Gen 1 - Gen 2 back to back Comparo...

Kennyc56

Ford Lover-I/O hater!
Premium Plus
Lifetime Premium
Advanced User
Joined
Feb 22, 2018
Messages
5,076
Reaction score
18,215
Location
I/O Hell, Aka Eastern N.C.
Exactly.

We also try to use the same mount so the detectors are in the same position.
Being in their optimum position for detection isn’t as important as being the same position.

There’s too many environmental variables to account for that optimum doesn’t make a huge comparison impact.

Having it in an easy position to quickly change over detectors helps. The Uniden’s and Radenso Pro-M can share the same mount. The mag mount of the Escort’s are on the same level and right beside where the Uniden/Radenso’s are mounted.

You also want to test them as soon as you can right after each other. Detection ranges change day to day. Temperature, and humidity changes even throughout the day. Same sort of thing as why your car runs better in the cool evening vs the hit afternoon.

As noted above... the interference between 2 detectors are random. Some it can happen instantly.

Example:
2 Pro-M’s together will false constantly to each other. They’re functionally stealth detectors..... but I can do it on demand. Nothing in front of them but the windshield. I can go out and prove it right now.

My RC-M can cause other detectors to false to each other when I’m close to a car in front of me, or a flat object like a wall in a parking lot.

These are false that I can see. These, I’m not too worried about. I know why, and I can see it

It’s the ones that I don’t that I’m worried about.

It’s even more concerning when you run one detector that known to light up a Spector at a long distance .... then stick it in close proximity to another detector. Say a V1G1, or a Max360, Uniden's, ax3...

Think about it realistically. If a Spector can see it .... even 50 feet away..... what do you think the other detector is seeing 2 feet away?

That’s why we don’t test that way. It’s fun for shits and giggles, to run 2 detectors just to see how they reacts.... but for testing... never. The energy radiating out of the detectors is so random, you can’t predict it, or even know it’s happening if it’s silent.

Even when I test my R360C and my R-EX, never together. They’re 100% stealth, but you need to remove as many potential causes of interference as you realistically can, to get a good idea of how they’re performing
@VariableWave and I do the same things during all of our "on the record" testing making sure the detectors are all mounted in the same spot and controlling every last detail that we possibly can! Then we almost always try running ghetto arrows or a combo of R1 and V1G2, Redline-O and V1G2 or any other combo that we can think of just to satisfy our curiosity, off the record of course! Not even once during any of our testing have we had an issue, not once! I ran my Redline-O/ V1G1 tag team for years and hundreds of thousands of miles as well and they killed it and saved my @ss from every type of dirty point blank I/O shot these NC State Troopers could throw at me! I never thought my R1/Redline-O ghetto arrow setups could be beaten but my V1G2 finally beat them because of how it kills off axis on 34.7 and 35.5! The R1 is still better against K band however and kills my V1G2 against K band I/O! It makes a great deal of difference which detectors you try this with however and you won't know until you test them for many hours! There's really no reason to do it anymore unless you're curious like me!
 
Last edited:

Transwarp

Learning to Drive
General User
Joined
Oct 8, 2020
Messages
35
Reaction score
86
I've been running almost 3 months with a G1 6 inchs from a G2 with no problem. There has just been no issues at all. Full sensitivity on each and no false triggering of the other. It might depend on the G1 version. Mine is before ESP.
I've got the last Gen 1 before Gen 2, my G1 has ESP and whatever the updated circuit board is/was...
Post automatically merged:

Thanks for the response - you can see all my responses to Masi in his thread.

Why do you reference Masi, when a poster in this thread - the OP to be more clear, has stated it interferes?

My experience with 2 V1 gen1s and my Gen2 shows that they interfere at times with a few different stationary stalkers. My really old V1 (from the 90s) interferes a little more than one from a few year ago. V1 themselves will tell you they interfere.

Are you going by the fact that the detector does not alert to the other to determine interference? If so then almost all the interference I have seen with them close together on the stalkers, is the V1G2 having less range, sometimes 300-500 feet , depending on the layout of the stalker sign It alerts, but sometimes much closer to the target than without the Gen1 and the rampup seems strange at those times - never starts at one bar like normal on those signs - 2-3 bars. Most of the time there is no noticeable interference, maybe 1-2 times out of twenty at the very most. I did this a few times after MASI posted his experience just to check it out. K band did not seem to be affected from what I can tell, but I don't have a K gun any longer, just used the existing signs.

I dont consider the V2 G1 to be low emission, like the redline or even the new V1G2. In fact its pretty far in the pack on the testing done on the Gen 1 over the last 15 years or so. https://www.rdforum.org/threads/101179/ . I had 2 easily picked up by the Spectres and both were confiscated, never got my Sti Driver/Redlines/Stirs detected, found or confiscated.

A few of use have seen interference from 2 M3 detectors (one on my bumper and another on my windshield). Also as I posted in Masi's thread, if the V1 can be picked up by the Spectre from quite a ways away, the V1G2 most certainly sees the Gen1 as it is quite a bit more sensitive than the spectre.

Have you seen the Radenso video where when the one detector constantly sees the other, it raises the noise floor on some other alerts?

Is there a thread about your lab testing, I would like to find out more?

