Results - 2,400 Miles Running V1 G1 and V1 G2 Side by Side

Rocketman68

Learning to Drive
General User
Joined
May 31, 2016
Messages
48
Reaction score
99
Location
Toledo, Ohio USA
Been a V1 user for 20+ years. Recently received my V1G2. I wondered, what if I compared them, side-by-side in the real world? Given that new detectors have such extremely low RF emissions (to keep then undetectable) I wondered whether one would really interfere with the other. (Yes, I know everyone believes this). However, I found no specs nor any objective testing. Unfortunately, my own spectrum analyzer won't go up to 35 Ghz, so I can't objectively measure the RF emissions. So, when lab toys and specs aren't available, I say test in the real world. So I did. I recently drove from Illinois to Breckenridge, CO, to Park City, UT, then down to Scottsdale, AZ. Below are the results of my side by side testing of my G1 and G2. As always, this is just one test, by one tester, in one configuration, so your mileage may vary. But if you are wondering what a side by side comparison, at interstate highway speeds, would reveal, read on.


Both the G1 and G2 have the latest firmware. Both units were center of the windshield mounted, about 6" apart. Ran "A" mode in the remote areas and "l" mode in more urbanized areas. Always the same mode on both detectors. "K" Verifier was always on.


FIRST - THE EXPECTED RESULTS

1) KA band range. The G2 typically gave 3-6 seconds earlier alert over the G1. (At 85 MPH, that is 125 feet per second). :)

2) KA False alerts. A couple of times, the G2 alerted to KA, but I could not identify the source. Could have been any number of things, including real radar aiming at a different area, reflections, etc, etc. Given that the G2 is more sensitive than the G1, this **probably** explains this, but its hard to know for sure.

3) Blind Spot Performance. Of 86 apparent blind spot monitor alerts, the G2 was either quiet or alerted at the lowest level 77 times. No question that the G2 is much quieter on the BSM front. Often the G1 was alerting near full tilt, while the G2 was silent. :)

4) K band Range. No clear winner here - at highway speeds. At times, one alerted a second or two over the other. My gut tells me that the G2 tended to be a little better, at highway speeds, but I really can't say for sure.

5) The G2 suffers from ghosting more than the G1. I captured a screen shot of one instance where the G2 went wild in a construction zone. See below. This was rare. Perhaps 3 times in 2,400 miles.


SECOND - THE UNEXPECTED RESULTS

I passed 2 automated K band speed signs where the G1 alerted full tilt, but the G2 was silent! (Never happened with live LE situation) One automated sign was in Colorado outside of Breckenridge and the other was in Utah. I have no explanation for this. Especially given the results above. Could it be that some automated speed signs are operating at BSM frequencies that are blocked by "K" verifier of the G2? I really don't know. Perhaps others can offer a theory or explanation.



CONCLUSIONS

So, there you have the results of my 2,400 mile testing of my G1 and G2, side by side. I saw no evidence of any cross-talk or interference. Could it have been a factor and I just never saw it? Possibly, but I saw no evidence. It sure would be nice to see some spectral analysis on actual measured RF emissions from both devices, but so far as I am able to ascertain, if it exists, its not in the public domain. (A spectrum analyzer capable of 35 GHZ is a very expensive piece of RF engineering hardware). Remember, as with all testing, your mileage may vary.
I have SA that goes to 40Ghz with external mixer. Located in NW Ohio. If that would help! Tnx
 

ARkaband

War Eagle
Premium Plus
Lifetime Premium
Corgi Lovers
Advanced User
Joined
Jul 28, 2019
Messages
1,560
Reaction score
5,780
Location
Auburn, AL
Well....... I suppose "anything is possible", (i.e., pigs might be able to fly).
But do you have any facts or evidence to support your contention that the latest generation of RDs (G2 and RL 360c) don't have lower emissions than previous generations? The evidence so far is pretty clear is that emissions have dropped, in part due to the LNAs used in the G2, which are right behind the antenna terminations. These LNAs act as "one way" valves, letting RF in, but blocking most of the RF from getting out.

