| Author |
Message |
Mitch Alsup (Mitch_alsup)
Member
Username: Mitch_alsup
Post Number: 735
Registered: 4-2002
| | Posted on Thursday, June 05, 2003 - 11:09 am: | |
"Re Radar detectors and GPS: this combination is already available in Britain"
The most modern version in Britain has cars that detect radar signals send the location of the radar unit to a central website, which then broadcasts that location to everyone receiving certain web-addresses. So you get far-beyond-the-horizon detection capabilities! You can (essentially) drive around knowing where all the radar units are within 200 miles of where you are driving! You don't even NEED a radar detector!!! |
Charles Barton (Airbarton)
Member
Username: Airbarton
Post Number: 548
Registered: 11-2002
| | Posted on Thursday, June 05, 2003 - 9:35 am: | |
David, I think I'll stick with keeping them down then since it has worked just fine up to this point. The 348 really is a great little stealth fighter. The profile of the front end is just about perfect. The biggest issue is the fog lights which are easily dealt with using black electical tape. |
Jason Fraser (Jfraser)
Member
Username: Jfraser
Post Number: 388
Registered: 3-2001
| | Posted on Thursday, June 05, 2003 - 3:06 am: | |
Dennis,
"As it stands, I've got the V1 hardwired in two vehicles (thanks, Charles!!!). If I need to park in an area where I don't feel completely safe, I (a) unplug the power wire from the V1, like a phone jack, and (b) slide it out of the mount (or remove the mount too. 3 seconds. And I save at least $500."
....That's great if you're a diligent individual that makes sure everytime the car is driven the radar is mounted and switched on....I on the otherhand am a lazy bastard, and I guarantee, the one time I don't bother to reconnect the radar is the time that I get stopped....It doesn't matter what increased range you believe the V1 has if it ain't switched on and it's sitting in the glovebox......
"If you browse around the Escort site, you can find links to some positive reviews, but there are NO reviews that compare the SR1/SRX to the Valentine 1."
....I don't need to read a review I have owned both systems, and given my criteria, the SR1 was my preference!!
|
david handa (Davehanda)
Member
Username: Davehanda
Post Number: 896
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 04, 2003 - 7:42 pm: | |
Charles,
I think Dennis sited the C&D article that mentioned the minor benefit of running with your highbeams and driving lights on (less so with low beams). It definitely reduced the effective range of the laser. But, running with your highbeams on, may have it's own negatives of making you more noticeable, and new laser guns (the C&D article was a few years ago) may not be as affected by this. |
wm hart (Whart)
Intermediate Member
Username: Whart
Post Number: 1192
Registered: 12-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 04, 2003 - 7:37 pm: | |
This thread is way too long for me to review in full, but has anyone already noted ultrasmith, who does stealth installs of the V-1, with the display in the rearview mirror, and all else hidden? That's the direction i'm going next.... |
Ben Lobenstein 90 TR (Benjet)
Intermediate Member
Username: Benjet
Post Number: 1156
Registered: 1-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 04, 2003 - 6:59 pm: | |
Mitch I was totally thikning that same thought (well ok minus the part about YOU doing the code).
-ben |
Charles Barton (Airbarton)
Member
Username: Airbarton
Post Number: 546
Registered: 11-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 04, 2003 - 2:27 pm: | |
Don, yes of course if you have pop-up head lights you would think they would be best down. What I was trying to figure out was if there was any trade off between CW jamming effect and the lower reflectivity of having them down. Which do you think will yeild a better benefit? |
Dennis (Bighead)
Junior Member
Username: Bighead
Post Number: 125
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 04, 2003 - 2:11 pm: | |
Re Radar detectors and GPS: this combination is already available in Britain, and possibly elsewhere. It's designed mostly for speed cameras; users can download updates to the unit, and it warns you of known speed camera locations. I dunno any more details; if anyone cared, I'm sure more info is available via google.
