R7 FW 133.141.113 - New K Filter Discussion

VariableWave

Premium Plus
Lifetime Premium
Corgi Lovers
Advanced User
Joined
Dec 31, 2017
Messages
1,443
Reaction score
3,154
Location
SEVa
Early on I noticed the increase in range. Locked out door openers on K and X (yes, I have it turned on) got a boost. It's not the lockout range that is at fault, but just an increase in performance. And the latest tests done by @VariableWave are also showing a boost on Ka. So far, I'm loving this 133 release. IO detection testing @DC Fluid did shows it's dependable there. That's super important. And I really like the R7 ramp-up. Everything considered, I can depend on this device.

Phil

If you average the full test of the 129 to 133, in this setup.... we are talking maybe 150 ft average. In the real world, we are talking nothing but 10-15ft or maybe that one in fifteen chance of difference. The reasons in the shown, is either vehicle placements at that time (not broadcast Source). but the area around changing the most minor variant reflection. Just because there was shown to be X amount of Runs, there were run eliminated as they were and out-layer and test scraped. Having that equitable ( @Brainstorm69 ) to review our testing videos, allows for more confirmed seen results to our testing. After we did out testing of each unit individual, we ran them side by side to show we were not tainting the gauntlet. Interesting thing, the R7 gained a little ground and back to one more each to reflect.
 

mb300sd

PSL +200
Premium Plus
Lifetime Premium
Intermediate User
Joined
Mar 14, 2012
Messages
557
Reaction score
483
Location
GA
Updated. Not really noticing any difference in K band BSM falses, but also getting the quick alert before driving into some lock outs. Wiping them and starting over I guess.
 

cihkal

♟️ WWG1WGA ⛈️
Banned User
Premium Plus
Lifetime Premium
Corgi Lovers
Advanced User
Joined
Apr 21, 2014
Messages
4,192
Reaction score
8,061
Updated. Not really noticing any difference in K band BSM falses, but also getting the quick alert before driving into some lock outs. Wiping them and starting over I guess.
That makes sense, I've not seen seen one beta tester mention specific details on the filtering changes. I haven't been looking rather hard though, would rather the info come from independent people!
 

brettzo

PSL +5
Intermediate User
Joined
Oct 22, 2012
Messages
230
Reaction score
371
Location
Alberta, Canada
I would really like to test the laser detection on the R7 in 133.

But I do not have a XLR or Dragon eye.

I am excited about this change.

Why you may ask? because on the bike it is hard to see the red flashing light of the jammers (TPX) having it alert to my helmet would give me time to slow down before JTK quicker.
I'll be testing the R7 on 1.33 against DragonEye on Thurs. I'll get it on video and post the results.
 

NoahWL

Learning to Drive
General User
Joined
Sep 17, 2020
Messages
16
Reaction score
29
Location
Illinois
Been running v133 since release and have put maybe 10 miles a day on it on my daily suburban commute. I've yet to take it more than a few miles on the highway. TSS on/K Filter on/K Wide/MRCD off, K sensitivity adjusted from 100% down to 50% in 10% increments over the course of a week as I got a feel for it. Rear balance from 100% to 90%. Since installing v133 it's gotten a lot colder around here and leaves have started to fall so that may also be a factor in any changes I've seen.

The most noticeable difference compared to v129 is alerts to stationary emitters will stop much quicker. When passing door openers the alerts fade out roughly the same distance they started, even with only 90% rear balance (whereas on v129 I ran 70% and even then alerts would sometimes ramp up in strength as detection moved from front to rear). I'm also very pleased that when stopped at intersections the alerts will frequently just disappear as if they are spontaneously filtered out. On v129 I'd get weak alerts for door openers across the street as I approached and stopped at the light, and the detection would continue for as long as I was stopped. On v133 I'll still get the 1-2 bar detection but it will go away after I've stopped for a second or two. I want to say I see something similar happening to BSMs as I approach, pass, or sit behind offending cars (moving or stationary) but without some time on less busy roads I cannot say for certain; I don't think I've ever gotten more than one BSM alert at a time but on these roads it seems I always spot more than one car with BSM when searching for the source.
 

RadarScout

Premium Plus
Lifetime Premium
Advanced User
Joined
Sep 4, 2015
Messages
6,170
Reaction score
8,704
Location
Land of Crimson Tide!
I'm also very pleased that when stopped at intersections the alerts will frequently just disappear as if they are spontaneously filtered out. On v129 I'd get weak alerts for door openers across the street as I approached and stopped at the light, and the detection would continue for as long as I was stopped.
Are you utilizing Quiet Ride? I have mine set at 15 mph, so when I'm stopped at a traffic light, I don't get any of those door K falses.
 

