Radenso Pro M - 3rd Version RM079

cihkal

♟️ WWG1WGA ⛈️
Corgi Lovers
Advanced User
Premium Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2014
Messages
3,978
Reaction score
7,469
Hey all,

I use a Pro M and this is my second go around with owning one. Sold my R7 and bought a new Pro M probably back in early Sept. I'm a very happy owner to say the least!

My first version was a RM087 which is known as the "second hardware version" . Some Canadian users were testing with an earlier version know as RM077, but it was never sold in mass quantities or even in the US.

Anyway, I thought I would open mine up as there were talks about potential hardware changes to the laser circuitry. Basically improved hardware to like V1 levels of performance, but the firmware has issues so it's been nerfed.

Well, to my surprise with this RM079 version that is indeed the case! There's a whole new laser sensor compared to what is shown in the FCCID.

Also, I noticed the MR board is now at revision 5, up from 4, and the main board is at revision 6, up from 3!

IMG_20191201_010254.jpg



IMG_20191201_010245.jpg



IMG_20191201_005917.jpg
 

Attachments

Last edited:

Heywood

Learning Something New, Still Dying Stupid
Corgi Lovers
Advanced User
Lifetime Premium Member
Joined
May 12, 2016
Messages
5,291
Reaction score
10,930
Location
The Tail Lights Pulling Away From You
Nicely done. Thanks for taking it apart and having a look. I could do it, but I probably wouldn’t know what I’m looking at.
Better someone like you doing it.


I still have my R077 Pro-M. Of course I also have the 087 as well.

R079 is a new one on me.
 

winterbrew

Poliscan Hunter
Advanced User
Premium Member
Joined
Mar 5, 2012
Messages
2,251
Reaction score
2,897
Location
Perth, Western Australia
Yes, this is as described to me by the Genevo AU dealer.
He says his One M's with latest hardware and Genevo firmware are all alerting to laser at expected levels, and minimal falling.
 

cihkal

♟️ WWG1WGA ⛈️
Corgi Lovers
Advanced User
Premium Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2014
Messages
3,978
Reaction score
7,469
Now can anyone provide insight as to what the MR board actually is?

Somehow the Pro M/RC-M have the best filtering and modulated K threat performance on the market. Yet they're just analog frequency (legacy) detectors. On top of that, the Pro M has a pathetically weak processor. So we know the heavy lifting would likely be done ahead of time. I say that because Radenso has said turning things on like MRCD has no ill effect on performance. Seems to be true from my experience.

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk
Post automatically merged:

@Jon at Radenso or @Randy at Radenso I know there has been a lot of talk about Theia, but if you guys can, will you comment on the hardware changes with the Pro M? Specifically what appears to be a new laser sensor, updated MR board (rev 5 from rev 4), and updated main board (rev 6 from rev 3) with version RM079. I also remember Jon mentioning that things were done to improve emissions, but that was always a general comment that was not tied to a specific version or timeline.

Before I say this I fully acknowledge Genevo is simply a business partner in terms of pooling resources together at times, but I do notice on their site they advertise the One M as being updated for 2019; this goes along with the laser detection improvement European users were talking about. Anyway, it now seems that new Pro Ms are equipped with these hardware changes. That's pretty cool regardless and if accurate!

Can we expect a bit more out of the hardware in terms of filtering or something of the sort for these newer versions, or is that not really in the works for a future firmware update... or do the hardware differences, outside of the laser sensor change, yield no benefits?

Any info at all would be very much appreciated. Thought about calling into CS tomorrow but figure that is a bit rude since this pertains to random tech info that you wouldn't know unless you, or someone you know, opens a Pro M.

I understand if you can't or don't want to comment, thanks for the time either way.
 
Last edited:

Jon at Radenso

Manufacturer
Corgi Lovers
Advanced User
Premium Member
Manufacturer
Joined
Oct 9, 2012
Messages
2,492
Reaction score
19,418
Age
31
Filtering wise, nothing changed.