I've said before, I'm sure Mike Valentine is sitting in his basement, working on the Valentine Two, with build-in GPS. You can program in "known" false alarms; great for those incredibly annoying radar transponders attached to flashing road signs on the highway.
vty,
--Dennis |
Marq J Ruben (Qferrari)
Member
Username: Qferrari
Post Number: 377
Registered: 2-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 04, 2003 - 1:26 pm: | |
Oooooh! I like that idea, Mitch!!
|
Mitch Alsup (Mitch_alsup)
Member
Username: Mitch_alsup
Post Number: 728
Registered: 4-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 04, 2003 - 1:14 pm: | |
With todays technology in laptop computers and radar/laser detectors AND GPS navigation systems:
It SHOULD be possible to hook up a V1-like system to the laptop running a navigation system and have the position of the radar/laser plotted on the screen!
The Detector only needs to give the navigation software a direction and distance approximation, the navigation software displaies a big red dot/elipse. Multiple hits would result in different collored dots.
Imagine driving down the road across from a big strip mall and having all the store dore openers blink at their locations, and STILL be able to pick out the police car in the middle of the parking area!
The compute power to do this is readily available. The Navigation software and GPS receivers are redily available. All we need is for a radar/laser detector manufcture (V1 please) to put the output of the detector on a USB-II port, and have some geek (like me) write some software to put the two systems together. |
Don Vollum (Donv)
Junior Member
Username: Donv
Post Number: 99
Registered: 1-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 04, 2003 - 12:35 pm: | |
Unless, of course, you have pop-up headlights. |
Charles Barton (Airbarton)
Member
Username: Airbarton
Post Number: 545
Registered: 11-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 04, 2003 - 10:44 am: | |
Here is an interesting tid bit about the possibility of headlights effecting a laser gun. Headlights aimed into .5 by .2 radian distribute their power over 0.1 steradians, at 250 meters range, this illuminates 6000 square meters or 10^(-6) of the police receiving aperture. 200 Watt lights put 200 microWatts into the gun. The gun has a narrow band filter passing about 10 nanometer of the spectrum, reducing this CW jammer by a factor of about 40, meaning that the light is now 5 microWatts. The detector is AC coupled so we calculate the shot noise due to this background ShotNoise = SQRT[RecievedPower * PhotonEnergy * MeasurementBandwidth] Sqrt[5. Micro Watt PlanckConstant SpeedOfLight/(900 Nano Meter)*30 Giga Hertz] = 0.200 microWatt equivalent optical power. This is small compared to the 25 microWatts return from a license plate. This would tend to support the argument that they don't effect the gun. One other thing to note about the gun is that it is tuned to one frequency of 904nm so even though the headlights are emmitting IR the only IR from the headlights that would be visible to the gun is the 904nm wavelength. I have not yet been able to varifiy this but I suspect headlights have very little, if not zero impact on the gun. I would really like more info on this Because if it turns out that headlights do effect the gun, then you would think it might be a good idea to turn them on during the daytime. |
Dennis (Bighead)
Junior Member
Username: Bighead
Post Number: 124
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 04, 2003 - 10:20 am: | |
last, QUICK post before I have to run. To John Roberts:
if you're concerned about size and falsing, consider that the V1 is actually, dimensionally, SMALLER than some other detectors, including several Passport models. And as for Falsing, as I said below, there are three levels of sensitivity AND if that's STILL not enough, you can program the unit to be even LESS sensitive.
And, as for battery operated detectors, beware: sensitivity is typically significantly reduced in battery powered units (at least it was in the original Solo), and degraded as the battery died down. As for practicality, it might be really useful for people who rent cars and such, but it really is very little effort to hardwire your cars for a regular unit.
vty,
--Dennis |
Dennis (Bighead)
Junior Member
Username: Bighead
Post Number: 123
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 04, 2003 - 10:15 am: | |
.