Running two detectors is something I am interested in for a few reasons (backup for one, fun, lots of snow buildup making the remote useless, etc) and I have been doing it since 2007 with the Escorts or the V1 and the Stir/Stir+ on the bumper, plus trying every other detector I could get my hand on. Thinking about getting another MaxCi, or using my Netradar and running with G2, but I am afraid of handicapping the V2 when it really counts.

With that said, I don't have any illusions that they wont or don't interfere from time to time, I have seen some strange things, but its to hard to verify without the fancy equipment and it rarely manifests with alerts, vast majority of times, its a delayed alert.
Where were you that someone took your detector ? Your sig says NY, unless you are in an 18 wheeler they are legal....
Post automatically merged:

Even simpler, run video in the cabin of the vehicle and test them properly one at a time without the other detector even being in the vehicle! You had a fixed source to play with so why not run a proper more scientific controlled test letting both units perform at their best without any possible interference?

During a proper Detector shoot-out, they use the same test vehicle, over the same fixed course, with only one detector in the vehicle mounted in its optimum position. There is a reason for all this, it gives the most unbiased test results without any possible interaction or interference.

.
correct-as a ham radio op, I've seen even at VHF frequencies major changes with only a few feet difference, and installing HDTV antennas, which are UHF, same-they tell cops if the PD radio isn't working only a few feet can make a difference. Radio waves can be funny. I wasn't going for perfect, just messing around when I saw the new trailer so don't hold me to the quality level of tests I've seen on this site. Regardless of distance, the fact that both boxes were massively de-sensed was very clear....I drove down a local strip with many big boxes and neverending K falses and both boxes were silent till I practically drove INTO the Home Depot, when alone either one lights.
 
Last edited:

WildOne

Learning to Fly
Beginner User
Joined
Oct 16, 2020
Messages
389
Reaction score
893
Location
MD
Thanks for the response - you can see all my responses to Masi in his thread.

Why do you reference Masi, when a poster in this thread - the OP to be more clear, has stated it interferes?

My experience with 2 V1 gen1s and my Gen2 shows that they interfere at times with a few different stationary stalkers. My really old V1 (from the 90s) interferes a little more than one from a few year ago. V1 themselves will tell you they interfere.

Are you going by the fact that the detector does not alert to the other to determine interference? If so then almost all the interference I have seen with them close together on the stalkers, is the V1G2 having less range, sometimes 300-500 feet , depending on the layout of the stalker sign It alerts, but sometimes much closer to the target than without the Gen1 and the rampup seems strange at those times - never starts at one bar like normal on those signs - 2-3 bars. Most of the time there is no noticeable interference, maybe 1-2 times out of twenty at the very most. I did this a few times after MASI posted his experience just to check it out. K band did not seem to be affected from what I can tell, but I don't have a K gun any longer, just used the existing signs.

I dont consider the V2 G1 to be low emission, like the redline or even the new V1G2. In fact its pretty far in the pack on the testing done on the Gen 1 over the last 15 years or so. https://www.rdforum.org/threads/101179/ . I had 2 easily picked up by the Spectres and both were confiscated, never got my Sti Driver/Redlines/Stirs detected, found or confiscated.

A few of use have seen interference from 2 M3 detectors (one on my bumper and another on my windshield). Also as I posted in Masi's thread, if the V1 can be picked up by the Spectre from quite a ways away, the V1G2 most certainly sees the Gen1 as it is quite a bit more sensitive than the spectre.

Have you seen the Radenso video where when the one detector constantly sees the other, it raises the noise floor on some other alerts?

Is there a thread about your lab testing, I would like to find out more?

Running two detectors is something I am interested in for a few reasons (backup for one, fun, lots of snow buildup making the remote useless, etc) and I have been doing it since 2007 with the Escorts or the V1 and the Stir/Stir+ on the bumper, plus trying every other detector I could get my hand on. Thinking about getting another MaxCi, or using my Netradar and running with G2, but I am afraid of handicapping the V2 when it really counts.

With that said, I don't have any illusions that they wont or don't interfere from time to time, I have seen some strange things, but its to hard to verify without the fancy equipment and it rarely manifests with alerts, vast majority of times, its a delayed alert.
I'm just presenting my findings. With my 2 detectors, I saw no interference. The OP may have. I don't know. Not everyone is running the same version. Each combo will behave differently.

Testing a speed sign has many variables that may have coincidently shown a reduction in detection distance just when he tried the two at the same time. It wasn't a controlled test with other reflectors being present or absent for each individual run differently. ie other cars, signs or many combinations thereof.

Different detectors will behave differently. I couldn't run my old(1980s) escort with the just introduced V1 at the same time. Every few minutes, they would each alert in turn. I couldn't run my first V1 with a little later V1. The later V1 would be triggered, but the early one wouldn't even see the newer V1 as the newer one had better filters for in band signals.

As for the V1G2 seeing the V1G1 because the Sprectre can see the Gen 1 is a false assumption. The Spectre detects in a different band than the radar detectors work at for LEO radars. The V1G1 is filtered out by the V1G2.

As for my lab tests, I have presented some here. I don't have time to do fancy videos and graphs. Since I use expensive lab equipment rather than actual radar guns to do my lab tests, I'm not sure if people believed me when I first brought up the reactivity of the V1G2. But after more field tests, I think everyone has realized the problems with many IO/QT K radar units.

