They have the ability to add many, often long-requested features:
@Rags - thanks again for your time, effort and $$ for testing.This is part 2 to this thread: https://www.rdforum.org/threads/110405/
I had time to finish up testing of the 33.8 and 34.7, in addition @Brainstorm69 indicated I should have been testing the RL360C with TSR off, so I re-ran K band tests again today with both TSR on and off with the RL360C in addition to running the other detectors again (to eliminate set up to set up variance).
The K source is a Kustom Golden Eagle with a K band antenna measured at 24.144 Ghz
The 33.8 source is a MPH Python II fs with a 33.8 antenna measured at 33.789 Ghz
The 34.7 source is a Stalker Dual with a 34.7 antenna measured at 34.691 Ghz
The settings are as follows:
RL360C and R7: Highway, Ka Narrow 2,4,5,6,8
V1G2: All bogeys mode, no custom frequencies
K notch On
K Block 1 Weak
K Block 2 Weak
K Filter On
K Verifier On
The longest detections were near this pin drop on the map:
View attachment 177941
The second longest detections were near this pin drop on the map:
View attachment 177942
The 3rd longest detections were at this pin drop on the map:
View attachment 177943
Here is the approximate location where constant alerting going towards the source were clustered:
View attachment 177944
Here are the results that will go with the above maps:
View attachment 177945
As you can see, the Redline 360C was the only detector to alert at the longest distance cluster this go around. It also alerted at the 2nd and 3rd points. It did this with both TSR on and Off. The V1G2 was able to alert at the second location 2 out of 3 times, the R7 never was able to.
They were all silent after the 3rd detection point until nearing the source where they then would alert constantly up to the source. The constant detection location results looked like this:
View attachment 177955
Running the other direction from behind the source (forward facing detection):
View attachment 177948
View attachment 177949
All would quickly lose the signal, then pick up the signal at different distances later on, these are averages of 3 runs:
View attachment 177950
Again, FF results for 33.8:
View attachment 177951
Finally, here's the 34.7 results:
View attachment 177952
Again, all would lose the signal quickly then pick it back up at different distances, these are the average of 3 runs:
View attachment 177956
Lastly, Forward Facing 34.7:
View attachment 177954
During testing, I noted some odd behavior:
The RL360C when passing the K band antenna, the arrows would transition, but when flipping from front to back, the sound from the detector would stop, then start again but would take a second or two for the audible sound to match the level meter on the detector. It only did this with K band, on Ka it seemed somewhat normal.
The R7 would report up to 3 bogeys on the 34.7 antenna when getting near it. The RL360C and V1G2 only reported 1 bogey for all tests. The R7 reported 1 bogey on K and 33.8.
It looks like the RL360C is a very strong performer on K band distance, if Escort and Valentine get the K band reaction times fixed, they would both have the top detectors with regards to K performance.
The newest firmware does, indeed, seem to have improved Ka performance a bit, but it still doesn't seem to be as good as the V1G2 overall...but both are really very close in reality. My R7 has great performance as well, but it doesn't seem to be as strong overall as the other 2.
Of course, this is just 1 sampling of these detectors, so your results may vary
There are more tests with different courses planned. You will see more on axis testing at vastly longer distances.@Rags - thanks again for your time, effort and $$ for testing. I have to admit that I'm having a bit of a hard time wrapping my head around the K-band results given previous testing I have done with these detectors. The only thing I can think of that may explain it is the fact that most of this course is off-axis.
I know that on-axis, the RL360c is likely stronger than the R7. The previous testing I have done says the V1G2 isn't nearly. That said, I do know the V1G2 has tremendous off-axis capabilities. And it has a somewhat strange ability to detect off-axis weak K-band that doesn't seem to be affected by the delay that on-axis K-band presents. So maybe that is it.
But then there's the FF results, which I don't think are off-axis at all based on your maps. So that whole analysis doesn't play for the FF. Those results make me wonder if you have a somewhat weak R7.
I guess I just need to go do some more testing myself. Most all the testing I have done'with these detectors has been on-axis. I may need to find a better off-axis type of course.
