Ask the Car People.SM


Radar/Lidar detectors

1208 messages,  Last post on Jan 09, 2013 at 12:44 PM

You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum.

What is this discussion about? Navigation System

Messages Page 118 of 121

#1168 of 1208 Automode by upstatedoc

Jan 11, 2008 (11:24 am)

I can see how the automode would work in the 9500i because it can tell how fast you're going (GPS), but then how does the x50's automode work?

#1169 of 1208 Re: Automode [upstatedoc] by lgtwrx

Jan 11, 2008 (12:23 pm)

Replying to: upstatedoc (Jan 11, 2008 11:24 am)
The x50's "Auto" mode is a filtering algorithm that is, unfortunately, not speed-dependent. This is where the 9500i's GPS capabilities come into play, as a lot of us Escort fans/users have, in the past, complained about the slight temporal response delay in terms of reporting of the threat signal, when utilizing "Auto" mode, exclusively, for all driving conditions.
 
You can well imagine that that very slight delay/hesitation may not matter much in low-speed, city-driving scenarios, but that it would be of much more concern when at higher road-speeds, on the open highway.
 
With my x50, I used, for my daily commute, the "City" setting, with "LoX" preference, and had to remember to turn the unit over to "Highway" mode when in open-field. On the 9500i, I honestly am very comfortable just leaving it on "Auto" setting, and letting the GPS real-time speed compensation work its magic.

#1170 of 1208 9500i update by upstatedoc

Jan 14, 2008 (11:57 am)

According to the wife-o-meter, the 9500i is more annoying than the x50 which she prefers, apparently, because of its decreased sensitivity. I think this unit is far superior to my 3 year old x50 as far as sensitivity, maybe even straying into V1 territory.

#1171 of 1208 Re: 9500i update [upstatedoc] by lgtwrx

Jan 15, 2008 (6:41 am)

Replying to: upstatedoc (Jan 14, 2008 11:57 am)
^ That's a very interesting observation - and I will have to log more highway (speed) miles, I think, in order to confirm that with my wifey. In-city, the combination of "Auto" mode with the few X-band locked-out spots I have makes for a near-noiseless commute, so definitely, I think this is more scenario-based.
 
With regard to your observation/comparison to our venerable Rev5 x50s, I'd totally agree - Ka-band sensitivity, overall, and also K-band off-axis sensitivity as well seem to be way up compared to my old Rev5 x50, which is about the same "vintage" as yours.
 
I still don't know that it's a match for the V1 just yet, particularly on the open highway, but definitely, Escort did make a progressive step in the right direction between the x50 and this new flagship.

#1172 of 1208 Re: 9500i update [lgtwrx] by upstatedoc

Jan 15, 2008 (7:45 am)

Replying to: lgtwrx (Jan 15, 2008 6:41 am)
In all fairness to V1 owners, I didn't own my V1 long enough to be able to compare it to the new 9500i. One things for sure, if the wife doesn't like the 9500i, she sure as heck wouldn't like the V1.

#1173 of 1208 Blind spot detection by upstatedoc

Jan 15, 2008 (9:28 am)

Does anyone know what band of radar is used with the blind spot detection feature offered on some vehicles? We may see more of this in the future, its a $200 option on some Mazdas now.

#1174 of 1208 Re: Blind spot detection [upstatedoc] by lgtwrx

Jan 16, 2008 (9:35 am)

Replying to: upstatedoc (Jan 15, 2008 9:28 am)
Hi upstatedoc -
 
The radar-based systems, I believe, are in the range to cause falses on K-band. The Audi Q7, for example, uses a "24 GHz" frequency for their system, and it's known to present problems.
 
At the same time, similar laser-based cruise-control or predictive-safety systems found on many Lexus and Infiniti vehicles also can cause falses on both laser detectors as well as jammers.

#1175 of 1208 Which Detector Did They Use? by blane

Jan 16, 2008 (7:02 pm)

The February 2008 Motor Trend magazine has a long article about their 11,306 mile north-south, east-west cross-country road test of a 2008 Chevy Malibu. Here's what they said about some of the tools that they took along:
 
http://tinyurl.com/3b4ltf
 
That's the last of seven pages of the article on their website.

