[Shotimes] Radar/Laser Detectors

[D Potter]

Oh, I know the rules of propogation and detection very well. I was
commenting on what seem to be a contradiction, though, in that the more
expensive valentine type units are superior, yet a test consisting of two
exact same cars, side by side on a road, would not be considered a valid
test. When I was in the service, the only thing we counted were the real
world tests.

Now, if you are getting at the fact that "holes" exist in a propogated
wave's coverage due to reflections and impedances, you are correct, but the
problem with this test is that the cars were moving (at quite a fast rate)
and any "gaps" in the signal would have been passed on the order of parts of
a second. Even if you were to block one car from the signal, it should
stilll pick up reflections coming off cars in the other lane.

 Yes, quality makes a difference, which is why I suggest Whistler after
ripping mine apart. Is a valentine better? Probably. Do I really need the
30% extra detection distance the V1 provides? Two miles is plenty of
distance for me. Does the guy/gal that just tosses their detector up on the
dash "wherever" need a V1? Most likely.

For a little more than the cost of a V1 you can get a half-decent scanner
and always know when a cop is around by picking up their trunking signal. Of
course, they could be up to 5 miles away, and nowhere near your road, but
you'd know they were there as long as their comms were up and running.



----- Original Message -----
From: "Donald Mallinson" <dmall@mwonline.net>
To: <shotimes-admin@autox.team.net>
Cc: <shotimes@autox.team.net>
Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 7:16 PM
Subject: Re: [Shotimes] Radar/Laser Detectors


> A controlled situation has the detectors tesed in the same
> exact car, same location on the dash/window, at the same
> location on the road.
>
> When cars are side by side, they are several feet apart.
> Different location.  Yes you can predict where radar will go
> when you KNOW the situation, but going 130+ on a public
> highway isn't a controlled situation.  Make sense?
>
> As for $50 detector being just as good, most tests prove
> that there is a big difference in how far away and in what
> situations different detectors will pick up the signal.
> This isn't guessing, this is reality.
>
> So if a $50 unit is just as good as the most expensive, why
> not use them in aircraft in the military?  If you really are
> a radar technician, and I have no reason to doubt it, then
> you should know that quality does count in detectors.
>
> And as has been said a lot, there are a lot of good
> detectors out there.  You don't have to have a V1 to find
> out if there is radar in the area.  You want more
> information than that, you need something other than a $50 unit.
>
> Don Mallinson
>
> D Potter wrote:
> > Well, Don, if this situation of two SHO's being next to each other isn't
a
> > good enough test, then neither are any tests that have been performed on
the
> > units. If radar waves behave in odd ways in uncontrolled situations,
then no
> > amount of testing will tell you which system performs best on the road.
I
> > guess that's why my $50 unit works as well as any $300 unit.
> >
> > Then again, when I worked for unca sam as a RADAR technician, I was
always
> > told that there was no such thing as uncontrolled situations, but that
> > failures would come from unobservant users.
> _______________________________________________
> Shotimes mailing list
> Shotimes@autox.team.net
> http://www.team.net/mailman/listinfo/shotimes