INTRO Thanks to @nbulatovic and his EFL tool, I was able to do this comparative testing yesterday on the Van Alstyne course. I had rolled my Max 360 back to 1.5 FW, and had a laptop with me to use his tool to update to 1.6 in the field as I tested. (EDIT: 9/20/2017 - we now now that 1.5 requires a rollback of the Antenna fw to 1.1. That was not done for these tests, so you need to understand that what we thought was 1.5 and I tested here was not really 1.5 as it would be if you never updated to 1.6). THE DETECTOR Escort Max 360 FW 1.5 and FW 1.6 THE COURSE Well, you seen it before, it’s the Van Alstyne course in Van Alstyne, TX. It’s a nice, long (3 miles), straight course, with some dips and high spots along the way. There are various points on the course where a sensitive detector can catch a signal, and some points where it can’t. I spent about the first 45 minutes of my test time trying to set things up to get some proper separation. For whatever reason, the spot I had the radar gun last time wasn’t working too well, and the detections were quite short. I ultimately had to move the radar gun to a higher point a bit closer to the road. And I decided to use my MPH Python II FS for this test rather than my Bushnell (as was used in the last). I’ve marked them on a map of the course below, so you can visually see where the potential detection points for the Max 360 are, and the dead spots in between where there’s no way it’s going to catch a whiff of the radar signal. These may have shifted a bit with the new radar gun placement, but are generally still correct. RESULTS K-band On-Axis K-band Commentary · With the new radar gun placement, Hwy mode with either FW produced some long detections. All Hwy mode runs for each FW alerted soon after starting the course with a couple of exceptions. There were a couple of anomalous runs with FW 1.5 in Hwy mode that were shorter. However, Hwy mode suddenly looks like maybe no sensitivity haircut between 1.5 and 1.6 in this testing, despite anecdotal evidence to the contrary. · Auto mode looks to be another story, however. Auto mode for 1.6 was the worst of all modes for either FW with the exception of one 1.5 Auto run, which still equaled the best 1.6 Auto run. And for 1.6, Auto with TSR on was the worst. · For the Auto mode runs, I did give them some extra length at the beginning of the course to get up to speed (at least 60 mph) for a few runs until it became apparent that it wouldn’t matter. Auto mode never came close to alerting near the course start. All the Auto runs were at at least 60 mph and usually closer to 70 mph. FINAL THOUGHTS Initially, we thought FW 1.6 in Hwy mode had taken a haircut vs. 1.5. Now on this test at least, that doesn’t look to be the case. Hwy mode for 1.5 and 1.6 generally looked the same. Auto mode does look to have taken a haircut to sensitivity in FW 1.6, but I was surprised at the difference between Hwy and Auto for 1.5. Again, tending to indicate Hwy and Auto have never been that close in detection distance for the Max 360. I expect some folks to wonder if nbulatovic’s tool and fw images do what they are supposed to do, and whether these results can be counted on to accurately reflect the true state of affairs between FW 1.5 and FW 1.6. All I can say is that Max 360 appears to work as it should with either FW image loaded. However, I will have a Max 360 that hasn’t been updated to 1.6 yet, in my hands soon, and will be testing it and then updating it in the field, hopefully using DT so there will be no question of whether thing are as they are supposed to be. I will end with my usual admonishment: This is just one test. You need to look at various tests, by various people, at various times, on various courses to try to get to a complete picture of a detector. So make sure to do your research, look at as many tests as you can, and find out as much information as you can.