Oh, and, with all due respect to Messrs. Jason Fraser and Chris Pounds, here's what I wrote about the Passport SR1/SRX:
___________________
Posted on Thursday, March 27, 2003 - 11:22 pm:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I posted this on the FerrariList last February.
-----Original Message-----
Sent: Thursday, February 28, 2002 2:45 PM
Subject: RE: Valentine One Source?
Brian wrote:
> Have any of y'all heard of the Passport SRX? I don't all the particulars,
> but I believe it has 3 sensors for the front of the car and 1 for the rear.
> It can detect and reflect the radar signal essentially making you
> "invisible". As I said, I haven't completely studied the info, but we are
> selling the hell outta them. I think they're $1900 installed.
> I can find out more if anyone is interested.
Charles added:
I think finding out more is an absolute necessity. It can't make you
invisible if it's not an active jammer, and active jammers are illegal (FCC
unlicensed radar transmitter), so I doubt they would be marketing it or you
would be selling it - too much liability.
Is it just a fancier K-40 type with the multiple antennas?
_________
The Passport SRX is, as you point out, a K-40 type detector with multiple antennas (but not even as good as a K40!! See below). It is NOT a _radar_ jammer; what it calls its "laser shifter" is, in fact, a laser jammer -- though they don't come out and say that in so many words. While radar jammers violate FCC regulations, the FCC does not regulate laser usage (that's up to the FDA), so jamming lasers is not illegal. The SRX is a radar detector, laser detector, and laser jammer.
Escort also sells the laser jamming portion separately, for $500 (MSRP, installed) -- the ZR3. The MSRP for the full Passport SRX, installed, is $1500. The MSRP for the Passport SR1 is $1000, installed. What is the SR1? Well, the laser jammer alone is $500, the full SRX is $1500, but the SR1 is $1000 -- take a guess. Yup, it's just the radar and laser detector portion of the system, without the jammer gear.
If you browse around the Escort site, you can find links to some positive reviews, but there are NO reviews that compare the SR1/SRX to the Valentine 1.
Here's where the SR1/SRX totally FAILS, in my judgment; it has modules for front and rear LASER detection, but only one module (front) for RADAR protection. The number of Laser hits from the rear are incredibly, incredibly rare, but radar from the rear is not uncommon. So, how does the Passport protect you from the rear?? Using only one radar module, mounted somewhere in the front grille area, with all that metal shielding it from radar signals from the rear??? If you take a look at their literature, Passport relies on REFLECTIONS from radar signals from the rear -- reflections that bounce off trees, signs, overpasses, trucks, etc., to alert you to police behind you. Great....
Also, while Passport has finally gotten around to building a display that can show the NUMBER of radar signals, it still does not tell you WHERE the signals are coming from -- a critical feature, IMHO.
As for cost, $1900 or $1500 or even $1000 is ridiculous, IMHO. If I really wanted a mounted detector, I'd get a V1 with the hidden display module, and hit the V1 box somehere in the cabin -- one guy did it in a box of tissues, another guy did it in his center-high-mounted-rear-brake-light box. You can get the remote display embedded in your rearview mirror for a really trick installation too. And it'd still be WAY less than the SRX or the SR1. If I lived in a jurisdiction with signficiant Laser problems, I might consider the ZR3 jammer system, but I'd also look at the much cheaper license-plate laser jammer systems.
Lastly, I don't know where the hell you'd mount a K40 or SR1/SRX on some modern mid/rear engined cars. The front radar module can't be blocked by metal; I'm trying to picture where on my 355 it would go. Maybe, on Ferraris, they mount them behind the bumper. Also, the HIGHER the receiver, the more effective it is.
As it stands, I've got the V1 hardwired in two vehicles (thanks, Charles!!!). If I need to park in an area where I don't feel completely safe, I (a) unplug the power wire from the V1, like a phone jack, and (b) slide it out of the mount (or remove the mount too. 3 seconds. And I save at least $500. And I can take it with me on trips with a rental car, or use one detector for multiple vehicles. Still, I suppose there are those drivers who just really enjoy a simple, installed radar solution, even if it doesn't provide as much information/warning -- the ease of living with a fully-installed detector makes up for it, I guess, in their minds.