PHILBERT

left lane, behind your [email protected]$$ ugly SUV_ MOVE OVER!
Intermediate User
Joined
Nov 20, 2018
Messages
555
Reaction score
1,265
If you average the full test of the 129 to 133, in this setup.... we are talking maybe 150 ft average. In the real world, we are talking nothing but 10-15ft or maybe that one in fifteen chance of difference. The reasons in the shown, is either vehicle placements at that time (not broadcast Source). but the area around changing the most minor variant reflection. Just because there was shown to be X amount of Runs, there were run eliminated as they were and out-layer and test scraped. Having that equitable ( @Brainstorm69 ) to review our testing videos, allows for more confirmed seen results to our testing. After we did out testing of each unit individual, we ran them side by side to show we were not tainting the gauntlet. Interesting thing, the R7 gained a little ground and back to one more each to reflect.
This is why I'm not a fan of off-axis emitter testing. That is not "real world" An officer is going to be shooting at you, not away from you at buildings. Reflections in any scenario are what is know as "standing waves". Phase cancellations and (at times) enhancements make the test results erratic. The real world test is a very long straight shot without obstructions. Yes, it's "best case", but without emitter antenna "side lobe anomolies" and phase reflections you can get accurate, reproducible numbers. How detectors handle variable conditions is also a valid concern, true, but not a real range test. More of a pass/reject/rampup logical decision test under scatter signal conditions. You do want to know when a LEO running radar is anywhere around you.

That said, I do appreciate the time you all put in to give us some idea of what alerting differences there are in that presence of radar. Thank you for testing and posting the results.

I'll take any increase in range as a positive. Yes, I see signals reaching out further than before. That is not a bad thing. But I need more drive time. My daughter is visiting, so she and my wife are using "the White Ghost" (known as Birdie) all the time. Maybe today I'll take it out in dense traffic to see a bit more BSM action.

Phil
 

bhrodeoaz

Lifted and tuned Ram
Premium Plus
Lifetime Premium
Advanced User
Joined
Jun 19, 2013
Messages
965
Reaction score
647
Location
phx, az
I have been running the new FW on my R7 and there is some performance gain as for the BSM. However , a little quirk i have seen is ---on K band. I run K-band on, K band filter on, K Extended, K-Block. I have noticed that some hyundais and toyotas BSM still get through. And they punch through even when in advanced mode. Anybody else still getting punch throughs?
 

aim4squirrels

Currently edging...
Premium Plus
Lifetime Premium
Corgi Lovers
Advanced User
Joined
Jul 21, 2015
Messages
4,034
Reaction score
8,529
Location
DFW Texas
This is why I'm not a fan of off-axis emitter testing. That is not "real world" An officer is going to be shooting at you, not away from you at buildings. Reflections in any scenario are what is know as "standing waves". Phase cancellations and (at times) enhancements make the test results erratic. The real world test is a very long straight shot without obstructions. Yes, it's "best case", but without emitter antenna "side lobe anomolies" and phase reflections you can get accurate, reproducible numbers. How detectors handle variable conditions is also a valid concern, true, but not a real range test. More of a pass/reject/rampup logical decision test under scatter signal conditions. You do want to know when a LEO running radar is anywhere around you.

That said, I do appreciate the time you all put in to give us some idea of what alerting differences there are in that presence of radar. Thank you for testing and posting the results.

I'll take any increase in range as a positive. Yes, I see signals reaching out further than before. That is not a bad thing. But I need more drive time. My daughter is visiting, so she and my wife are using "the

White Ghost" (known as Birdie) all the time. Maybe today I'll take it out in dense traffic to see a bit more BSM action.

Phil
Understood, but most of the top tier detectors have such long range that even finding long enough courses to test limits can be challenging. And let's be honest, nobody's being targeted for tickets at such distances.

The world is full of variables as is. Structures, vegetation, elevation, traffic, etc. can all effect total range, as can the LEOs vehicle placement. If the LEO is set up around a curve, over a hill, behind a building, trees, etc., then we're being hit by an attenuated signal as is, and we ought to know how our devices react to what we recounter in real life, as well as a controlled range test out on the salt flats.

I think the regular testing crews here have done enough attenuated emitter testing to show that results are repeatable and consistent enough to be trusted as legit.


The BSM testing is harder to do, it's almost all anecdotal. For instance, I can say that I had the misfortune of following a Mazda cx-5 for a mile yesterday and my R7 on the newest firmware was pegged at half alert at about 3 car lengths following distance. So I can say confidently the new firmware is no better on filtering of that particular vehicle then previous versions.

But I can't tell you if the V1G2 is better because:

1. I don't own a V1G2 myself.

2. I don't know if the reports of the new R7 firmware being juiced up on K band is correct yet or not. I'm running 40% and feel like I've got plenty of range. Maybe too much for the in town only K band I seem to face.

