R3 performance reduction on 1.46

flagator10

Learning to Drive
General User
Joined
Oct 10, 2017
Messages
10
Reaction score
30
New to the forum but have been a V1 user since it's inception. Bought the R3 last year and have loved it ever since.
But the upgrade to 1.46 definitely has some degradation in certain performance areas as many have noted. I did the firmware update and then went on a 500 mile round trip this weekend and really felt uneasy about a few Ka encounters I received on 34.7 that were in very close range before I picked them up. That said today I pulled out my 35.5 Kustom, 34.7 Stalker, and 24.120 Stalker radars to test response time.

I was blown away with the difference in speed from 1.46 and 1.37. 1.37 has always been instantaneous on 34.7 and 35.5 which is one of the reasons I put the V1 in storage as the signal speed pickup between the V1 and R3 was no comparison.

With 1.46, I was shocked to see that there was a significant lag time on both 35.5 and 34.7.
Both sometimes lagged over half a second before they picked up in 1.46. K band on 24.120 took over a second to register a signal, I tried multiple setting recommendations, but could not get it to improve. So I went back to 1.37 and conducted the same tests. Just like old times, it is super fast at picking up a signal! And better yet, it's almost impossible to quick trigger 1.37 and not get a signal on any band. This test verified my intuition this weekend, as I just felt something was not the same with the close proximity of alerts I was receiving.
 

Deadhead1971

Three Sheets to the Wind
Advanced User
Joined
Dec 7, 2014
Messages
3,509
Reaction score
5,971
Location
Central NC
Thanks for the info. Something to keep an eye on and see what others have to say. I didn’t stay long on 1.46.

I had comparable alerts on 34.7 and 35.5 so I did not notice anything strange. Did you reset to factory settings after the update?
 

flagator10

Learning to Drive
General User
Joined
Oct 10, 2017
Messages
10
Reaction score
30
Yes I did and made sure settings were the same as before the update. I even played with K filtering, and Pop settings, even Redlight camera, all with no improvement.
Hoping I'm not the only one with this experience but wanted to post it for reference and to see if anyone had any other thoughts.
It was a piece of cake to revert back to 1.37 prior to waiting for a better consensus on 1.46
 

Preston Witham

Learning to Fly
Beginner User
Premium Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2018
Messages
133
Reaction score
124
New to the forum but have been a V1 user since it's inception. Bought the R3 last year and have loved it ever since.
But the upgrade to 1.46 definitely has some degradation in certain performance areas as many have noted. I did the firmware update and then went on a 500 mile round trip this weekend and really felt uneasy about a few Ka encounters I received on 34.7 that were in very close range before I picked them up. That said today I pulled out my 35.5 Kustom, 34.7 Stalker, and 24.120 Stalker radars to test response time.

I was blown away with the difference in speed from 1.46 and 1.37. 1.37 has always been instantaneous on 34.7 and 35.5 which is one of the reasons I put the V1 in storage as the signal speed pickup between the V1 and R3 was no comparison.

With 1.46, I was shocked to see that there was a significant lag time on both 35.5 and 34.7.
Both sometimes lagged over half a second before they picked up in 1.46. K band on 24.120 took over a second to register a signal, I tried multiple setting recommendations, but could not get it to improve. So I went back to 1.37 and conducted the same tests. Just like old times, it is super fast at picking up a signal! And better yet, it's almost impossible to quick trigger 1.37 and not get a signal on any band. This test verified my intuition this weekend, as I just felt something was not the same with the close proximity of alerts I was receiving.
First of all welcome to the forum....I just switched back to v1.37 because i don't have the mrct/mrcd anywhere close to here and i definitely noticed a difference in performance to
 

cihkal

WWG1WGA
Advanced User
Premium Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2014
Messages
3,844
Reaction score
7,095
When you tested the V1 did you have Ka Guard off?

The V1 is insanely fast, arguably the fastest RD in real world conditions when you factor in the fact its response time includes scanning on two horns. Having Ka Guard on adds additional signal vetting, so the V1 will ignore really shot signals it sees the first time; it still sees them though. A second time it then "parks" on the signal or really just tags it as legitimate.

This is a bit older version with some really nice testing done by our famous Nine_C1.