Laser wise, they broke it. The factory can't calibrate it properly which is why the laser performance sucks so bad. We have been trying to work with them for months to fix it, but they are extremely slow. Laser falsing was so bad with original firmware that you could put the detector in a cardboard box and it would constantly false. So sensitivity is currently reduced until they calibrate it so it's not a false alert machine.

This type of thing was a major reason we brought engineering in-house going forward.
 

cihkal

♟️ WWG1WGA ⛈️
Corgi Lovers
Advanced User
Premium Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2014
Messages
3,978
Reaction score
7,469
Jon confirmed the filtering hasn't changed, thank you for that! When I saw the MR Board's rev increase from 4 to 5 I was doing a lot of thinking about what its function is.

So we know some general clues, we're dealing with "legacy detectors" at the current moment. My understanding is they (extremely simplified) basically do this: pre-amp the signal if you're not cheap, mix the signal, condition it/down convert, detect an IF that is always fixed to the same value if a legit signal is detected (maybe?), and determine if enough energy was present to warrant an alert?

I might be way off! Anyway, if that's somewhat accurate and these things really are just frequency detectors maybe there really isn't too much to the filtering. And maybe they've all basically hit a wall... I mean the Pro M appears to be as good as it gets for what's on the market, and it's actually pretty damn good.

But to be pretty damn good it got a hardware add-on known as its "MR board". So I think this added circuit is a demodulator. I haven't been able to verify that for sure yet, maybe never will, but I've been trying to look up components on the board, components around the board and what it's connected to, different demodulators and techniques, and trying to learn more about superhets like these so I get a better idea of the capabilities/limitations.

One demodulator type is based on a PLL and so I wonder if that's the technique a lot of current RDs have. No idea yet because I haven't been able to research this much. But it is interesting that most modern RDs that aren't an extremely budget design can filter decently; look at the V1 for example with a software update. The more affordable Unidens also don't appear to have special hardware. So something built into more modern designs offers the opportunity for demodulation, or really the detection of modulation so a signal can be omitted?

Something to read: PLL Demodulator

Maybe you can use the above technique in some manner to detect and omit some modulated signals, and due to the typical design of modern RDs this often can require no hardware change?

So back to the Pro M and it's great filtering. I wonder if it can beat the Uniden Rs in filtering/modulated K threat performance because despite the R's having a 400MHz DSP (2 for the R7), maybe the complex algorithms necessary are too taxing via software for them to compete in a cost effective manner to the Pro M's hardware solution. That would possibly explain why on 1.46 the R1/3 did great on MRCD/T but then suffered on regular K. It could also explain why the performance would vary greatly depending on how much traffic was around - aka BSM noise that resembled, in my case, the MRCT cameras I see. I know a lot of BSM resembles it to some degree with legacy detectors because the Pro M struggles with MRCT falsing. BUT, the Pro M doesn't seem to suffer in MRCT performance or general K performance if there is a lot of noise around... it just works consistently. Seeing how weak its main MCU is I would bet my Pro M the heavy lifting is a hardware solution.

As for the Max series, maybe it's just because Escort can't utilize a FPGA to save their lives. Jon has hinted or mentioned multiple times that basically there is a small chance Uniden could match the M's filtering in software; basically skeptical it would happen but not saying it's impossible. That probably goes for Escort too, but they have a greater challenge using a FGPA, due to complexity, over a DSP like Uniden uses. However, Escort's platform should have more potential in filtering performance if all other things are equal. I would guess that if someone was really savvy with a FPGA they could match the Pro M's hardware solution..... but I could be totally wrong on all of this lol.