Basically you need to test each combo to see if it interferes. The false alerts are easy to find. The suppression of signals are very hard to find and quantify. You can't prove a negative. The best you can do is have many, many instances to draw inferences from or run very controlled lab or field tests to see what interferes or suppresses a detection.
 

MASI

Learning to Fly
Beginner User
Joined
Aug 20, 2020
Messages
361
Reaction score
719
Location
Moving ......
Once again, it is important to note that Radenso did not test the latest generation of RDs in the video posted by the poster to the north.

Most everybody knows that older generation RDs had much higher emissions. However, most everybody also knows that the newer generation of RDS have much, much lower emissions. And that is why more and more people are beginning to recognize that (at least for the V1s), you can test V1s side by side with no significant alteration in performance.




I do not know why people continue to ignore these facts. But some beliefs (i.e. the world is flat) just will not die.
Post automatically merged:

@samq45 said:

"I wonder how you know they were no issues?"

Because the detectors, at least in my 2,400 mile test and others, performed just as expected. In other words, on K they performed about the same. On Ka, the G2 consistently beat the G1. There were no instances of ping-pong. There was nothing to indicate that there was any degradation in performance.

Allow me to reverse the question, what evidence is there that the latest versions of the G1 and G2 do interfere when used side by side?

Speculation, guess, conjecture, and theory just don't trump testing.
 
Last edited:

WildOne

Learning to Fly
Beginner User
Joined
Oct 16, 2020
Messages
389
Reaction score
893
Location
MD
Once again, it is important to note that Radenso did not test the latest generation of RDs in the video posted by the poster to the north.

Most everybody knows that older generation RDs had much higher emissions. However, most everybody also knows that the newer generation of RDS have much, much lower emissions. And that is why more and more people are beginning to recognize that (at least for the V1s), you can test V1s side by side with no significant alteration in performance.




I do not know why people continue to ignore these facts. But some beliefs (i.e. the world is flat) just will not die.
But the world is flat! Just look at maps, GPS screens, they are all flat! Globes are just used to keep soccer(football to the rest of the world....) fans happy....
 

MASI

Learning to Fly
Beginner User
Joined
Aug 20, 2020
Messages
361
Reaction score
719
Location
Moving ......
But the world is flat! Just look at maps, GPS screens, they are all flat!

Sadly, my friend, you point to the type of reasoning that all too often passes for "science" "logic" and "intellect".
Post automatically merged:

You cannot run a One and Two together...they interfere with each other even on opposite ends of the window, which is well known, but on both Ka band with the speed sign trailer and elsewhere with K band, running them both makes them both deaf-

Many of us have noticed that the G2 is totally deaf to some speed signs. In my own 2,400 mile side by side test, I had 2 occasions (1 in UT and 1 in CO) where my G1 alerted full tilt to a speed sign, while my G2 never made a sound. The prevailing theory is that some newer speed signs use a modulation mode that the G2 filters out.

Take a moment to think about the implications if speed detection manufacturers begin using a modulation that newer detectors filter out...... :(
 
Last edited:

MASI

Learning to Fly
Beginner User
Joined
Aug 20, 2020
Messages
361
Reaction score
719
Location
Moving ......
Not even once during any of our testing have we had an issue, not once!

@Kennyc56, @WildOne, @VariableWave, and myself seem to have roughly similar experiences running V1s side by side. Now, nobody is saying it can't possibly be an issue under some unusual situations, just that after many thousands of real world road miles by multiple testers, we are not seeing anything significant.

I'm not aware of any testing wherein the RDs are used in a way that the antennas face each other. If the antennas face each other, then that is entirely different, and I would not be surprised to see interaction or a degradation in performance.
 
Last edited:

Kennyc56

Ford Lover-I/O hater!
Premium Plus
Lifetime Premium
Advanced User
Joined
Feb 22, 2018
Messages
5,076
Reaction score
18,215
Location
I/O Hell, Aka Eastern N.C.
@Kennyc56, @WildOne, @VariableWave, and myself seem to have roughly similar experiences running V1s side by side. Now, nobody is saying it can't possibly be an issue under some unusual situations, just that after many thousands of real world road miles by multiple testers, we are not seeing anything significant.

I'm not aware of any testing wherein the RDs are used in a way that the antennas face each other. If the antennas face each other, then that is entirely different, and I would not be surprised to see interaction or a degradation in performance.
I actually sold my V1G1 just about the same time I got my V1G2, so I never actually ran them together, but I know that @VariableWave has and still does. I have run my V1G2 with my Redline-O's, and R1's for several thousand miles when I first got my G2 and didn't trust it yet! I was running the R1 and G2 in the front spaced on each side of mirror and the Redline-O in the middle of my back glass against the headliner. Within the first 3 miles of running the V1G2 it picked up a really stupid off axis 34.7 alert that was over a hill and almost dead to my right as I was making a left turn! The R1 and Redline-O remained silent until I turned around and headed for the hill/bridge and as I got close to facing the signal the R1 picked it up. I said to myself at the time, no damn way! This must be interference because the R1 ia a beast against off axis! So I turned around and started over running only my R1/Redline-O. The R1 still picked it up in the exact same spot over and over. I spent the next 45 minutes watching my V1G2 kick my ghetto arrows @ss against a C/O 34.7 source that was on the other side of that bridge aiming back up the other side about a mile away. I ran them every way possible both all together, and one at a time and the results were exactly the same everytime! The V1G2 beat my R1 noticeably each time, which hurt my feelings I might add! The Redline-O however put up one hell of a fight from the rear but still lost by at least 200 feet everytime. Even though the V1G2 kicked @ss the first night, it still took me awhile to trust it so I ran them together for quite awhile with no difference noticed for thousands of miles or during all of our testing. I know interference can and does happen, I've just been lucky I guess!
 