Thanks for sharing what you've seen with the R. I recommend using scan display for testing as the heart icon will let you know if you have noise from the area the R is filtering out which can impact results. It also should pause momentarily if it sees the signal and ignores I've because it doesn't believe it to be legitimate.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk
 

TeamQuack

s\/\/er\/e
Advanced User
Premium Member
Joined
May 8, 2014
Messages
2,185
Reaction score
2,370
Location
NYC
New to the forum but have been a V1 user since it's inception. Bought the R3 last year and have loved it ever since.
But the upgrade to 1.46 definitely has some degradation in certain performance areas as many have noted. I did the firmware update and then went on a 500 mile round trip this weekend and really felt uneasy about a few Ka encounters I received on 34.7 that were in very close range before I picked them up. That said today I pulled out my 35.5 Kustom, 34.7 Stalker, and 24.120 Stalker radars to test response time.

I was blown away with the difference in speed from 1.46 and 1.37. 1.37 has always been instantaneous on 34.7 and 35.5 which is one of the reasons I put the V1 in storage as the signal speed pickup between the V1 and R3 was no comparison.

With 1.46, I was shocked to see that there was a significant lag time on both 35.5 and 34.7.
Both sometimes lagged over half a second before they picked up in 1.46. K band on 24.120 took over a second to register a signal, I tried multiple setting recommendations, but could not get it to improve. So I went back to 1.37 and conducted the same tests. Just like old times, it is super fast at picking up a signal! And better yet, it's almost impossible to quick trigger 1.37 and not get a signal on any band. This test verified my intuition this weekend, as I just felt something was not the same with the close proximity of alerts I was receiving.
wow, i wish there was video of this. im glad i did not hesitate to get back on 1.37. First k-band i/o issues, and now a report of this. thanks for the heads up!
 

KrazyK

Advanced User
Lifetime Premium Member
Joined
May 23, 2016
Messages
1,705
Reaction score
3,634
Location
Way Down North
What set-up did you have your R3 with???
There seems to be an issue with delay if the MRCD is on that can be seen as a slower heartbeat on the scan display.
Please share your set-up at time of testing such as Ka wide, K filter TSR, MRCD, etc. This would be a big help. I do realize that you tried many options on and off but maybe try a test with no filters, etc; maybe an out of the box condition.
I really do sugest strongly to try without MRCD and TSR to see the speed.
 
Last edited:

TacoTuesday

Probably messing with R3 settings
General User
Joined
Sep 25, 2018
Messages
25
Reaction score
38
Location
NE Ohio
I would definitely post your R3 settings that you had during testing and if possible a video showing the delay in KA band would help out a ton. I have heard there is a delay in K band when TSF and MRCD is on and this isn't much of an issue for me since I do not use either. However if you are finding that there might be a KA band delay with certain settings on; that might be the last straw I have with FW 1.46.
 

gpgxp

Learning to Fly
Beginner User
Joined
May 11, 2017
Messages
206
Reaction score
361
OP should explain your test set up and add a video. I have been running 1.46 since it came out. No complaints here. I just tested the Ka reaction time of 1.46 this morning because of this thread. It's fine and the range is the same. This anti 1.46 dogpile is getting ridiculous. See for yourselves and don't buy into the anti Uniden hype.
 

gpgxp

Learning to Fly
Beginner User
Joined
May 11, 2017
Messages
206
Reaction score
361
Some users are downgrading based on rumors, and unsubstantiated claims. For instance BSM's. Most days I get no BSM's, other days I get stuck behind a Buick and then some other polluter pulls in front of me. It's a day to day variable almost impossible to verify a difference. Then someone posts about some issue then the anti's jump right on it like a pit bull fed some raw meat. Others just jump on the bandwagon for no good reason. Testing with speed signs or other detectors will also give variable and false results.
Uniden needs to be careful what they change. The R's are the most sensitive WS mount detectors available. Changing the TSF based a few complainers may have been questionable. Reducing k band range to satisfy BSM complainers would be a bad idea as well. I tolerate the BSM because I want maximum range. If BSM's were a problem I would run my DFR 7 and accept the reduced range for better filtering. Actual testing has me keeping 1.46.
 