That's my $.02....
======================
Subsequently, Graham added:
>I can personally vouch for the fact that you can't mount the SR1 on a 355.
Period. There is a huge steel bar behind the bumper that makes installation
impossible there due to the depth of the detector unit. I gave up and stuck
with my Valentine.
vty,
--Dennis
|
Hans E. Hansen (4re_gt4)
Intermediate Member
Username: 4re_gt4
Post Number: 1450
Registered: 4-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 04, 2003 - 10:12 am: | |
Edit: Oops. Dennis beat me to it. Nevermind.
John: Radartest.com has had their objectivity questioned. I don't know the details, don't know if they are right or wrong, etc., etc., but look at Valentine's web site, as they reference radartest.com's comments. |
Dennis (Bighead)
Junior Member
Username: Bighead
Post Number: 122
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 04, 2003 - 10:10 am: | |
.
ok.... If anyone STILL believes in radartest.com, check out:
http://www.ferrarichat.com/discus/messages/251280/224293.html
And if you don't want to bother going back to that link, or searching in the archives here or on FerrariList, here's what I actually wrote:
_____________________
Posted on Thursday, March 27, 2003 - 11:26 pm:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And, FWIW, I totally agree with Mitch - radartest.com is BOGUS. Check the archives here or at FerrariList. I've posted this a few times:
=====================
Kris wrote:
>There is a new passport out that is supposed to be better than the V1.
It's about the same price I think.
>http://www.highperformanceparts.net/Escort/8500.html
>Here is a better link for comparing RDs.
>http://www.radartest.com/DS4HEM.html
_____________
The topic of "which radar detector" comes up on the F-List pretty frequently. For more info, interested parties can check the archives (both on the Ferrari List and here on the rennlist, but here's what I wrote previously:
+++++++++++
Bill wrote in response to my defense of the V1:
>Well, no. The report was on a website and I cannot find the darned link.
It was a head to head done recently. And the V1 lost.
>Ah. Here it is:
http://www.radartest.com/
>The V1 does not justify the increased cost, IMHO. And it is also bulkier.
FYI, Craig Peterson is the man behind the radartest site. There has been some controversy surrounding him; see:
http://www.valentine1.com/lab/V1Hater.asp
for Mike Valentine's refutation. Is this a situation of "he said, he said"? Well, you be the judge. In every single quantitative test conducted by every single magazine that I've seen or heard of (admittedly, not a scientific sampling, but still), the Valentine 1 has come out as the overall winner -- EXCEPT for those tests that Peterson conducts. Interesting that he ALONE picks other detectors, while Car & Driver, Road & Track, Bimmer and other magazines all have ranked V1 first?
Additionally, you'll see that he points out lots of problems with Craig Peterson's "test". Among the most glaring: Peterson
stated that the V1 was "by far the largest and heaviest unit tested...", much like what you stated above about the V1 being bulkier.
The truth? According to Valentine, "On our scale, Passport is heaviest at 8.9 ounces followed by V1 at 8.6 and the BEL at 8.0. Only V1 has a metal case (magnesium), the others are plastic. Passport is also the longest by a huge margin at 5.29 inches, followed by the BEL at 4.72 inches. V1 is shortest at 4.46 inches, more than a quarter inch shorter than the BEL and nearly an inch shorter than Passport. In thickness, all are within 0.1 of an inch (V1 is thickest). Only in width is V1 significantly larger than the others, but the difference between them is less than the difference in length."
So, by "bulkier", do you mean the V1 is lighter and shorter, but .1" thicker and slightly wider?
And, as Valentine states, "If [Peterson] can't get a simple comparison of dimensions right, imagine the reliability of his performance testing."