Last edited:

VariableWave

Premium Plus
Lifetime Premium
Corgi Lovers
Advanced User
Joined
Dec 31, 2017
Messages
1,601
Reaction score
3,678
Location
SEVa
I hate to play in this side of things... be it devil's advocate, or just say no to playing the game. Always four side to everything... yes four. Top, bottom, left, and/or right... forget your rear (@ss)

Yes, one can operation more than one device... why, well to play... and play with issues that one may or may not see. Yes, more than one radio operation device that sees other frequencies can be subject to other devices. Trust I know and have seen it, and other Testers and Radio Engineers, operators, techs, and more. Just how and when, and what you are drinking.

The latest RDs vs detectors 10 years ago, 20 years, or older, have a higher tolerance and filtering needed to extinguish the multitude of frequencies that are outputted by devices around them. BSMs today, Traffic Monitor systems earlier, and even new Cellular that came before that. Over the years, you can take and see select brands doing strong, and then having to curb back issues overtime.

I remember when I had my first V1, the thick unit with the Crystal and fat (added Laser diodes), vs and older Escort and Bel.... about 2003 when in South Myrtle Beach side. The V1 did not alert, Bel and Escort did.... had me scratching my head. Well, all detectors do having filtering built in, only how good.

So, back to this thread.... can you run a V1G1 and a V1G2, sure.. I did on my way back from Maine, and I also ran my V1G2 with the R7.... All looked good.. but can I say one offered an issue to the other at that time? Maybe.... I ran the V1G2 and the Cobra 480i in NY... well I would say the 480i did seem to have issues with the V1G2, but also with other issues going on.... funny thing, the 480i would of saved my vs the V1G2 to PAs K band to Redflex. :bang:
Now, yes this is not V1 class... I did have the R7 and the NRDSP at one point interfere with the other....

So, I am a tester and more (driver, PSL+++ roller, and...) Running in daily, just need one. You can run more than, but at what cost... testing sure... but know what you bring to the table. @Kennyc56 do is run each individual, then place side by side to show real delta if, or see if there is an issue..... we have found interesting resolves, but is backed up with video and other means to clarify.

Always Run one unit, and hopefully the best one needs. Not all serve the same... it is what you bought and why.
 

MASI

Learning to Fly
Beginner User
Joined
Aug 20, 2020
Messages
361
Reaction score
719
Location
Moving ......
I ran the V1G2 and the Cobra 480i in NY... well I would say the 480i did seem to have issues with the V1G2, but also with other issues going on.... funny thing, the 480i would of saved my vs the V1G2 to PAs K band to Redflex. :bang:
Now, yes this is not V1 class... I did have the R7 and the NRDSP at one point interfere with the other....


Nobody doubts that older and other (non-V1) detectors may interact and may effect performance. I can't speak to running anything other than the V1G1 and V1G2 side by side over 2,400 miles of interstate highway driving.

The fact that V1s don't interact is certainly not proof that other detectors can't or won't interact. (But point the antennas at each other and they probably would).

But as for V1s, multiple testers over thousands of miles have not seen any issues. (Antennas all in parallel and not pointed at each other).

Just because older RDs had issues does not mean that newer RDs also will. (They may, but let's see data, not assumptions). Let's not "assume" that just because that is the way things were, that is how things are. :)
 
Last edited:

MASI

Learning to Fly
Beginner User
Joined
Aug 20, 2020
Messages
361
Reaction score
719
Location
Moving ......
I have run a G1 and G2 side by side for 2,400 interstate highway miles in "l" and "A" modes, and I never saw any degradation in typical V1 performance. Mine were in parallel, about 6" apart. Both were high on the windshield, one over the other, with no upper tint stripe. Consistently, the G2 out performed the G1 on Ka, with no clear winner on K. But the G2 suffered more ghosting issues. (before most recent update).

A couple of questions, if I might:
1) What software versions were you using?
2) Do you have a defroster type of windshield?
3) What type of car?
4) Any tinting?
 

samq45

Premium Plus
Lifetime Premium
Advanced User
Joined
Jul 5, 2011
Messages
1,941
Reaction score
3,340
Location
Saratoga, NY
Where were you that someone took your detector ? Your sig says NY, unless you are in an 18 wheeler they are legal....
NY is really close to Canada - The two provinces that border NY have laws against detector usage. From some of the properties or businesses I can see the border as they are pretty close. Some businesses and relatives are in PQ and I go there often when the border is open.

I have had two V1s taken - one in PQ and one in PO. Ontario sent it back after the fine was paid.
Post automatically merged:

But as for V1s, multiple testers over thousands of miles have not seen any issues. (Antennas all in parallel and not pointed at each other).
2 people in this thread would disagree with you on the V1s. Just cause you don't see or notice t does not mean they do not interfere at times. You seem to cherry pick anything that could support your assertion.

Call V1 - speak to anyone there and see if they tell you they will never interfere.
 