Might, could, possibly, maybe, conceivably......are are all little more than a "guess" or "hunch", without factual evidence or support.

So........ it "could" be that Theia will tell you what type of doughnut the LE ate yesterday, but that too would be speculation -without any supporting evidence. :)
Unfortunately, I don't have the equipment to give you the evidence. There isn't any testing to show that they are interference-free either, so I'm sticking with the conclusion that there's a chance of it.

I agree it is much better than older detectors, but data remains to be seen on if they are truly interference free. Since I rely on my RD's greatly, I don't want to do anything that could possibly put them to sleep and put me at risk for a ticket, or worse.
 

samq45

Premium Plus
Lifetime Premium
Advanced User
Joined
Jul 5, 2011
Messages
1,923
Reaction score
3,282
Location
Saratoga, NY
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. (That is why LE purchased them).

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!
It not new, the technology is the same. Show me where those detectors have lower emissions than some of the ones made 10 years ago. You are making the claims, so please show us. Some of them alert to each other.

Even if you are correct that they emit less, it makes no difference. You fail to mention or take into account that these detectors are more sensitive (said this previously in this thread, but you just ignore information that does not fit your argument). More sensitivity can pick up weaker signals.

Thanks for teaching about the law of inverse squares, it likes none of us knew that. Glad you bolded those items, that makes it clear.

Using your huge reduction - you are saying that if I have a radar unit 1000 feet away from a detector and move it back 25 feet - which is a small change - that results in a huge reduction in signal strength? I dont think so. In the world where you move detectors apart from 2 feet to 3.5 feet, it makes little difference - Especially if they are very sensitive.

Plus you are referring to radar waves (or sunlight) that travels in a straight line and is not attenuated or focused. When you put the detector against your windshield, there is the windshield glass, the inside of the detector your self and the faraday cage in which you are driving in. The signals are not just sent out to no mans land, they are bouncing all around the glass and inside of the cabin (and potentially combining harmonics). The horn has a way of focusing signals. The law of inverse squares has little to do with detectors a few feet apart inside a vehicle.

Its very strange You wont even address Radenso's videos where they clearly explain the problem. How are they wrong with all that expensive equipment you asked for tests with? It would seem that they have a lot more credibility in this space than most of us. Why not ask them to do your tests, when they have time. Is that not the easiest way we know of to get your answers?

Here are some easy arguments against your assumptions.

- Detectors today emit less according to you. But the Spectre results from 2007 for the Stir/Stir Plus. were exactly the same as the tests recently with the EX, RL360c and V1G2. If there is no change in the distance detected, and you are relying on the spectre test to make your assumptions. How can you say that detectors emit less than the previous generations? If you are just arguing about the V1G2, I don't know how that help your argument that there is no interference.
- It been accepted here that even 2 stealth detectors can interfere with each other, again neither of those M3s can be detected by the Spectre, but still can interfere. There are threads and videos on the board showing this.
- Spectres only look for specific frequencies - its very limited. There are other tests done and you can see some of the videos where stealth detectors emit other frequencies. There are some videos from a while back showing those items. Just because a spectre does not pick them up does not mean a detector wont. As previously stated - these detectors are a lot more sensitive than the spectres.
- The V1G2 Alerts to the R360C. So if we go back to your original argument that there is no interference if detectors do not beep at each other, these 2 do. Someone can show you those interfere (or you can buy them) and that makes your whole argument about them emitting less moot - it does not matter if they do - they still interfere.
- My V1G2 will also alert to my Stir Plus - which again is also stealth. They interfere, not a lot but it happens.

Please - Rather than stating the same things and changing your arguments, bolding items that have little or nothing to do with your argument - show us you are correct with facts rather than conjecture (that keeps changing).