Well, then, is the V1 worth the extra $100? For that extra $100, whether or NOT the V1 is more sensitive, you also get the ability to detect the DIRECTION from which the radar is coming, as well as the NUMBER of sources of emissions. Both of those features are worth far more to me than, arguendo, any marginal extra sensitivity (which, IMHO, the Passport does NOT have).
Bottom line, the "testing" you cite comes from an industry consultant who has worked for, and received payment from, Escort, but has never worked for Valentine. Again, in all of the other tests that I've seen --other than Peterson's--, the V1 has come out on top, including those tests run by the incredibly independent techno-geeks at Car & Driver.
vty,
--Dennis
. |
Dennis (Bighead)
Junior Member
Username: Bighead
Post Number: 121
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 04, 2003 - 10:03 am: | |
.
1. Vincent, I dunno if you're kidding or not, but in case you aren't, Valentine 1 is the only rational way to go.
2. Valentine sells ONLY directly to the consumer. It does not wholesale to ANYONE; if you want one, you have to pay $399 to Valentine. That's why you never see them for sale anywhere else, from Wal-Mart to high-end car audio shops (or, if you do, they cost AT LEAST $399). If anyone claims to have them at a discount, it's either USED V1s or else they're selling at a loss for some reason. Agree with this policy or not, Valentine is the only place to get one.
3. eBay can be a place to save a few bucks, but do make sure that you're getting all the accessories, and, as has been noted, make sure that you're buying a CURRENT version.
4. With all due respect, Modified348ts (Modman), I completely disagree with your position. You and I and everyone else out here each has our own anecdotal experience, the value of which is limited by the speeds and conditions under which we are traveling. Someone who drives at 12 mph over the limit in Kansas is going to have a different experience than someone who drives 18 mph over in Norther California and someone who does 100+ regularly in suburban Boston.
Of course, of course, the best way to protect yourself against speeding tickets is (aside from not speeding) to drive INTELLIGENTLY and keep your eyes open. But a good detector is INVALUABLE in ADDING to that base level of protection. I won't reference my own experience here, but I will ask a question. If an officer has set up radar up around the bend, wouldn't it be too late for you by the time you visually spotted her? If a detector could have warned you of the emissions a mile back, couldn't you have slowed down and avoided it? This is not to say that you should be relying blindly on your detector; rather, it's a TOOL to help you in your travels.
So, (a) drive observantly, (b) constantly scan to see if any marked or unmarked cars are traveling in front or behind of you, (c) use "rabbits" intelligently, (d) remember regular locations where cops are parked, (e) don't weave in and out of lanes or do other things to show your hand, and (f) learn HOW to WISELY use a really good detector (V1, but any is better than none).
Anyone who, on an absolute basis, refutes the (at least incremental) utility of a detector has his head stuck in the sand.
vty,
--Dennis
.
|
john roberts (Jr328gtb)
New member
Username: Jr328gtb
Post Number: 27
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 04, 2003 - 9:58 am: | |
At the risk of starting this argument again, radartest.com rates the passport products, 8500 and Solo 2 significantly ahead of the V1
my concerns about the V1 were echoed on the site...false alarms and size.
i am now leaning towards the solo2 because i like the wireless functionality a lot |
Modified348ts (Modman)
Member
Username: Modman
Post Number: 622
Registered: 11-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 04, 2003 - 2:19 am: | |
Radar detectors are for those who don't pay attention to their driving, if you pay attention you won't need it. Radar detectors do not detect undercover vehicles which will find you before you find them. I've never needed one and never will, don't care for them. Radar detectors are useless in my area, if you speed and don't know what you're doing, you will either get caught or end up in jail. I know a lot of people with the best radar detectors, even the valentine, get caught. If I was to patrol the freeway daily, I'd run out of ticket slips to give out but the reality is that certain cars are passed up for others even when found speeding. Fortunately I know several patrol officers from different organizations and learned their ways of what they look for and how they go after speeders. In our area there are several undercover vehicles on the freeway looking for speedsters and you can forget about your radar detector, it won't help you but help the manufacturer of the device more than it will help you. As a tip, pay attention to your driving and your surroundings before punching the pedal. I always speed but I know when to do it and know my limitations also. |
Vincent (Vincent348)
Member
Username: Vincent348
Post Number: 496
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 04, 2003 - 1:20 am: | |
One more time. Which one is the best? |
89TCab (Jmg)
Member
Username: Jmg
Post Number: 473
Registered: 9-2001
| | Posted on Wednesday, June 04, 2003 - 12:57 am: | |
Order directly from V1 or if you decide to go ebay, make sure the serial number is that of a the 1.8 spec unit (check out upgrades on their site) otherwise it will cost you $$$ to upgrade.
