Learning Something New, Still Dying Stupid
- May 12, 2016
- Reaction score
I run 3 detectors at times and almost always run a remote and a dashmount (since the O was released in 2007/8). Its fine to run them together for the fun of it, but any results are taken with a grain of salt. Its not the greatest way of comparing the detectors, but it is fun - and noisy. After 6 months with the Magnum and O I thought the same as you - these things are fine to run together. Then over the years I have seen several weird items and when I finally started testing them in a controlled environment, I could see that although it was rare between those detectors, they can and do cause issues with each other, you never know when. Biggest fear with two detectors is not missing C/O - but a weak I/O shot.With all due respect, and I intend that sincerely, when it comes to Radio Frequency signals, we generally prefer to deal with knowns, rather than speculation, guess, conjecture, maybes, or possibilities. Here is what we know:
1) The strength of emitted signals from RDs have been dropping with each successive generation, making them less and less detectable. This new generation (G2 and RL360) appear to have extremely low emissions.
2) The strength of an RD emitted signal will generally depend upon the vector, i.e. direction. One would normally expect to see the most emitted signal from the antennas (front and rear), because that is where the emitted signal mostly escapes the RD.
3) The amount of signal emitted from the **side** is expected to be orders of magnitude lower than from the front or rear antennae. This is because the case acts as a "shield" keeping external signals out and internal signals in. This is called "shielding".
4) If one detector is emitting a signal on a RD frequency, then we expect the other detector to alert. (That is why we have them, right?) However, that did not seem to happen in my G1/G2 test. I had long intervals of no alerts. So.........
5) If the RD was emitting a non-RD frequency and thereby merely raising the noise floor, then we would expect a decreased signal to noise ratio, which typically shows up as reduced range. But that did not seem to happen in this particular test. My ranges seemed fairly consistent with results by other testers using a single detector methodology.
6) I certainly can't speak for a RL360, because it was not part of the test. So as for the RL360, I must defer to others.
I would put very little stock in any tests, or claims, of how well any detector worked where 2 detectors were running together. Stealth or not.
I hope the same goes for you as to my G2 experience.Thanks for the feedback. Im getting killed by BSMs w my V1G1 so i have to upgrade. I dont trust it anymore even though real performance is still good
I just wish there was a way to conclusively say that in a particular setup, there is no interference of any kind happening period. That'd be amazing.
Since the radar detector MFGs have done these tests and told us many times that they do and will interfere at times, its probably best to take their advice since they have the fancy equipment. Why does anyone need to sped this kind of money when you can simply test them separately?Fortunately, there is a way!
We just need some 40 Ghz hardware like the HP 8363 or something similar. I would venture a guess that Valentine, Escort, Radenso, and many university level EE labs have such capabilities. Measurement of the sensitivity and spectral output of various RDs is not very complicated. You just gotta have the RF hardware and some basic measurement expertise.
Really??Did you notice that the RD in the test was ***not*** one of the latest generation of RDs?
It was not a G2 or RL360c. It was a previous generation detector with much higher levels of spurious output. So nobody should be surprised that previous generations of RDs put out enough RF to be problematic. But the G2 and the 360c are new generations, with much lower spurious outputs.
If you want to base your opinions on fact and not subjective gut impressions based upon previous generations, that is most assuredly your prerogative. Me, I would prefer to base conclusions on facts and data. For example, what is the DbM level output of a G2 or RL 360c? If such data exists, it does not appear to be in the pubic domain. Such data, when combined with testing would answer this newly presented question.
Just because it was a problem with previous generations, do not automatically make it so for new generations. This is because new generations of RDs have much lower emissions.
Why do you assume these newer detectors are lower than previous detectors, like the the OG Redline, 9500ci, Stir Plus etc?
Just because the Spectre detects a RD from less range does not necessarily mean the RD is outputting less interfering emissions, it could be outputting interference emissions that are outside of what the Spectre sweeps. The Spectre is not an RF spectrum analyzer and being RDD immune doesn't mean you aren't outputting harmful interference emissions.My friend, Its not an assumption.
The newest generation of detectors (V1G2 and RL360c) have much lower emissions than previous generations. If you doubt this fact, you need only see that the RD detection distances by a Spectra Elite (a radar detector detector or RD-D) have dropped dramatically with the new generation. For example, the V1G2 can't be detected until the RD-D gets within about 3 feet! Older generations were detectable at much greater distances.
Remember, the strength of an RF signal degrades rapidly with distance. In fact, signal intensity is inversely proportional to the square of the distance! Its not a linear degradation. Thus, a small change in RD-D distance represents a huge reduction in signal strength emitted from the RD.
Its a brave new world!
Just because the Spectre detects a RD from less range does not necessarily mean the RD is outputting less interfering emissions, it could be outputting interference emissions that are outside of what the Spectre sweeps.
Or, it could be emitting bothIf the G2 was emitting outside the RD-D's frequency sweep, then the RD-D would not alert at all. The fact that it alerts confirms that it is detecting the G2 at a lower distance, due to lower emission.
If the G2 were emitting outside of the RD-D's frequency sweep, then it would not alert at all.
Or, it could be emitting both