Last edited:

samq45

Premium Plus
Lifetime Premium
Advanced User
Joined
Jul 5, 2011
Messages
1,941
Reaction score
3,340
Location
Saratoga, NY
Once again, it is important to note that Radenso did not test the latest generation of RDs in the video posted by the poster to the north.

Most everybody knows that older generation RDs had much higher emissions. However, most everybody also knows that the newer generation of RDS have much, much lower emissions. And that is why more and more people are beginning to recognize that (at least for the V1s), you can test V1s side by side with no significant alteration in performance.




I do not know why people continue to ignore these facts. But some beliefs (i.e. the world is flat) just will not die.
Post automatically merged:

@samq45 said:

"I wonder how you know they were no issues?"

Because the detectors, at least in my 2,400 mile test and others, performed just as expected. In other words, on K they performed about the same. On Ka, the G2 consistently beat the G1. There were no instances of ping-pong. There was nothing to indicate that there was any degradation in performance.

Allow me to reverse the question, what evidence is there that the latest versions of the G1 and G2 do interfere when used side by side?

Speculation, guess, conjecture, and theory just don't trump testing.
All you have is speculation - and you keep changing your assertions. First you say they never beeped at each other in your old thread - then you mention things like the law of inverse squares - you say they have less emissions - but conveniently don't mention that they are a lot more sensitive also and have a lot more filtering they are doing with BSMs and other environmental noise. You also not address that there are posts showing how 2 M4 antennas have interference. They are older generations - 15 years at this point - so how can I accept the statement that Most Everyone Knows the Older have higher emissions, that is simply not true. Even if it was the proximity and the extra sensitivity trump the lower emissions, in my opinion.

I have a magic belt that protects me from dog bites. I know it works since I have never been bitten by a dog when I have it on. I have not seen any interference - so there must not be any. Both of those statements have problems.

I can play the same game - show me the evidence they never interfere. They do interfere once in a great while, one from 2015 or so and the V1G2 - I can see the range decreased a little here and there. I dont know what you mean by significant alteration in performance, I am saying

Here is what I think is significant. If I am moving along and there is a LEO with moving I/O. If the detectors do cause one to park and the alert is delayed by 200-400 feet, that is not much for a 2 mile detection - Unless the LEO uses I/O in the 200-400 feet where the detector missed the shot. Now I missed an I/O shot that it would have caught, and the next I/O will be too late to prevent a ticket.

With no permanently mounted stationary radar to test against, you must be very good to notice they performed about the same. So your testing is better than Radenso's - but Speculation, guess, conjecture, and theory just don't trump testing.

You are right - neither of our anecotodtal evidence is testing, no matter how many times you say it or state the mileage you drove. Radenso did an actual test with very sophisticated equipment and those detectors to show a point. V1s might interfere less, but is still a possibility.

Also what about different cars, with different dashcams, BSMs, radar cruise, different phones, hotspots, times when you drive by cell towers, wind shear systems and sat dishes and all those signals and harmonics around. First the newer detectors are doing a lot more filtering where they could park on a signal from another detector (maybe mixed with some of those other signals) - the detectors have a lot to filter out, when you add another detector, things might happen and the variables to test are almost endless. Also I was using several Stalker signs and an ATR. What if there were other guns, could those be affected by interference differently?

So the testing you have done is in just one unique environment (your car), other environments could result in a different result on occasion, and it could be quite rare.

Not sure why you can make a statement that they dont/cant/never interfere.

If you want to run 2 detectors at once, there is no problem with this at all I fully support it - I do it all the time. And I used to make the same argument as you about two M4s. I really believed they could not interfere, until it occurred a few times - 2 years after i installed the Stir and way more than 2400 miles later. Other members told me to be careful, and they ended up being right - although rare, its possible that they can interfere and there are other members that posted videos about this.

I don't think its responsible to say that without a doubt there can never be interference, the message should be I don't see any issues, but run them together at your own risk as there can be issues and the MFGs do not recommend this and may not pay a ticket guarantee if you are running 2 detectors.

What kind of weirdos run 2 detectors anyway :)
 

samq45

Premium Plus
Lifetime Premium
Advanced User
Joined
Jul 5, 2011
Messages
1,941
Reaction score
3,340
Location
Saratoga, NY
As for the V1G2 seeing the V1G1 because the Sprectre can see the Gen 1 is a false assumption. The Spectre detects in a different band than the radar detectors work at for LEO radars. The V1G1 is filtered out by the V1G2.
Thank you for making this point.

I know how the Spectres work, they look for the LO signal - its not a false assumption - you need to remember the harmonics. What is the LO frequency and what is the 2nd or 3rd harmonic? Why does a cobra alert to 33.6XX, on a lot of our detectors? Its because of the 3rd harmonic from the LO on some cobras. The third harmonic puts it in the area the detector is sweeping for radar signals. The M4s use the X band horn to help with false alerts from harmonics. The V1s J out feature comes about when it see that harmonic after it alerted.

The filtering is actually interference that I am talking about - and similar to Radenso's videos. As the V2 is filtering out the the V1, it is focused - or parking on that signal it is filtering to determine if it is legitimate (and maybe other signals like your cars BSM, which in a lab you dont always have). The software may raise the noise floor and may require a higher threshold to alert to such a signal.