Fair points. I have also seen some evidence that the RL360c may have better response time against weak, off-axis K-band signals. So you may be onto something there.There are more tests with different courses planned. You will see more on axis testing at vastly longer distances.
Going into the test, I expected the redline to dominate both the other detectors on K band. It did dominate the R7 and bested the V1G2 in this particular test. I expected better results from the R7 as well. I don't think anything is wrong with mine:
1. This just got back from uniden. Its performance seems the same as what I sent in.
2. It finds door openers with greater range than any detector I've ever owned.
3. It dominates my Redline original.
If someone wants to loan me a spare R7, I will be happy to test it against mine to verify.
I think the problem with testing is that sometimes we just focus on the terrain limited clusters of detections. I'm trying very hard to illustrate the strengths and weaknesses between the detectors. Off axis performance is an indicator of raw sensitivity balanced with reactivity. I always raise an eyebrow when I see a detector known for monster off axis performance vs the others performing worse in an overall test. The RL360C dominates in K band off axis performance in my experience. It's also better than the R7 on Ka in that regard as well. So I'm not too shocked to see it lead the R7 with regards to both.
With regards to the V1G2, I think you may be on to something regarding the reactivity improving inversely to signal strength. That could certainly explain why it did well on this course, but didn't alert on K band at the longest detection cluster point. That cluster is where a short window to a stronger signal is present. The reactivity hurt it because it didn't stay in the signal long enough to get past the delay. The subsequent points are all weaker in signal strength until you reach the constant alert cluster. Forward facing is a more persistent signal starting weak gradually getting stronger. That would support your theory.
I also have to wonder if the RL360C sees better response time with weak signals.
I have some ideas on how to test I/O performance at long distance.
TSR has little effect on the RL360C with this firmware from what I can see when looking at pure range.If possible and no other signal in K world is present, like to see K verifier off on the V1G2 since you are running no TSF/TSR off on the others, as you are testing.
TSR has little effect on the RL360C with this firmware from what I can see when looking at pure range.
I never run with TSF off on the R7 and didn't test it with it off. Same with the Valentine and KV.
I am willing to show test results with them off. I do know that V1G2 will show much better K performance with it off. At least it did with older firmware versions.
I just don't see people turning those off on those detectors, especially the R7, because it's so inconvenient to navigate the menu to turn it on and off. At least with the V1G2 I could just make a profile and attach it to locations, so maybe it would be worth it in that case.
Yeah, I only ran with it off because of special request. And it didn't really have much effect on performance. As stated earlier in this thread, I ran with the settings I run and expect most others to run. It didn't offer an advantage against the others, so I don't feel it polluted the testing whatsoever.If one does show any test with any filter off, best to show with all on and off. The RL360c and V1G2 only really have one true filter vs the R7 having two true filters and other sub.
When you do, I look forward to see that test !
Trust me... I hear ya. Been there...Yeah, I only ran with it off because of special request. And it didn't really have much effect on performance. As stated earlier in this thread, I ran with the settings I run and expect most others to run. It didn't offer an advantage against the others, so I don't feel it polluted the testing whatsoever.
Yes, 1.8 is definitely more sensitive on Ka. I can't find a test where it doesn't beat the R7 on Ka range. On 1.7, they were closer.Great testing @Rags ; Just picked up a second R360C after the wife was ready to throw the "piece of junk R7" out the window (her words, not mine). Her words were: "You either get me a new V1 or the Redline you have or I'm outta here like Melinda Gates." The radar detector industry won that round. Mine was a build date of 1921 (this week and just got it today), but it shipped with 1.7. Are you seeing much difference between 1.7 and 1.8??
So in other words the R7 was not set up right and on the latest 135 firmware?Great testing @Rags ; Just picked up a second R360C after the wife was ready to throw the "piece of junk R7" out the window (her words, not mine). Her words were: "You either get me a new V1 or the Redline you have or I'm outta here like Melinda Gates." The radar detector industry won that round. Mine was a build date of 1921 (this week and just got it today), but it shipped with 1.7. Are you seeing much difference between 1.7 and 1.8??