V1 and R1 (Ka only) run simultaneously = good results

918dad

Learning to Fly
Beginner User
Joined
Dec 30, 2017
Messages
94
Reaction score
30
So I've been running my wife's R1 along with my V1 and JBV1 and the results are pretty helpful and interesting.
First, the R1 has better range off-axis, no doubt about it. That's nice when I come to a highway and it starts going off but the V1 stays quiet. That tells me that the radar is on the highway and not a threat unless I get on the highway.
Second, the V1 and the R1 have (usually) the same range on a straight ahead radar. Once in a while the R1 will get a sniff of something crazy far away that the V1 didn't. Again, with one going off and not the other, it really helps me know what's around me.

Finally, just to mess with me, the V1 will occasionally go off when the R1 doesn't. But that's pretty rare.

I don't really have a point to prove here other than I enjoy having the extra detector and the extra info it provides relative to my V1 with JBV1.
 

bslaws

Land of Spuds and Gems.
Advanced User
Premium Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2016
Messages
1,561
Reaction score
2,885
38.8 the V1 is neck and neck with my R3. 34.7, R3 is way better. Don't have any 35.5 in my area so no idea how they compare.
 

DChiJEllis

Lifetime RDF Contributor
Moderator
Advanced User
Lifetime Premium Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2016
Messages
2,022
Reaction score
3,183
Location
Trollstigen, Lyseveien og Atlanterhavsveien
My limited K band testing showed that my R3+V1 combination was pretty good together. I've been running the R7 + V1/JBV1 pretty consisstently the last few months and around 5,000 miles of driving, and they work nice together. I do have mine separated by ~80 inches
 

surprisinguy

Government can only give what it takes...
Advanced User
Lifetime Premium Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2015
Messages
1,368
Reaction score
1,365
Location
North Carolina

RoverTtx

PSL +5
Intermediate User
Joined
Mar 21, 2018
Messages
471
Reaction score
522
Location
Texas
I love that setup! My car has a v1 and r3 side by side. Perfect combo for me.
Impeccable range, but still fun to toy with jbv1.

Sent from my Moto Z2 using Tapatalk
 

Chris KH2PM

AV8R
Beginner User
Lifetime Premium Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2018
Messages
108
Reaction score
274
Age
53
Location
Raleigh, NC
I've been running my V1 & JBV1 along with my R7 for many months now with no issues due to proximity. I run the R7 with K band OFF since it's really awesome at sniffing out distant Ka. The V1 is better at LIDAR warnings. Not much LIDAR around here, but a couple of towns I frequent do have LEO's on motorcycles and they like to sit and hide with the LIDAR gun propped up and tagging. Otherwise it's almost 100% Ka around here (South of Raleigh NC, Apex/Cary/Holly Springs/FuquayVarina) mostly I/O, but sometimes Ka C/O (constant on). Last time I had a legit K-band hit and sighting of the LEO was in Dayton Ohio many months ago. I love the filtering that JBV1 has, making my V1 behave so well I almost forget it's there.
 

Euurx

Learning to Drive
General User
Joined
Dec 3, 2019
Messages
33
Reaction score
15
Location
W-NY
38.8 the V1 is neck and neck with my R3. 34.7, R3 is way better. Don't have any 35.5 in my area so no idea how they compare.
I used to run the V1 briefly before it was stolen, but never the less was a great unit. Why would you say the R3 is 'better' if there results are about neck to neck, just curious!
 

RoverTtx

PSL +5
Intermediate User
Joined
Mar 21, 2018
Messages
471
Reaction score
522
Location
Texas
I actually let my v1 handle all k band, and leave it off on the r3. To get k band quiet enough for me on the r3, I usually have to neuter the performance to a point where it's not worth running.
In other words, to make the r3 as quiet on k band as the v1 (with jbv1), the range is much worse than the v1.
Ymmv

Sent from my Moto Z2 using Tapatalk
 

9C1Driver

Learning to Fly
Beginner User
Joined
Jun 9, 2017
Messages
402
Reaction score
359
As a general rule two detectors should not be run at the same time. Here is some information from Vortex on this issue.