DrHow

Going “Plaid” ASAP (Tesla S) RDT refugee
Advanced User
Lifetime Premium Member
Joined
May 18, 2018
Messages
3,251
Reaction score
5,398
Some users are downgrading based on rumors, and unsubstantiated claims. For instance BSM's. Most days I get no BSM's, other days I get stuck behind a Buick and then some other polluter pulls in front of me. It's a day to day variable almost impossible to verify a difference. Then someone posts about some issue then the anti's jump right on it like a pit bull fed some raw meat. Others just jump on the bandwagon for no good reason. Testing with speed signs or other detectors will also give variable and false results.
Uniden needs to be careful what they change. The R's are the most sensitive WS mount detectors available. Changing the TSF based a few complainers may have been questionable. Reducing k band range to satisfy BSM complainers would be a bad idea as well. I tolerate the BSM because I want maximum range. If BSM's were a problem I would run my DFR 7 and accept the reduced range for better filtering. Actual testing has me keeping 1.46.
I have not seen people downgrading unless they had some reasonable suspicion, or tangible examples of their own experience.

For me, I am waiting till this sorts itself out. Too many good people here with experiences beyond rumors. Many of us have not been part of the beta testing, do not have axe to grind, and do not have long term experience the beta testers do. I do not experience anyone on a agenda warpath here (yet). I see some frustrated folks who are not nuts. They have valid experiences to relate. Glad your 1.46 is doing excellent.
 
Last edited:

PointerCone

M3 Kng
Advanced User
Lifetime Premium Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2011
Messages
22,266
Reaction score
22,282
Oy Vez, gentlemen. This is the exact reason why I don't jump into threads (not often anyway) about firmware issues. I typically wait a month or two before "upgrading" to the "latest and greatest" to get feedback from those who jump right in because if its the newest, it must be the bestest. From what I know and have been told by P.M. and others (Vortex videos on the delay for example), there's some who love 1.46 and others who neither need it nor want it for various reasons. Whatever your reasons, state that, but also provide some details as to why you chose to revert back to 1.37, rather than just stating, 'I went back to 1.37." I never chastise anyone for their decisions, as long as they are rational and backed by some semblance or appearance of fact, testing or research.

What I know is this: If you don't need MRCD ,is there a rational reason why you need 1.46?? For those who do need it, it makes total sense to have 1.46. There's been talk of excessive K band falsing with 1.46. If this is the case, show us a video of what you're talking about versus the old 1.37. Perhaps, 1.46 is not ready for primetime and if its not, lets help Uniden get it right rather than coming in all guns ablazing and telling them I went back to 1.37 without proof or reason why we did that. If we do that, then what's Uniden's incentive to try again to make future releases better?? NONE.
 

PointerCone

M3 Kng
Advanced User
Lifetime Premium Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2011
Messages
22,266
Reaction score
22,282
^^^^ Now that it looks like even up on the back and forth, both of you want to go private as suggested? Just a thought.

I bet in end, you both will be drinking beer together soon.
I recall ER really screwing up some firmware upgrades, BUT unless we tell them "what the problem is" and define it, then how are they to know what to do to remedy the issue ? The Max 360 was a great example of this with the cycling and "stuck" on an alert. I know I had this issue and let them know and apparently they resolved it.
 

DrHow

Going “Plaid” ASAP (Tesla S) RDT refugee
Advanced User
Lifetime Premium Member
Joined
May 18, 2018
Messages
3,251
Reaction score
5,398
I recall ER really screwing up some firmware upgrades, BUT unless we tell them "what the problem is" and define it, then how are they to know what to do to remedy the issue ? The Max 360 was a great example of this with the cycling and "stuck" on an alert. I know I had this issue and let them know and apparently they resolved it.
Oh, agree 100% my “^^^” was referring to the post above yours. Based on time stamp, looks like you bumped me under you and your post went under TeamQ by one minute. Sorry.
 

gpgxp

Learning to Fly
Beginner User
Joined
May 11, 2017
Messages
206
Reaction score
361

OBeerWANKenobi

This is not the car you're looking for......
Moderator
Advanced User
Lifetime Premium Member
Joined
Mar 20, 2018
Messages
4,856
Reaction score
13,188
Location
Outer Rim - Hiding from 35.5 I/O
.....
What I know is this: If you don't need MRCD ,is there a rational reason why you need 1.46?? .....
Bogie tones and frequency change alerts. I almost got burned on 1.37 twice because of it not alerting me to a second bogie.