3. I don't know the schemes each manufacturer has employed to control BSMs. Actual algorithms and analysis to ignore certain signals? Total block of a particular area of the spectrum? Delayed reporting? Muting under 2 bars of alert status? All or some of the above?

What exactly constitutes good filtering? At present, it's just how quiet is my detector, and do I feel safe running it... Which is highly subjective and anecdotal.
 
Last edited:

NoahWL

Learning to Drive
General User
Joined
Sep 17, 2020
Messages
16
Reaction score
29
Location
Illinois
Are you utilizing Quiet Ride? I have mine set at 15 mph, so when I'm stopped at a traffic light, I don't get any of those door K falses.
No, not using Quiet Ride. I'll use it eventually but for the time being I prefer learning how the detector reacts. I'll turn it on eventually but for now Auto Mute at volume 1 is tolerable.
 

goodtimes40

PSL +5
Premium Plus
Lifetime Premium
Intermediate User
Joined
Jun 29, 2012
Messages
680
Reaction score
597
Location
Port St. Lucie, Fl
That's always the case with Uniden updates. I'm not a fanboy but how come Escort can pull it off maintaining almost the same detection distance with 360c being quiet as a church mouse.
I can tell you since the update on the R7 it is so much quieter around town and I live in a pretty big city. It's just spread out. And I run my R7 K Band at 80% most places that would make it a chatty as hell and since the update almost no falsing from cars. all from businesses or Banks and I locked those out right away. I think it was a great update
Post automatically merged:

I can tell you since the update on the R7 it is so much quieter around town and I live in a pretty big city. It's just spread out. And I run my R7 K Band at 80% most places that would make it a chatty as hell and since the update almost no falsing from cars. all from businesses or Banks and I locked those out right away. I think it was a great update
Oh and the k band range at 80% is absolutely insane and ka-band is even more insane congratulations Uniden on another fine update this one really is a good one
 

yellowtibby

Shifter ZR4's number one fan.
Intermediate User
Joined
Dec 15, 2011
Messages
566
Reaction score
544
Location
Pennsylvania and Connecticut
I have been running the new FW on my R7 and there is some performance gain as for the BSM. However , a little quirk i have seen is ---on K band. I run K-band on, K band filter on, K Extended, K-Block. I have noticed that some hyundais and toyotas BSM still get through. And they punch through even when in advanced mode. Anybody else still getting punch throughs?

I never have Hyundais and toyotas bsms punched through. Its always mazdas ar 24.123 and GMs, Pacific's, jeeps, and random Hondas at 24.168. Every other bsm is filtered out.
 

G39x

Huntin' Rabbits
Intermediate User
Joined
Nov 1, 2016
Messages
721
Reaction score
850
Location
Nashville, TN
I can tell you since the update on the R7 it is so much quieter around town and I live in a pretty big city. It's just spread out. And I run my R7 K Band at 80% most places that would make it a chatty as hell and since the update almost no falsing from cars. all from businesses or Banks and I locked those out right away. I think it was a great update
Post automatically merged:


Oh and the k band range at 80% is absolutely insane and ka-band is even more insane congratulations Uniden on another fine update this one really is a good one
I really haven't noticed the benefits from the update as far as BSM goes, I still get alerts from Mazda's, Acura/Honda's, Jeep, and GM vehicles. I still have to drive more to see if this is true as just because it is a new firmware, I may not be used to the firmware. However I do feel like the sensitivity is increased for K band as the BSM punch throughs I get at a longer distance at first alert.

Edit: The settings that I ran were 70% K, K filter on, TSF off, Notch is on. I am not saying that it is more sensitive, however I just feel as if I am getting an earlier alert, and I also think that is not by design, but I will try to update on my experience with the firmware as I get more mileage on it.
 
Last edited:

Brainstorm69

TXCTG - 2016 MOTY
Premium Plus
Lifetime Premium
Advanced User
Joined
May 23, 2015
Messages
11,480
Reaction score
28,500
Location
Lone Star State
I really haven't noticed the benefits from the update as far as BSM goes, I still get alerts from Mazda's, Acura/Honda's, Jeep, and GM vehicles. I still have to drive more to see if this is true as just because it is a new firmware, I may not be used to the firmware. However I do feel like the sensitivity is increased for K band as the BSM punch throughs I get at a longer distance at first alert.
For all those saying K band sensitivity is increased, I can tell you that Uniden has not mentioned that they tried to make K band more sensitive. So if it is (which I tend to doubt), it is not by design.
 

fishing66

Premium Plus
Advanced User
Joined
Sep 1, 2012
Messages
3,897
Reaction score
6,959
For all those saying K band sensitivity is increased, I can tell you that Uniden has not mentioned that they tried to make K band more sensitive. So if it is (which I tend to doubt), it is not by design.
This is speculative at best, however, perhaps the detector is not more sensitive but it appears so because filtering algorithms have changed. We saw something kinda sorta similar when Escort took the artificially knecapped Redline, implemented BS RDR firmware and turned it into a reactivity and range monster.

