashboard, the proximity with which I've mounted them relative to each other does not allow me effective (nor safe/timely) tactical response to an incoming threat in that, visually, it's very hard to reference. This is yet another reason why I am staying with the Escort detectors, yet another reason of my compromise.
And that's my personal concern with my proposed scenario of owning both the x50 and the V1, and using the former exclusively for my usual around-town commutes and errands, and the latter exclusively for highway.
I fear that I will not be able to, thus, optimize my use of the V1, in such a scenario, since I so rarely take extended trips anymore. Furthermore, I am fearful that, therefore, my lack of intimacy with the V1 would also mean that I will not be able to interpret its warnings properly (and/or respond properly).
These are the reasons why, in conjunction with the other listed in my previous posts above, that my current detector is the x50 (and why I am seeking the 9500i as an upgrade). Had my lifestyle and driving preferences/needs been different, it is just as likely that I would use the V1 as my primary detector, or, for that matter, the STi-Driver.
I have nothing against the V1 - it's a tremendously capable detector, and probably the most sensitive of the breed, and furthermore, its directional capability is just a marvel. I have nothing but respect for it. Unfortunately, it is just not a good fit for me.
Cool! Let me know what you think as the miles roll by.
One item of-interest: if for some reason, your delivered unit isn't delivering a smooth, progressive audio ramp-up, please let me know. A good car-buddy of mine recently purchased the 9500i, direct from Escort, and had specifically requested a ramp-up corrected unit, and was delivered one in which the ramp-up issue was not yet addressed. Escort did go all-out to help him solve the issue, but could not avoid the hassle of having his credit-card charged 2x the purchase amount, until the questionable unit was received by Escort (at which time they took off the extra charge, of course).
In any case, regarding Ku-band....
Currently, the only reason for you to enable Ku-band detection would be if you were going off North-America for travel. Luckily for us, Ku-band is not currently in-use here for speed-enforcement. Enabling Ku-band detection on your detector may cause issues with increased falsing, and may potentially also cause your detector to respond just ever so much slower, as it will have yet another segment to scan through.
The audio alert "ramp-up" from the Escort 8500x50 was considered by many enthusiasts to be the model of perfection - a smooth progression based on threat strength/distance.
Imagine a scale/range of audio output, from 1 to 10, with "10" being the "highest" level of alert - a nearly solid and insistant warning tone, whereas "1" is essentially a single, soft, beep.
With a signal detected far-away, but getting closer, the x50 would thus "ramp-up" its audio warning as follows:
1-1-1-1--2-2-2-2-3-3-3-3-4-4-4-4-5-5-5-5-6-6-6-6-7-7-7-7-8-8-8-8-9-9-9-10-10-10-- 10
On the early-release 9500i, many complained that the audio ramp-up was non-linear, reflection, in the same situation, this type of report:
1-1-1-1-4-4-4-4-7-7-7-7-10-10-10-10-10-10-10
While later explainations as to why this kind of audible threat report may have both made-sense, based on several different situations, as well as might have been something that the 9500i's engineers were specifically trying to achieve, most of the loyal Escort users still found themselve wishing that the ramp-up was more akin to that of their beloved x50's - and after a number of complaints by end-users as well as product returns where this "defect" was the one cited as the main reason for return, Escort responded by reverting to the more linear audio ramp-up.
Supposedly, units made after the 4007 (40th week, 2007) date-stamp have the revised (old scheme, like the x50) audio ramp-up in-place already, but there have been a few reports of units having "slipped through," and arriving with the non-linear ramp-up. I *believe* that all "Blue" units already have the revised ramp-up scheme in-place, but again, I cannot be completely sure.
Also, please note that this ramp-up progression issue can also be simply a personal-preference issue. I know of several early-9500i adopters who have elected NOT to send their units back for this revision, specifically because they preferred the non-linear audio warning scheme.
Doh! I'm sorry that your message got deleted - but coming from a fellow "owner of a two-year old toddler" (my beloved baby-Anna will be turning two in just 6 days), I can well-understand, and share the same sigh/laugh that you undoubtedly voiced.
Thank you for your continuing update!
Indeed, the 9500i, by the GOL's latest round of tests, did prove much more sensitive than the x50. I can't help but wonder if this sensitivity improvement may trickle-down to the x50, or if, as with many car manufacturers, they'll keep the x50 "de-tuned" so that there's a performance gap to the flagship model?
In any case, again, I thank you for the continued report!
( PS: Yep, you can indeed turn off the visual speed alert. In anticipation of my coming 9500i, I'd already downloaded its manual from the Escort website, and read through it.