This and trying to generate helpful feedback to get the issues fixed are the two things keeping me on 1.46 right now.
 

benzr

Been there done that !! Original V1 user !!
Advanced User
Joined
Apr 23, 2012
Messages
4,886
Reaction score
5,668
Location
FLA
OP should explain your test set up and add a video. I have been running 1.46 since it came out. No complaints here. I just tested the Ka reaction time of 1.46 this morning because of this thread. It's fine and the range is the same. This anti 1.46 dogpile is getting ridiculous. See for yourselves and don't buy into the anti Uniden hype.
I don't think 1.46 is slower on KA and i think it might be a slight hit on K IMHO ... my only concern is that in our area ATL the R3 is a bit noisier on K Band BSMs on 1.46. On 1.37 is was bearable albeit annoying at least in the areas I run .. but 1.46 is unbearable ... HOWEVER, since i was biased by the reviews here negatively I AM CONTINUING TO RUN 1.46 to see if maybe it was coincidence.
I TOTALLY LOOOVE THE BOGEY TONEs ala V1
And I think some RDF members tweaking will get some of the MRCT CD alerts too.

Still prefer my RADENSO's for the Quietness ANGLES though ... and the MRCT CD detections!!
Dont need them yet .... but I trust ATL will implement them soon enough.

NOT IF WE CAN DETECT THEM THOUGH !!

So the Cat n Mouse GAME is afoot !!

Benzr


Posted from my iPhone using the RDF Mobile App!
 

flagator10

Learning to Drive
General User
Joined
Oct 10, 2017
Messages
10
Reaction score
30
When you tested the V1 did you have Ka Guard off?

The V1 is insanely fast, arguably the fastest RD in real world conditions when you factor in the fact its response time includes scanning on two horns. Having Ka Guard on adds additional signal vetting, so the V1 will ignore really shot signals it sees the first time; it still sees them though. A second time it then "parks" on the signal or really just tags it as legitimate.

This is a bit older version with some really nice testing done by our famous Nine_C1.


Thanks for sharing what you've seen with the R. I recommend using scan display for testing as the heart icon will let you know if you have noise from the area the R is filtering out which can impact results. It also should pause momentarily if it sees the signal and ignores I've because it doesn't believe it to be legitimate.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk
Good question, no I did not have Ka Guard off. I've never run it with that setting but I will certainly give it a try. Thanks!

--- DOUBLEPOST MERGED ---

What set-up did you have your R3 with???
There seems to be an issue with delay if the MRCD is on that can be seen as a slower heartbeat on the scan display.
Please share your set-up at time of testing such as Ka wide, K filter TSR, MRCD, etc. This would be a big help. I do realize that you tried many options on and off but maybe try a test with no filters, etc; maybe an out of the box condition.
I really do sugest strongly to try without MRCD and TSR to see the speed.
Great questions. I tried it with each of the above settings except TSR. Ka wide and narrow, Filter, MCRD. I couldn't get a noticable difference by changing any of the settings on 34.7 or 35.5.

--- DOUBLEPOST MERGED ---

Thanks for all the questions and conversation, I certainly didn't want to create a controversy. Just wanted to let everyone know what I was seeing and if anyone had experienced the same performance. I've backed down to 1.37 and response time is back to previously stated which I prefer.
I'm happy to reinstall 1.46 and re-run the tests and maybe even video them if it helps. Again this is not a 1.37 vs 1.46 battle, I have no preconceived opinion, just want the fastest target acquisition I can get for early detection.
 

KrazyK

Advanced User
Lifetime Premium Member
Joined
May 23, 2016
Messages
1,705
Reaction score
3,634
Location
Way Down North
It is a good thread but I think the jury is out. By that I mean I don't see much from any other members showing sensitivity loss with Ka alerts with TSR on, but issues on K band regarding QT (with 1.46) there is concern. MRCD is a whole different animal.

Both of my R3 units are running as incredible as ever with MRCD off. I don't use TSR at all, any time, any FW. I do believe there is a penalty for running MRCD based on the scan cycle slowing down with it on and only run MRCD "in the city".
 
Last edited:

Discord Server

Latest threads

Forum statistics

Threads
83,707
Messages
1,271,999
Members
21,135
Latest member
rct101
Top