I learned all this from Jimbonzz on the other forum and other people who do this stuff for a living that are are smarter than me, there were lots of great technical discussions back then. I wish he was still participating.

As you can see these discussions have been occurring for quite some time, even 15 year ago people were making the assertion that if I cannot see it, they dont interfere.

Jimbonzz explains it pretty well in this thread.

 

MASI

Learning to Fly
Beginner User
Joined
Aug 20, 2020
Messages
361
Reaction score
719
Location
Moving ......
All you have is speculation

Actually, I did 2,400 miles of side by side interstate highway testing. That is hardly speculation.

Not sure why you can make a statement that they dont/cant/never interfere.

I don't state that they can't or never interfere.
Just that in 2,400 miles, I didn't see it. And others like @WildOne have similar experiences and conclusions. In other threads I have explained that so long as the antenna patterns are in parallel and don't intersect, that the highly directional nature of what the RD "sees" (when RDs are in parallel) makes significant interaction unlikely. Now, point them at each other and you are far more likely to see an issue.

First you say they never beeped at each other in your old thread - then you mention things like the law of inverse squares

These are totally different issues/subjects. I never saw, in 2,400 miles, them ping-ponging.

The law of field density (inversely proportionate to the square of the distance) explains the rapid drop in signal strength. You are conflating two totally different subjects.

What kind of weirdos run 2 detectors anyway

"weirdos"? Really? Is everyone with whom you disagree a "weirdo"? Oh my.
You would be surprised at the number of people here that do. Why insult many people whose expertise you cannot comprehend? Try to be more open minded. You might just learn something new.
 
Last edited:

NorEaster18

Maximum Efficiency
Advanced User
Joined
Sep 5, 2018
Messages
2,316
Reaction score
6,844
Location
The North Shore
All you have is speculation - and you keep changing your assertions. First you say they never beeped at each other in your old thread - then you mention things like the law of inverse squares - you say they have less emissions - but conveniently don't mention that they are a lot more sensitive also and have a lot more filtering they are doing with BSMs and other environmental noise. You also not address that there are posts showing how 2 M4 antennas have interference. They are older generations - 15 years at this point - so how can I accept the statement that Most Everyone Knows the Older have higher emissions, that is simply not true. Even if it was the proximity and the extra sensitivity trump the lower emissions, in my opinion.

I have a magic belt that protects me from dog bites. I know it works since I have never been bitten by a dog when I have it on. I have not seen any interference - so there must not be any. Both of those statements have problems.

I can play the same game - show me the evidence they never interfere. They do interfere once in a great while, one from 2015 or so and the V1G2 - I can see the range decreased a little here and there. I dont know what you mean by significant alteration in performance, I am saying

Here is what I think is significant. If I am moving along and there is a LEO with moving I/O. If the detectors do cause one to park and the alert is delayed by 200-400 feet, that is not much for a 2 mile detection - Unless the LEO uses I/O in the 200-400 feet where the detector missed the shot. Now I missed an I/O shot that it would have caught, and the next I/O will be too late to prevent a ticket.

With no permanently mounted stationary radar to test against, you must be very good to notice they performed about the same. So your testing is better than Radenso's - but Speculation, guess, conjecture, and theory just don't trump testing.

You are right - neither of our anecotodtal evidence is testing, no matter how many times you say it or state the mileage you drove. Radenso did an actual test with very sophisticated equipment and those detectors to show a point. V1s might interfere less, but is still a possibility.

Also what about different cars, with different dashcams, BSMs, radar cruise, different phones, hotspots, times when you drive by cell towers, wind shear systems and sat dishes and all those signals and harmonics around. First the newer detectors are doing a lot more filtering where they could park on a signal from another detector (maybe mixed with some of those other signals) - the detectors have a lot to filter out, when you add another detector, things might happen and the variables to test are almost endless. Also I was using several Stalker signs and an ATR. What if there were other guns, could those be affected by interference differently?

So the testing you have done is in just one unique environment (your car), other environments could result in a different result on occasion, and it could be quite rare.

Not sure why you can make a statement that they dont/cant/never interfere.

If you want to run 2 detectors at once, there is no problem with this at all I fully support it - I do it all the time. And I used to make the same argument as you about two M4s. I really believed they could not interfere, until it occurred a few times - 2 years after i installed the Stir and way more than 2400 miles later. Other members told me to be careful, and they ended up being right - although rare, its possible that they can interfere and there are other members that posted videos about this.

I don't think its responsible to say that without a doubt there can never be interference, the message should be I don't see any issues, but run them together at your own risk as there can be issues and the MFGs do not recommend this and may not pay a ticket guarantee if you are running 2 detectors.

What kind of weirdos run 2 detectors anyway :)
@samq45 it's not worth it. He's proven time and again that he lives in fantasyland and nothing he ever says or believes can be wrong. We are collectively better as a forum if we let him just scream into the void and ignore him. Don't waste your time.
 

samq45

Premium Plus
Lifetime Premium
Advanced User
Joined
Jul 5, 2011
Messages
1,941
Reaction score
3,340
Location
Saratoga, NY
Actually, I did 2,400 miles of side by side interstate highway testing. That is hardly speculation.