I did order a 9500i, Red, this afternoon. I requested one with the revised (x50-esque) audio ramp-up. Hopefully, I'll get what I asked for.... To Escort's credit, though, their phone operator was very cordial, and was product-knowledgeable.
I am very eager to give this unit a try, however, I'm also somewhat apprehensive.
The Rev5 x50 is regarded very, very highly among countermeasures enthusiasts, and as such, the 9500i will have big shoes to fill. Also, I was just informed today by a fellow BL/BP-chassis Subaru Legacy enthusiast - someone with whom I've only had "e-contact" with but whom I'd consider a true friend - that his 9500i, using the same hardwire setup as his x50, has come up with the often-reported "false Laser-alert on WOT" issue (his Rev5 x50, of the same vintage as mine, never saw this trouble). Although he kindly advised me to wait-out his trouble/fix report, I decided to take the plunge, nonetheless.
It needs to be said that our Subarus - as with many modern-generation FI Subarus - are considered electrically "noisy" vehicles. Although there are those of us who've never experienced such issues, those who have are not, per se, necessarily a minority. Of that unfortunate group, many have been able to "cure" their woes by splicing in some form of in-line electrical filter (i.e. ferrite choke). However, it is speculated by at least one true guru in this area that RF-interference produced by the VEHICLE itself could also be the root-cause of these issues (and may be the true cause in those specific vehicles for which such in-line filters have not worked), and that in these cases, either shutting off the laser detection or sending the unit back to the manufacturer for "tweaking" (often, this means increased shielding around the laser circuitry, and this in-turn translates into decreased sensitivity; my friend was quoted that his laser sensitivity would be decreased by appx. 1/3 that of his current unit's).
I'm begining to understand what you mean by smooth audio ramp-up. The 9500i (at least mine) definitely has a different alert system. Gone are the days when you here just one beep and search for the source then the alarm slowly gets more frantic. This unit likes to scare you right off the bat when it encounters a signal. It's going to take some getting use to.. With the 8500, that flurry of sound meant you were right on top of the signal, not so with the 9500i, Again this unit is much more sensitive than my 8500, blowing it out of the water with it's Ka performance.
Look at the bottom of your unit - there should be a serial-number, with last four digits in the format of XX07. The "XX" part corresponds to the week of the year in which your 9500i was manufactured.
It is rumored that any unit bearing a manufacture week after week 40 (i.e. "4007" = 40th week, 2007) has, as a part of its production-line revision, the smoother, more x50-like ramp-up scheme. My unit, which I just received this past Thursday, bears a 4307 stamp, and it does ramp-up in a manner which is similar to, but still not quite the same as, my x50.
If you'd like to pursue this issue more with Escort, I know that they will reflash your unit's firmware, at their cost, so that you will receive the smoother ramp-up progression, akin to your x50. Just call their customer-service line, and make them aware of the issue. Typical turn-around is within two weeks, I believe, with many fellow hobbyists having reported that they've received their unit back within only about one week.
I unfortunately have not yet had time to test this unit with regard to Ka band performance. A local township uses 35.5 Ghz Ka-band - which is a frequency that gave the x50 some trouble on - but I have not been able to cruise around to test-out the 9500i.... On K band, I'm pretty happy with the 9500i's performance, even when set to "Auto" mode (which greatly enhances the comfort of my daily commute - more on this in just a minute), it seems to pick up K-band threats as fast as/with similar range as my Rev5 x50.
What I've really been able to enjoy the past few days is the quietness of the 9500i. Even with no GPS TrueLock lockouts set on the first day of my commute, I was able to get to work, and then home again, without *any* false alerts. Apparently, during regular-traffic hours, my road-speed is decreased sufficiently that the falses I do encounter are all successfully filtered via the "Auto"Sensitivity mode's road-speed based real-time sensitivity adjustments. Currently, I have 4 X-band signals locked-out (while the OH State Patrol does occasionally use X-band, my local enforcers are exclusively K, Ka, and LASER shooters), which covers the X-band falses on my normal commute, which I can still elicit when I travel those routes during off-traffic hours, which sees increased road-speed (even though I'm still within the PSL).
A good friend of mine, and a fellow BL/BP-chassis turbocharged Subaru Legacy driver unfortunately reported that he is seeing a laser-alert false at WOT. This is a not-uncommon issue with the top-flight Escort products, and was first noted with their 7000-series detectors, but has seemed to continue to present itself through both the x50 as well as the 9500i. My friend also comes from, as I did, an early-make Rev5 x50, which, on his vehicle (on the same exact electrical wiring setup), did *NOT* false laser alert at WOT.