Speed and range were never the issue with the R7 as BSM filtering is a main gripe. Is the new firmware perfect? No, far from it. Yesterday I had a pretty long drive through PA and couldn't get a read on whether highway K band alerts were LEOs or BSMs. There were stationary PASP who were not shooting and then strong K band alerts in the middle of nowhere. PA is such a tough state for countermeasures as handheld IO K band is predominant. Assuming the upcoming unit from another manufacturer has the BSM filtering that has been represented, the unit will be a boon to PA drivers. I just kept at or near PSL as to negate the issue. Once back in NJ, the NJSP were spraying CO 34.7 like crazy and it was night and day compared to driving in PA.

As always, K band came from Satan's anus.
 

VariableWave

Premium Plus
Lifetime Premium
Corgi Lovers
Advanced User
Joined
Dec 31, 2017
Messages
1,443
Reaction score
3,154
Location
SEVa
@PHILBERT
You failed to read what this test was all about. This test was of two things; One, test another's devices as there have been different results shown to the R7 and V1G2. Two, to represent the "real world" testing that was done by @Kennyc56 and myself.

If this real world was conducted in IO, then in comparing the two, the R7 had a higher chance of getting the ticket.

Sent from my LM-V600 using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:

OBeerWANKenobi

This is not the car you're looking for......
ModSec
Premium Plus
Lifetime Premium
Corgi Lovers
Advanced User
Joined
Mar 20, 2018
Messages
7,100
Reaction score
20,653
Location
Outer Rim - Hiding from 35.5 I/O
You failed to read what this test was all about. This test was of two things; One, test another's devices as there have been different results shown to the R7 and V1G2. Two, to represent the "real world" testing that was done by @Kennyc56 and myself.

If this real world was conducted in IO, then in comparing the two, the R7 had a higher chance of getting the ticket.

Sent from my LM-V600 using Tapatalk
Can you clarify what or who you're responding to? I'm having a very hard time following what you're talking about.
 

Brainstorm69

TXCTG - 2016 MOTY
Premium Plus
Lifetime Premium
Advanced User
Joined
May 23, 2015
Messages
11,480
Reaction score
28,500
Location
Lone Star State
Last edited:

OBeerWANKenobi

This is not the car you're looking for......
ModSec
Premium Plus
Lifetime Premium
Corgi Lovers
Advanced User
Joined
Mar 20, 2018
Messages
7,100
Reaction score
20,653
Location
Outer Rim - Hiding from 35.5 I/O
On the topic of this filter. I've been running highway mode to start with to get an idea of where everything is at and I can pick up certain BSM's so far away that I haven't been able to figure out what all of them are yet. Main offenders are Pacificas and Jeeps it seems. Eat me Chrysler! I'm getting a lot of false in the region of 24.184 to 24.189. I was getting, I think 24.186 from the rear yesterday and there was a car way behind me. As I slowed down in anticipation of a left turn the car caught up and the R7 ramped up. It turned out to be a Toyota?!

Anyway, I'm going to drop the sensitivity back to 50%, where I was running it previous to the update and see if it has improved there from what I remember.
 

cihkal

♟️ WWG1WGA ⛈️
Banned User
Premium Plus
Lifetime Premium
Corgi Lovers
Advanced User
Joined
Apr 21, 2014
Messages
4,192
Reaction score
8,061
I really haven't noticed the benefits from the update as far as BSM goes, I still get alerts from Mazda's, Acura/Honda's, Jeep, and GM vehicles. I still have to drive more to see if this is true as just because it is a new firmware, I may not be used to the firmware. However I do feel like the sensitivity is increased for K band as the BSM punch throughs I get at a longer distance at first alert.

Edit: The settings that I ran were 70% K, K filter on, TSF off, Notch is on. I am not saying that it is more sensitive, however I just feel as if I am getting an earlier alert, and I also think that is not by design, but I will try to update on my experience with the firmware as I get more mileage on it.
Have any of the beta testers said anything definitive on the filtering update?

I find that interesting if no, maybe they weren't given any specifics.

It almost doesn't sound like it's necessarily an obvious improvement, but I'm sure a change happened.

Has anyone noticed a vehicle that wasn't being filtered, but now is?

With another company who made some tweaks to their BSM rejection, I was able to notice pretty quickly the difference. But they also called out the specific vehicle they made progress on.

Maybe Uniden made more widespread adjustments that will take some time to pinpoint 🤔
 

Discord Server

Latest threads

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
90,803
Messages
1,381,886
Members
22,838
Latest member
akoe
Top