Just gotta keep learning :D
 
Last edited:

DrHow

Going “Plaid” ASAP (Tesla S) RDT refugee
Corgi Lovers
Advanced User
Lifetime Premium Member
Joined
May 18, 2018
Messages
3,642
Reaction score
6,076
^^^^ My street of the pants work with both M and 360 platform. Even with the slight backwards of BSM filtering with latest ER release, they beat the BSM filtering over the M hands down. Even with their “code” the FPGA and other tech inside does a better job. I am not the only one. Universal with users of my gear. The M is still liked and revered by users. display/feature limitations and all.
 

Bossdad71

Advanced User
Premium Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2016
Messages
7,695
Reaction score
11,233
Location
Kansas
Hey all,

I use a Pro M and this is my second go around with owning one. Sold my R7 and bought a new Pro M probably back in early Sept. I'm a very happy owner to say the least!

My first version was a RM087 which is known as the "second hardware version" . Some Canadian users were testing with an earlier version know as RM077, but it was never sold in mass quantities or even in the US.

Anyway, I thought I would open mine up as there were talks about potential hardware changes to the laser circuitry. Basically improved hardware to like V1 levels of performance, but the firmware has issues so it's been nerfed.

Well, to my surprise with this RM079 version that is indeed the case! There's a whole new laser sensor compared to what is shown in the FCCID.

Also, I noticed the MR board is now at revision 5, up from 4, and the main board is at revision 6, up from 3!

View attachment 135764


View attachment 135765


View attachment 135766
some people put them on their winshield and wait for the cops, others cough tear them apart and look at the inners,, get some help brother, there are groups set up for people that have that addiction :)
 

Heywood

Learning Something New, Still Dying Stupid
Corgi Lovers
Advanced User
Lifetime Premium Member
Joined
May 12, 2016
Messages
5,291
Reaction score
10,930
Location
The Tail Lights Pulling Away From You
^^^^ My street of the pants work with both M and 360 platform. Even with the slight backwards of BSM filtering with latest ER release, they beat the BSM filtering over the M hands down. Even with their “code” the FPGA and other tech inside does a better job. I am not the only one. Universal with users of my gear. The M is still liked and revered by users. display/feature limitations and all.
Respectfully disagree with what I’ve found after limited use.
It may seem better to BSM.... that’s assuming it actually sees it.

When it can’t see a CW K band speed sign .... but every other detector can.... is it filtering or a miss?
Even the same type of speed signs at different locations, it’s not consistent. Even the same one at the same location.

When it can’t see a CW Bushnell ....... but every other detector can... all the time. Is that filtering... or a miss?

There’s a lot of assumptions that this is suppose to be normal.... when it acts so different than every other detector on the market.
Even the things that are suppose to be normal.... it can’t be done consistently or reliably.

I have to add.... this is all on FW 1.11 Max360C. I can’t speak on the 360 or past FW’s.
For the Max360C.... on FW 1.11, I have one word.
“Punt”
 

DrHow

Going “Plaid” ASAP (Tesla S) RDT refugee
Corgi Lovers
Advanced User
Lifetime Premium Member
Joined
May 18, 2018
Messages
3,642
Reaction score
6,076
Respectfully disagree with what I’ve found after limited use.
It may seem better to BSM.... that’s assuming it actually sees it.

When it can’t see a CW K band speed sign .... but every other detector can.... is it filtering or a miss?
Even the same type of speed signs at different locations, it’s not consistent. Even the same one at the same location.

When it can’t see a CW Bushnell ....... but every other detector can... all the time. Is that filtering... or a miss?

There’s a lot of assumptions that this is suppose to be normal.... when it acts so different than every other detector on the market.
Even the things that are suppose to be normal.... it can’t be done consistently or reliably.