"–> DON’T RUN MULTIPLE DETECTORS AT THE SAME TIME!!!! <–

This right here is the single biggest mistake people make. It may seem counter-intuitive because if you want to compare detectors, why not just put both of them on your windshield next to each other and see which one alerts first? Seems like the easiest way to do it, right? Well here’s the deal…


Radar detectors aren’t just detectors. They also inadvertently emit radar signals back out which is why they can be picked up by radar detector detectors. These emissions will cause problems for other nearby radar detectors (cheap Cobras are especially notorious for this, causing Ka falses on nearby detectors in other vehicles) and when you run multiple detectors at the same time, these emissions will cause problems including delayed alerts, missed alerts altogether, and more false alerts. Even detectors like the Redline which are otherwise stealth to RDD’s, when placed in close proximity to other RD’s, even they can cause problems with other nearby RD’s.


Escort has a good explanation of it here, along with a very blunt, but accurate statement about it:


The next time that you see a side-by-side radar detector review you will know that the reviewer knows little to nothing about radar technology and that their results are worthless."

There is also a link from Escort talking about why not to do this.

 

RoverTtx

PSL +5
Intermediate User
Joined
Mar 21, 2018
Messages
471
Reaction score
522
Location
Texas
As a general rule two detectors should not be run at the same time. Here is some information from Vortex on this issue.



"–> DON’T RUN MULTIPLE DETECTORS AT THE SAME TIME!!!! B]

This right here is the single biggest mistake people make. It may seem counter-intuitive because if you want to compare detectors, why not just put both of them on your windshield next to each other and see which one alerts first? Seems like the easiest way to do it, right? Well here’s the deal…


Radar detectors aren’t just detectors. They also inadvertently emit radar signals back out which is why they can be picked up by radar detector detectors. These emissions will cause problems for other nearby radar detectors (cheap Cobras are especially notorious for this, causing Ka falses on nearby detectors in other vehicles) and when you run multiple detectors at the same time, these emissions will cause problems including delayed alerts, missed alerts altogether, and more false alerts. Even detectors like the Redline which are otherwise stealth to RDD’s, when placed in close proximity to other RD’s, even they can cause problems with other nearby RD’s.


Escort has a good explanation of it here, along with a very blunt, but accurate statement about it:





There is also a link from Escort talking about why not to do this.

As I've said in previous posts, and I think this applies to most people who run both:

I know the reasons not to run detectors side by side, I don't deny any of the evidence that says it's potentially a bad idea. I just don't care.

For me, I've never had a bad symptom. Never had a detector perform weirdly. So, while there might be potential interference, I don't notice it on a practical level. The fun great duo I get from these detectors far outweighs any potential issues in my mind. If I eventually have trouble, that may change. I'm not testing detectors for scientific results, I'm using them for my enjoyment. Most of the people who own two detectors like this are probably aware as well. It's not a lack of knowledge thing for most of us here.

Sent from my Moto Z2 using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:

bslaws

Land of Spuds and Gems.
Advanced User
Premium Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2016
Messages
1,561
Reaction score
2,885
I used to run the V1 briefly before it was stolen, but never the less was a great unit. Why would you say the R3 is 'better' if there results are about neck to neck, just curious!
Not sure you understood my post. On the frequency 34.7 GHz, my R3 is way better as in it detects much further. On the frequency 33.8 GHz, the two detectors are neck and neck. I never said that the R3 is a better detector than the V1 only that it detects better on 34.7. In fact, I don't trust my R3 and that is why I run the V1. I know it will always work.
 

fireparamed

Learning to Fly
Beginner User
Joined
May 14, 2018
Messages
165
Reaction score
330
Location
Utah


For me, I've never had a bad symptom. Never had a detector perform weirdly. So, while there might be potential interference, I don't notice it on a practical level. The fun great duo I get from these detectors far outweighs any potential issues in my mind. If I eventually have trouble, that may change. I'm not testing detectors for scientific results, I'm using them for my enjoyment. Most of the people who own two detectors like this are probably aware as well. It's not a lack of knowledge thing for most of us here.