You keep saying our discussions are conjecture (even with Radenso's video). Go out an buy all these detectors, A Spectre Elite and the equip that Radenso has. Until then I don't think any of your arguments will get much traction.
 

MASI

Learning to Fly
Beginner User
Joined
Aug 20, 2020
Messages
313
Reaction score
625
Location
Moving ......
My friend....

I keep pointing to knowns, yet they seem to make no difference to you. That is your prerogative.

As to your your assertion that I have not addressed Radenso's video, I would call your attention to my November 2nd post above. Radenso did not test the V1G2 in that video. It tested a previous generation.

I spent 2,400 miles and 30+ hours running a V1G1 and a V1G2 side by side on Interstate Highway and they did not "beep at each other". Not once. My V1G1/V1G2 range results were also consistent with results of other testers. (Showing no degradation in actual performance). Perhaps my V1s are somehow special? Possible, but unlikely.

You refuse to accept results of my 2,400 mile, 30+ hours of testing. That is also your prerogative.

I invite you and others to repeat my testing with a V1G1 and a V1G2, side by side, on Interstate highways. Run them for 2,400 miles and 30+ hours. Let us see the results of more objective testing of the V1G1 and the V1G2 side by side by others on Interstate highways. Then we can continue this discussion on a more factual basis, once we have real data, and not speculation, guess or conjecture.

I realize that what I am saying rocks the boat for many. But technology marches on.

My own test was just one 2,400 mile, 30+ hour test. Could my results represent a 1 off that should be tossed? Maybe. But without multiple similar tests, by other testers, under similar conditions, its a valid data point and thus, like it or not, I have put forth a thesis that stands on solid data.
 

Heywood

Learning Something New, Still Dying Stupid
Premium Plus
Lifetime Premium
Corgi Lovers
Advanced User
Joined
May 12, 2016
Messages
5,739
Reaction score
12,486
Location
The Tail Lights Pulling Away From You
I invite you to grab a gun, set up a course, do 10 runs with both, then individually, and show us the results.

Mindlessly driving around for 30 hours, not know if there’s a signal to even to pick up, powering the detectors off an on ...... is no test. The only thing it proves is that you drove for 30 hours.

Your guessing if a Leo was using their guns at the time. No idea what tactics they were using such as I/O at a distance, which might of been missed.

@MASI
You think your ruffling feathers? No.

You push the idea of what a scientific experiment should entail, yet push this drivel? Like it’s a fact?

You have these great ideas about controlling testing veritable’s in another thread.... yet you try to push an idea that you think that driving around 30 hours and 2400 miles with a V1 that leaks like a sieve, beside another sensitive detector.... at the same time.... is a legitimate result or proves a point?

It does prove something in your short time here...... your not blinding us with brilliance.
 

NorEaster18

Bad Actor / Difficult RDF Member
Premium Plus
Advanced User
Joined
Sep 5, 2018
Messages
2,212
Reaction score
6,373
Location
The North Shore
You have these great ideas about controlling testing veritable’s in another thread.... yet you try to push an idea that you think that driving around 30 hours and 2400 miles with a V1 that leaks like a sieve, beside another sensitive detector.... at the same time.... is a legitimate result or proves a point?
Some people just like stirring the pot for no apparent reason. It would probably be better if we just allowed them to shout in their echo chamber on their own, completely unheard.
 

Heywood

Learning Something New, Still Dying Stupid
Premium Plus
Lifetime Premium
Corgi Lovers
Advanced User
Joined
May 12, 2016
Messages
5,739
Reaction score
12,486
Location
The Tail Lights Pulling Away From You
Some people just like stirring the pot for no apparent reason. It would probably be better if we just allowed them to shout in their echo chamber on their own, completely unheard.
Totally agree. Just thought I’d point out, out of common courtesy, why his ideas are being ignored and why no one takes his suggestions seriously.
 