#1176 of 1208 Re: Which Detector Did They Use? [blane] by lgtwrx

Jan 16, 2008 (7:40 pm)

Replying to: blane (Jan 16, 2008 7:02 pm)
^ Easy answer to the "which detector" question - the Valentine 1, as they openly listed.
 
I don't want to link to the Valentine 1 website, directly, here, as I don't know if that's against Forum policy , but you can easily obtain the V1, direct from the manufacturer, by simply Google'ing the detector name.
 
In any case:
 
Most true open-highway warriors will have a strong preference for the V1 due to its extreme sensitivity as well as directional-threat indication (for radar, this is unique to the V1), and, in cases where an active laser jammer is either out of financial reach or illegal (or simply beyond one's "moral/ethical" boundary), the V1's extreme laser sensitivity is a plus, too.
 
For raw sensitivity and unfiltered/"full" informational presentation, the V1 is nearly impossible to beat. Although it is, nevertheless, imperfect, it is so strong in the open-highway scenario that nearly 99% of drivers - even enthusiasts - will need no supplementation when detection is the question. Yes, there are those who actually run the V1 with the Bel STi-Driver (one of the truly rare "magical" combinations that do not cross-interfere with each other) or even use the V1 in conjunction with the remote-mounted Escort SR7/SRX units (to those in detector-legal areas, this is oftentimes considered the true gold-standard, as these two devices pair near perfectly to offer "full-circle" detection, and fills the holes left by the other in a complementary manner), but those are truly few and far in between.
 
The V1's only true weakness, in the open-highway scenario, is that of Spectre radar-detector-detector detectability (which will only matter for commercial vehicle operators or, alternatively, for those who live in detector-banned areas; nevertheless, even the use of the fully-cloaked Bel STi-Driver requires a certain amount of proper tactical execution and discretion).
 
Honestly, if my commute entailed routine open-highway travel, I'd definitely be a V1 user.
 
However, my commute is nearly 90% on local surface streets (and I'm factoring-in even my most typical highway-route errand running). And in as much as Escort's latest commercial video demonstrates (that kind of densely-packed non-LEO signal situation is very much akin to what I must run through, every day, during my commute), I truly need the 9500i's filtering capabilities. And yes, I am well-aware, as per our previous discussions, that the V1 can be programmed, in-depth (even more than to simply select between the various main operating modes), to greatly cut-down on such "annoyance" factors - but as you can read via the discussions here: http://www.radardetector.net/viewtopic.php?t=32993 , such extremes in terms of programming can cause dangerous oversights, as the original poster of that thread very well acknowledged (his goal, as a fellow enthusiast, was not to debate the "V1 versus 9500i" issue, but rather to show how easily one can manipulate such videos to further their own commercial propaganda).
 
There is no perfect detector - everything is a compromise. It's up to the end-user to determine what compromise best-fits their particular threat scenario.
 
---
 
Current rumors have it that the new remote-mounted units from Escort (introduced at this year's CES) may rival or even exceed the current-generation V1 in terms of raw sensitivity, but this remains both to be seen as well as need to be categorized differently, as such remote units offer not only not-insignificant advantages in being able to optimize on-vehicle positioning (particularly if "off-the-books" mounting/setup is taken into account), but are also, literally, many times more expensive than even these top-flight self-contained models.

#1177 of 1208 Re: Which Detector Did They Use? [blane] by lgtwrx

Jan 16, 2008 (8:29 pm)

Replying to: blane (Jan 16, 2008 7:02 pm)
Addition to above -
 
I just finished reading the entire article - most entertaining! I must say that Mr Markus, et. al., certainly have a higher opinion of my fellow commuters here in Cleveland than either myself or most of my fellow driving-enthusiast friends. I wish I saw more of that kind of vehicular/driving courtesy.
 
One point I did want to address with regard to the little blurb about the V1.
 
Mr. Markus mentioned that it is able to discern the frequency of the threat. This is, while true, not completely so - yes, the basic X, K, and Ka-band differentiation, based on frequency, can be made, but the more advanced differentiation between actual, physical, frequncy of the signal is something that is currently the sole ground of the high-end Bel/Escort products, with "SpecDisplay."

Messages Page 118 of 121

To POST a message, please Sign In.

Advertisement

Browse by Category

Browse by Vehicle
   View All Vehicles

Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
View All Topics

Edmunds Community

Advertisement