(Not complaining about upgrade price...just aksing you to be wary.)
- JMG |
David C. (Worth_it)
Junior Member
Username: Worth_it
Post Number: 139
Registered: 10-2002
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 03, 2003 - 11:03 pm: | |
The web site or by phone directly to Valentine - they do not use re-sellers. E-bay may save you a few bucks but why wait and drive a day longer without the device.
They also ship within a day of your order. My order was very fast and received e-mails confirming the order and later with shipping information. Don't wait.
By the way thanks for starting the thread. I now know more trivial BS and factual BS then I thought was available on this topic.
|
Brad Taylor (Btaylor74)
New member
Username: Btaylor74
Post Number: 11
Registered: 5-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 03, 2003 - 10:46 pm: | |
I'm the guy who opened up this can of worms last Saturday. Based on the feedback I've received from this post I am sold on the V-1. Now my next question is...is the Valentine Website the only way you can go about purchasing one? Are they available thru retailers? I see some on Ebay for a few bucks cheaper, but I notice different release versions. |
BILL CHIUSANO (My355)
Junior Member
Username: My355
Post Number: 111
Registered: 3-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 03, 2003 - 10:35 pm: | |
very simple VALENTINE 1
|
Dr. J C928 (Attitude928)
New member
Username: Attitude928
Post Number: 39
Registered: 11-2002
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 03, 2003 - 9:33 pm: | |
While traveling west over the lower level of the Verrazano Bridge this AM, the usual 1 car speed trap was expanded to a 3 car trap. Two police cars were scattered in the left lane on the bridge (which is coned off because of chronic construction) and the last car was waiting down in the toll plaza. As I slowly passed the middle police car, I noticed in my rear view mirror that he had a red beam on facing foward in his car. Was he shooting laser at the back of my car, or is radar red? |
Jason Fraser (Jfraser)
Member
Username: Jfraser
Post Number: 385
Registered: 3-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 03, 2003 - 9:10 pm: | |
"R&T did a test on the laser jammers, and found no real effective defense aginst laser"
I don't know what R&T tested, or maybe they forgot to switch the unit on, but a good laser diffuser DOES work.....I posted a thread a couple months ago, about how I was targeted on Sunset Blvd..... I got a warning alarm, and an activation alarm....Did it work?....when I looked in the rearview mirror the cop was looking at his unit with total surprise....He had clearly got an error message....Same exact thing occurred on PCH (and I was speeding when I got targetted)......Highly recommend a good laser jammer |
david handa (Davehanda)
Member
Username: Davehanda
Post Number: 890
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 03, 2003 - 7:29 pm: | |
Hans,
As I previously stated, the WA State Patrol has been doing the same thing, using X-band guns as most folks ignore x-band alerts, or set their radar detector to be very insensitive to x-band.