I don't state that they can't or never interfere.
Just that in 2,400 miles, I didn't see it. And others like @WildOne have similar experiences and conclusions. In other threads I have explained that so long as the antenna patterns are in parallel and don't intersect, that the highly directional nature of what the RD "sees" (when RDs are in parallel) makes significant interaction unlikely. Now, point them at each other and you are far more likely to see an issue.



These are totally different issues/subjects. I never saw, in 2,400 miles, them ping-ponging.

The law of field density (inversely proportionate to the square of the distance) explains the rapid drop in signal strength. You are conflating two totally different subjects.



"weirdos"? Really? Is everyone with whom you disagree a "weirdo"? Oh my.
You would be surprised at the number of people here that do. Why insult many people whose expertise you cannot comprehend? Try to be more open minded. You might just learn something new.
Well we agree then - they could interfere. I am pretty sure I am more opened minded than you, plus you know I was having fun with that last comment as I have been one of the weirdos running 2 for quite some time.

But I am sorry if you think I was holding those two concepts together. I was just pointing out that you started (and continue to say) that they never beeped and when we point out that is not the way interference always works, you mentioned other items like the inverse square law and they have less emissions, Radenso tested old detectors - to which some of us do not agree those are factors that further your argument. There are certainly mitigating factors to all those statements. The ping ponging and Inverse square items are just two arguments you made against interference, they are distinct and separate, but I still disagree with them as proof they will mitigate any interfere.

The directional nature and parallel paths of any LO leakage is just something you made up to support your argument, its not based on fact. You don't address the attenuation of the signal with the windshield and the leakage from the detectors elsewhere, the fact that the LO signal does not come out of the horn as a straight line like a laser beam (they spread out and get weaker according to the inverse square law) and that the signals can still be picked up from the sides, like a cobra at a stoplight that is facing 90 degrees to you. Not to mention the rear horns putting signals behind you that bounce around from the cars metal and if there is a truck or other object in front of you that bounces the LO back to your car. Certainty the signal is the strongest coming out of the horn, but its not the only place it can leak.

In the last thread where you dug in pretty well, you said to go out and try to replicate your tests. It was a good idea - I did just that and I cannot replicate your results. I did see a reduction in range on the G2 every once in a while and it was rare - just like the M3s are rare. You mentioned that was a good way to see, if a bunch of people got the same results.

At this point I think you are just trolling. You ask other people to test and replicate your results, I could not replicate them and another poster said he thinks they interfere. Ill stop feeding you after this.
Post automatically merged:

@samq45 it's not worth it. He's proven time and again that he lives in fantasyland and nothing he ever says or believes can be wrong. We are collectively better as a forum if we let him just scream into the void and ignore him. Don't waste your time.
I know I should not feed the trolls. I also don't want anyone to get a ticket from running two detectors, so it was a good opportunity to post up that stuff from years ago.
 
Last edited:

MASI

Learning to Fly
Beginner User
Joined
Aug 20, 2020
Messages
361
Reaction score
719
Location
Moving ......
I also don't want anyone to get a ticket from running two detectors

Get a ticket for running 2 detectors? Oh my. Is there something in the water in the north-east?
Please be so kind as to enlighten me. On what planet can you get a ticket for running 2 detectors instead of running just one?
Post automatically merged:

The directional nature and parallel paths of any LO leakage is just something you made up to support your argument, its not based on fact.


Here we go again.

The directional radiation pattern of Ka horn antennas is well established. Here is a pattern:
 

Attachments

  • Ka-Band-Sector-Horn-3D-Radiation-Gain-Pattern-Testing-in-Anechoic-Chamber-Feature.jpg
    Ka-Band-Sector-Horn-3D-Radiation-Gain-Pattern-Testing-in-Anechoic-Chamber-Feature.jpg
    156.4 KB · Views: 12
  • Ka-Band-Sector-Horn-Measured-Polar-Radiation-Gain-Patterns-at-34-GHz.jpg
    Ka-Band-Sector-Horn-Measured-Polar-Radiation-Gain-Patterns-at-34-GHz.jpg
    470.8 KB · Views: 12
Last edited:

WildOne

Learning to Fly
Beginner User
Joined
Oct 16, 2020
Messages
389
Reaction score
893
Location
MD
Well we agree then - they could interfere. I am pretty sure I am more opened minded than you, plus you know I was having fun with that last comment as I have been one of the weirdos running 2 for quite some time.

But I am sorry if you think I was holding those two concepts together. I was just pointing out that you started (and continue to say) that they never beeped and when we point out that is not the way interference always works, you mentioned other items like the inverse square law and they have less emissions, Radenso tested old detectors - to which some of us do not agree those are factors that further your argument. There are certainly mitigating factors to all those statements. The ping ponging and Inverse square items are just two arguments you made against interference, they are distinct and separate, but I still disagree with them as proof they will mitigate any interfere.

The directional nature and parallel paths of any LO leakage is just something you made up to support your argument, its not based on fact. You don't address the attenuation of the signal with the windshield and the leakage from the detectors elsewhere, the fact that the LO signal does not come out of the horn as a straight line like a laser beam (they spread out and get weaker according to the inverse square law) and that the signals can still be picked up from the sides, like a cobra at a stoplight that is facing 90 degrees to you. Not to mention the rear horns putting signals behind you that bounce around from the cars metal and if there is a truck or other object in front of you that bounces the LO back to your car. Certainty the signal is the strongest coming out of the horn, but its not the only place it can leak.