Last edited:

MASI

Learning to Fly
Beginner User
Joined
Aug 20, 2020
Messages
313
Reaction score
625
Location
Moving ......
Mindlessly driving around for 30 hours, not know if there’s a signal to even to pick up, powering the detectors off an on ...... is no test. The only thing it proves is that you drove for 30 hours.

Perhaps you should actually read my testing & results. I compared the alerting results of one to the other.


You might not like the results. But your "dislike" for my results (or me) does not change or discredit the results. The results stand on their own. They should be repeatable by anyone with two up to date V1s using the same methodology. And repeatability is the hallmark of good scientific inquiry.
 
Last edited:

WildOne

Learning to Fly
Beginner User
Joined
Oct 16, 2020
Messages
281
Reaction score
661
Location
MD
Perhaps you should actually read my testing & results. I compared the alerting results of one to the other.


You might not like the results. But your "dislike" for my results (or me) does not change or discredit the results. The results stand on their own. They should be repeatable by anyone with two up to date V1s using the same methodology. And repeatability is the hallmark of good scientific inquiry.
Just to throw my $0.02 in. I have been running a gen 1 with a gen 2 together for about a month. I agree with most of what MASI has said. I would only add that K IO shows the delay of the G2, while Ka IO has them both singing in unison. And the Gen2 Ka sensitivity is unreal.....

I don't see any interference with the two together. This isn't to say that there isn't any, just no out right false alarms due to the other unit. I also haven't seen any suppression of signals as far as I know. But it is hard to prove a negative.

For other units that show a suppression of detection, they must have a high level signal present that saturates either the front end or later processing stages. The only way to test these is not only an in band detector(Spectrum Analyzer), but to look out of band. Basically one would need one or several EMC broadband antennas and the SA to look at all frequencies from several MHz to over 40-50 GHz. And then it could still be a strong 2nd or 3rd harmonic up at 60+ GHz.... EMI can be a real bear to find!
 

MASI

Learning to Fly
Beginner User
Joined
Aug 20, 2020
Messages
313
Reaction score
625
Location
Moving ......
I have been running a gen 1 with a gen 2 together for about a month.

@WildOne: A couple of questions, if I might:

1) Are you using the latest Rev on the V1G1?
2) Are they side by side or one over the other?
3) What is their spacing?

I sincerely hope that you will update this thread with your experience as time goes on. I'm very interested in your additional observations of the V1G1 and V1G2 running together. :)
 

WildOne

Learning to Fly
Beginner User
Joined
Oct 16, 2020
Messages
281
Reaction score
661
Location
MD
@WildOne: A couple of questions, if I might:

1) Are you using the latest Rev on the V1G1?
No, I didn't update when the filter came out. I think it is 3.872. Right before the filter....noisy, but fast to IO
2) Are they side by side or one over the other?
3) What is their spacing?
Side by side, about 2" between them
I sincerely hope that you will update this thread with your experience as time goes on. I'm very interested in your additional observations of the V1G1 and V1G2 running together. :)
So far I love the G2. I wish it had better K IO. I have to drive accordingly... I was counting on the mute of the BSM to let me live with the noise, but I had hoped it would still show a real leo. Mostly this holds true. I did have one instance where the V2 saved me as I had muted the V1 for BSMs that were traveling with me, but then a real K CO came on the G2. The G1 popped up the new signal above mute about 2 secs before I crested the hill. Luckily I had listened to the G2 long before that.....
 

MASI

Learning to Fly
Beginner User
Joined
Aug 20, 2020
Messages
313
Reaction score
625
Location
Moving ......
Just thought I’d point out, out of common courtesy, why his ideas are being ignored and why no one takes his suggestions seriously.

Wow. Nobody but all of the "likes" to the OP.
Such intolerance. Very impressive.
 

Discord Server

Latest threads

Forum statistics

Threads
92,238
Messages
1,405,624
Members
23,414
Latest member
Localmauythai
Top