Sent from my Moto Z2 using Tapatalk
I think that while as you said, most people on this forum know about the potential for interference, the part of your explanation that might not be accurate to all of the bench testers and field testers on this forum is when you said you haven’t noticed problems at the practical level.

The problem with that statement is that by running both detectors at the same time you really don’t know how either of them would’ve responded in a practical real world encounter by themselves. Perhaps one or both would’ve performed better by itself than together on a long distance Ka sniff.

I think that’s what is so very valuable about the testers on this forum. When they set up a course and run every detector on it multiple times, that gives legitimate repeatable results. If those guys say running two together has proven to decrease performance, I have to believe quantifiable results that show degradation of alerting down to the foot measurement.

It’s a question of how much loss of distance/sensitivity in the field is “practical”? 50 feet, 200 feet, 600 feet. One missed sniff of I/O 2 miles and instead only getting it at 1/2 mile?

Their scientific tests actually translate to real world results. I get the reason guys are playing with double detectors and if that’s your thing, knock yourself out. I just know from my years in aviation that the saying is “the worst possible problem will happen at the worst possible time when you don’t use the best possible practices”.
 
Last edited:

RoverTtx

PSL +5
Intermediate User
Joined
Mar 21, 2018
Messages
471
Reaction score
522
Location
Texas
I think that while as you said, most people on this forum know about the potential for interference, the part of your explanation that might not be accurate to all of the bench testers and field testers on this forum is when you said you haven’t noticed problems at the practical level.

The problem with that statement is that by running both detectors at the same time you really don’t know how either of them would’ve responded in a practical real world encounter by themselves. Perhaps one or both would’ve performed better by itself than together on a long distance Ka sniff.

I think that’s what is so very valuable about the testers on this forum. When they set up a course and run every detector on it multiple times, that gives legitimate repeatable results. If those guys say running two together has proven to decrease performance, I have to believe quantifiable results that show degradation of alerting down to the foot measurement.

It’s a question of how much loss of distance/sensitivity in the field is “practical”? 50 feet, 200 feet, 600 feet. One missed sniff of I/O 2 miles and instead only getting it at 1/2 mile?

Their scientific tests actually translate to real world results. I get the reason guys are playing with double detectors and if that’s your thing, knock yourself out. I just know from my years in aviation that the saying is “the worst possible problem will happen at the worst possible time when you don’t use the best possible practices”.
Yeah you're right, and I could've worded that better. Practical is subjective.

My point is really just that I have not been able to notice any difference between running those two vs a single detector stand alone. Obviously this is not quantifiable. I'm not trying to justify it, or advocate for this, just share my experience and point of view.

For me, it's perfect. I still get plenty of range in every case and that makes it practical. I wouldn't always rely on that setup, but like I said... It's for my enjoyment more than anything.

Sent from my Moto Z2 using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:

fireparamed

Learning to Fly
Beginner User
Joined
May 14, 2018
Messages
165
Reaction score
330
Location
Utah
Yeah you're right, and I could've worded that better. Practical is subjective.

My point is really just that I have not been able to notice any difference between running those two vs a single detector stand alone. Obviously this is not quantifiable. I'm not trying to justify it, or advocate for this, just share my experience and point of view.

For me, it's perfect. I still get plenty of range in every case and that makes it practical. I wouldn't always rely on that setup, but like I said... It's for my enjoyment more than anything.

Sent from my Moto Z2 using Tapatalk

Ya I totally get what you are saying. And I can understand why you do it.

I’m just absolutely amazed at the level of intelligence and science that the testers on this site put into stuff. Not just with RD, but also scanners,apps, and pretty much any other type of electronics that they are interested in. By far the most technical group of folks I’ve associated with on any forum.

It’s really quite fun to read and learn. I just wish I had enough money to buy and play with all the toys they have!
 

Discord Server

Latest threads

Forum statistics

Threads
80,883
Messages
1,229,576
Members
20,496
Latest member
robasap
Top