In the last thread where you dug in pretty well, you said to go out and try to replicate your tests. It was a good idea - I did just that and I cannot replicate your results. I did see a reduction in range on the G2 every once in a while and it was rare - just like the M3s are rare. You mentioned that was a good way to see, if a bunch of people got the same results.

At this point I think you are just trolling. You ask other people to test and replicate your results, I could not replicate them and another poster said he thinks they interfere. Ill stop feeding you after this.
Post automatically merged:


I know I should not feed the trolls. I also don't want anyone to get a ticket from running two detectors, so it was a good opportunity to post up that stuff from years ago.
OK, here are some facts to confuse those with closed minds. All @MASI and I are trying to say is that our two detectors haven't seen any interference. That is both in false triggering and suppression of detection. I'm running a 12 year old detector version 3.872. It has no filters, hence the instantaneous K response. It also has spurs coming out. Not very high, but the are there. They are at 10.680GHz and 14.54GHz.

I measured these by placing a horn right at the front horn of the V1G1. No separation at all. The back antenna had no detectable leakage. The side had no detectable leakage. 6 in from the front antenna, the signal was barely detectable. Here are the screen shots:

V1G1_2lowB.jpg


V1G1_2highB.jpg




I did the same for the V1G2 with the latest version. It had leakage centered at 9.27GHz and 13.6GHz. Completely different frequencies. Hence the RF is completely different. The architecture is completly different. On the surface, the Gen2 would appear to be 10dB less output on Ku and maybe more on X band. There are technical reasons why it is much less detectable than the Gen1, but I won't go into the details why,so not to give the RDDs any hints. These shots are available to anyone with a spectrum analyzer and a horn.

V1G2_3lowB.jpg


V1G2_3highB.jpg


These shots were with a horn right at the front antenna. Like the Gen1, there was no dectable signal on the rear antenna or from the side of the box. Unlike the Gen1, the Gen2 leakage from the front antenna disappeared completely at a few inches from the front antenna.

So, there appears to be no technical reason why these two versions of RDs would interfere with each other in any way. This is NOT to say that other detectors couldn't. Like I have said, I have seen it with other combos. I don't see it here. There is more than enough reason to run both detectors so as to NOT get a ticket due to K IO or QT. The Gen2 is almost blind to these modes and will not alert you in time!! Trust the Gen2 K IO/QT at your own peril. Gen2 Ka IO/QT/CO is beyond compare. I think it is the best out there.

Once MikeV gets the K band fixed, I'm sure it will be unbeatable and at that point, I will only run the Gen2. Until then, there is more than enough reason to run BOTH!
 

Bossdad71

Premium Plus
Lifetime Premium
Advanced User
Joined
Jul 11, 2016
Messages
8,861
Reaction score
13,940
Location
Kansas
From reading his post,it would appear he did run then separately. He was just mentioning that running them together in other testing showed you cannot do that and expect consistent results.
love you avatar
Post automatically merged:

OK, here are some facts to confuse those with closed minds. All @MASI and I are trying to say is that our two detectors haven't seen any interference. That is both in false triggering and suppression of detection. I'm running a 12 year old detector version 3.872. It has no filters, hence the instantaneous K response. It also has spurs coming out. Not very high, but the are there. They are at 10.680GHz and 14.54GHz.

I measured these by placing a horn right at the front horn of the V1G1. No separation at all. The back antenna had no detectable leakage. The side had no detectable leakage. 6 in from the front antenna, the signal was barely detectable. Here are the screen shots:

View attachment 171481

View attachment 171482



I did the same for the V1G2 with the latest version. It had leakage centered at 9.27GHz and 13.6GHz. Completely different frequencies. Hence the RF is completely different. The architecture is completly different. On the surface, the Gen2 would appear to be 10dB less output on Ku and maybe more on X band. There are technical reasons why it is much less detectable than the Gen1, but I won't go into the details why,so not to give the RDDs any hints. These shots are available to anyone with a spectrum analyzer and a horn.

View attachment 171483

View attachment 171484

These shots were with a horn right at the front antenna. Like the Gen1, there was no dectable signal on the rear antenna or from the side of the box. Unlike the Gen1, the Gen2 leakage from the front antenna disappeared completely at a few inches from the front antenna.

So, there appears to be no technical reason why these two versions of RDs would interfere with each other in any way. This is NOT to say that other detectors couldn't. Like I have said, I have seen it with other combos. I don't see it here. There is more than enough reason to run both detectors so as to NOT get a ticket due to K IO or QT. The Gen2 is almost blind to these modes and will not alert you in time!! Trust the Gen2 K IO/QT at your own peril. Gen2 Ka IO/QT/CO is beyond compare. I think it is the best out there.

Once MikeV gets the K band fixed, I'm sure it will be unbeatable and at that point, I will only run the Gen2. Until then, there is more than enough reason to run BOTH!
so running the two together dont interfier with eachother ? is that what im reading
Post automatically merged:

Post automatically merged:

Get a ticket for running 2 detectors? Oh my. Is there something in the water in the north-east?
Please be so kind as to enlighten me. On what planet can you get a ticket for running 2 detectors instead of running just one?
you just made me spit out my coffee lol
 
Last edited:

Discord Server

Latest threads

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
93,145
Messages
1,420,169
Members
23,710
Latest member
edmaverik
Top