It's rumored that the 9500i is much more laser sensitive than the x50 (and in-particular, the S7 chassis, early-make, Rev5 x50s) - as a remedial measure, Escort has told my friend that they'll "tune" his 9500i so as to hopefully prevent this falsing from taking place, but it will come at the expense of an appx. 30% decrease in laser sensitivity. We currently do not know exactly where this will place his 9500i, in terms of laser sensitivity, when compared with our old Rev5 x50s.
To-date, luckily, I have not yet seen this concern replicated on my own vehicle and with my 9500i/ZR3-integrated setup.
However, in addition to my friend, there are also more than a handful of others (who either are fellow BL/BP, turbocharged, Legacy drivers or owners of other vehicles) who are suffering from this persistent issue with their Escort detectors (x50, 9500i). To me, this is a big disappointment.
For someone like me, where the detector itself is no longer the first line of LASER defense, it really is more of an academic as well as strategic concern (i.e. that one receiver "up high" could help catch the "lucky scatter"). But for those who are relying on the detector as first-line laser defense, this falsing issue could be a serious concern.
One of the things that really gets to me about a detector that falses too much is that as the end-user, we may become de-tuned/de-sensitized to the detector's falses - in essence "lose confidence" in the detector and trying to second-guess it. The "spooky quietness" of the 9500i is something that many have listed as a tactical advantage, for, in this sense, *every* blip on the detector should then be taken seriously.
Living with falses on a detector that is specifically designed to minimize such - be it for reasons of convenience/sanity or for tactical concerns - is, in my most humble view, unacceptable, and I think that it is something that Escort should work to resolve, without degrading the detector's performance.
---
Note that self/end-user effected "fixes" to address this "LASER @ WOT" falsing issue does exist - typically, one uses an in-line filter, such as a Ferrite Choke - to try to suppress the tapped power line's electrical noise, which is one of the biggest (speculated) causes of this problem. Alternatively, it's also been reported that RF interference could also be an issue - but due to the truly random nature (as well as the difficulty involved in tracing it down) of this type of interference, there currently exists no real end-user effected methods of addressing this problem, short of turning off laser reception on the detector.
If you're in "Auto" mode and are at moderate road-speeds (between, reportedly, 25 to 50 MPH), remember that the unit is actively trying to figure-out if the signals it encounters are falses, and this, in and of itself, may cause sufficient temporal delay for you to have traveled "right on top of the target/signal."
---
That's very interesting, what you're reporting about the laser alert behavior on your 9500i, as well as the x50. One can't help but wonder if this is because of RF interference from the actual player itself, or if it is from laser "peeking out" from, say, the player's physical casing (including the disc slot).
Cool!
I've nearly always been a "high mount" kind of guy, so I can't really say that I've ever tried this - or had the detector located in such a way that this may have been an issue. I'll give it a run tonight, though.
What I do know, specific to the BL/BP-chassis Subaru Legacy, is that the '06+ models' navigation screen will set off the laser false.
What are your first impressions of the 9500i? I'm loving the lock-out feature however have not encountered radar/police car in a locked-out area yet. The alerts sound different so that is taking time to get used to. I have also switched to auto mode in the "city" with X turned off completely. Is there any advantage/disadvantage to this? :confuse:
I'm still forming my "first impression" of the detector. I just don't feel like I've logged enough time nor distance behind-the-wheel, with this detector, to have formed a good "bond" with it, just yet.
What little I can tell you, so far:
During my commute, I'm finding that leaving the detector on "Auto" mode was allowing "automatic" silencing of just about all of the falses in my area, during my AM commute hours, due to my lowered road-speed at such times.
During my afternoon as well as off-hours commutes/errands, however, I do reach sufficient road-speed where I'm in that "transition zone" of sensitivity in "Auto" mode, and as such, I will sometimes encounter falses. As such, I've utilized, so far, about a half-dozen marked locations. Almost all are X-band, so I don't have to worry about my local enforcers, but for the two K-band related locations, I've yet to be able to test them for responsiveness to true enforcement signals, since none have yet been present, simultaneously. I also don't know when/if I'll *ever* get a chance confirm, as, for those two spots, I truly rarely see any enforcement activity at all.....
Aside from this, I've truly been enjoying the tremendous increase in K and Ka-band sensitivity, compared to my old x50.
---
With regard to your question -
It's stated that in "Auto" mode, X and K-band sensitivities are speed-dependent. At below 15 MPH - i.e. parking lot speeds - you should have X/K-band falsing only if you're within *very* close proximity to the emitter.
Nevertheless, if your local area truly has no X-band enforcement, completely disabling this particular band, which is the most common cause of in-city falsing, will make your commute quite enjoyable, I'd imagine.