Not common, but I come across it two or three times a year around the State for the past three or four years. |
Hans E. Hansen (4re_gt4)
Intermediate Member
Username: 4re_gt4
Post Number: 1446
Registered: 4-2002
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 03, 2003 - 6:51 pm: | |
RE: X-band. I found an Oregon State trooper using instant-on X-band. Didn't know this existed, as I've always heard that instant-on was K or Ka. Little doubt about it. I was facing the cop, and as some cars passed, I'd get a momentary strong X-band signal. Happened about a half dozen times before I moved on. This was way out in farm country, so little chance of interference. Was a brand new cop car. I thought they would equip new cars with the latest. |
P. Thomas (Ferrari_fanatic)
Member
Username: Ferrari_fanatic
Post Number: 340
Registered: 4-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 03, 2003 - 2:19 pm: | |
R&T did a test on the laser jammers, and found no real effective defense aginst laser (it was supposed to trick the laser and give off a bogus #.) They saw a nominal benefit in the license plate frames, blankets, etc. |
Mitch Alsup (Mitch_alsup)
Member
Username: Mitch_alsup
Post Number: 722
Registered: 4-2002
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 03, 2003 - 1:58 pm: | |
"all US manufactured guns use a 904 nanometer laser. This is outside of the visible light range which of course headlights are."
You should know that both regular bulbs and Halogen bulbs produce more energy in the infrared than in the visible region of the spctrum. And 904nm is not that far from the visible 750-790nm edge the human eye can see. |
david handa (Davehanda)
Member
Username: Davehanda
Post Number: 888
Registered: 5-2001
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 03, 2003 - 11:44 am: | |
Dennis,
WA State Patrol hit cars from the rear with laser occaisionally on I-5, usually hiding behind a stand of trees, or just parked on the median strip, behind a small rise.
here is an interesting link to laser countermeasures:
www.audiworld.com/news/03/lidatek
|
Charles Barton (Airbarton)
Member
Username: Airbarton
Post Number: 544
Registered: 11-2002
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 03, 2003 - 11:41 am: | |
Here's another one that talks about reducing reflectivity
http://www.realbig.com/miata/1994-09/702.html |
Charles Barton (Airbarton)
Member
Username: Airbarton
Post Number: 543
Registered: 11-2002
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 03, 2003 - 11:24 am: | |
Here's one I found that did a study on countermeasures
http://www.laseradar.com/laser_wars.htm |
Dennis (Bighead)
Junior Member
Username: Bighead
Post Number: 119
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 03, 2003 - 11:11 am: | |
Two quick points:
1. Dr. JC: laser only works from the front and rear, like radar. I've never heard of anyone being shot with laser from the rear. Mike Valentine acknowledges that, though the V1 provides rear laser detection capability, the likelihood of that happening is extremely rare. The only time I've picked up a REAR laser warning is when there was a cop shooting ONCOMING cars, and I got a "bounce" signal. There is at least one jammer that is upgradable to front and rear protection.
I've been told that:
>the only laser jammer on the market that really works is a 'Blinder M10'. Tiger Lily Products, Inc. has the Blinder for $295. Their phone number is 307-772-9970. Try www.1-radar-laser-jammers-detectors.com for more info. I believe the testing lab is called 'Speed Measurement Labs'.
I have no experience with the Blinder myself, but will probably get one or two this month to evaluate.
2. Headlights CAN blind some lasers, or at least diminish their effectiveness. When C&D did a test a few years back (Laser guns may have improved since the test), they found that lights do cut effectiveness by some amount, which varied. A black car with no reflective surfaces and big-a$$ rally driving lights that will sear the back of your cornea DID totally defeat the laser, but is, clearly, unusable on the road.
vty,
--Dennis |
Charles Barton (Airbarton)
Member
Username: Airbarton
Post Number: 542
Registered: 11-2002
| | Posted on Tuesday, June 03, 2003 - 11:05 am: | |
One thing to note though. The laser does need some sort of reflective surface to bounce the light off of such as a headlight or license plate. There was an interesting test done by one of the developers of the diffusor. If I'm not mistaken the test showed it was possible to defeat the laser 90% of the time by reducing the reflectivity of the vehicle. What they did was remove all the crome and the front license plate, taped over the headlights with black tape, used a black vehicle, ect. I'll try to go back and find it if I can and post a link. |
|
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page