I have to add.... this is all on FW 1.11 Max360C. I can’t speak on the 360 or past FW’s.
For the Max360C.... on FW 1.11, I have one word.
“Punt”
You cannot use speed signs as a gauge. That is like using a Bushnell. Some work, some do not, some work part of the time. ER does filter them. Period. Just like my R7 filters the speed sign (so does the Pro M) Going onto I465 north from east bound I70 just past the airport. Even the R7 will ignore many (same for Pro M) at times (without lockout being saved).

look, some of us want find anything to slam ER. Get that. Then we have confused newer members influenced by what become by accident (or on purpose) social influencers inside RDF. After my last time being stupid declaring ER sleeps while on 3000mi road trip being wrong.... Turned out is it was my Bushnell. I am done with looking for problems under rocks of a different stream. Speed signs, supposed CW or not, cannot he used as definitive gauge.

ok, this is Radenso section. I am done with any more ER mentions here. I should not have continued the discussion.
 
Last edited:

cihkal

♟️ WWG1WGA ⛈️
Corgi Lovers
Advanced User
Premium Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2014
Messages
3,978
Reaction score
7,469
^^^^ My street of the pants work with both M and 360 platform. Even with the slight backwards of BSM filtering with latest ER release, they beat the BSM filtering over the M hands down. Even with their “code” the FPGA and other tech inside does a better job. I am not the only one. Universal with users of my gear. The M is still liked and revered by users. display/feature limitations and all.
Yeah I know you use them with your employees and the preferred is the 360, then M if I remember correctly. You offer a really good perspective because you're both an enthusiast and someone who gets feedback from more vanilla users, maybe slowly turning into enthusiasts too.

You got my interest peaked now to at least try one again in Chicago for testing purposes to compare to my M!

Might need to grab one from BRD, saw he has a few for sale.

some people put them on their winshield and wait for the cops, others cough tear them apart and look at the inners,, get some help brother, there are groups set up for people that have that addiction :)
Haha you're into something.... and probably right 🤪!!! If I had my way I'd be tearing into the thing and looking up every damn component on it lol. Maybe that's what I'll do during my Christmas vaca, and some more MRCT testing!
Post automatically merged:

You cannot use speed signs as a gauge. That is like using a Bushnell. Some work, some do not, some work part of the time. ER does filter them. Period. Just like my R7 filters the speed sign (so does the Pro M) Going onto I465 north from east bound I70 just past the airport. Even the R7 will ignore many (same for Pro M) at times (without lockout being saved).

look, some of us want find anything to slam ER. Get that. Then we have confused newer members influenced by what become by accident (or on purpose) social influencers inside RDF. After my last time being stupid declaring ER sleeps while on 3000mi road trip being wrong.... Turned out is it was my Bushnell. I am done with looking for problems under rocks of a different stream. Speed signs, supposed CW or not, cannot he used as definitive gauge.

ok, this is Radenso section. I am done with any more ER mentions here. I should not have continued the discussion.
Was just gonna say that I looked up a demod technique which uses a PLL. I wonder if that's one of the methods utilized by everyone. The LO is essentially used to track modulation of incoming mixed signal if I remember correctly.

Also if I remember correctly, some of these signals look dirty or have more "unintended" modulation characteristics than others. I believe the bushnell is one of them. Maybe Escort is more aggressive and only allowing really "clean" CW signals to go through, which is why we see inconsistent behavior with cheap guns like the bushnell.

Would also make sense for speed signs since those are probably physically abused from being moved around and out in the elements.

I fully agree Inna sense, seeing how beautiful the internals are for the 360. Outside of the budget horn, she's a dream compared to other things out there. The platform had come a long way since when I had it the first week it was released.
 
Last edited:

Heywood

Learning Something New, Still Dying Stupid
Corgi Lovers
Advanced User
Lifetime Premium Member
Joined
May 12, 2016
Messages
5,291
Reaction score
10,930
Location
The Tail Lights Pulling Away From You
You cannot use speed signs as a gauge. That is like using a Bushnell. Some work, some do not, some work part of the time.

... Turned out is it was my Bushnell. I am done with looking for problems under rocks of a different stream. Speed signs, supposed CW or not, cannot he used as definitive gauge.
lol. I’m not using a speed sign as a definitive gauge for anything other than to see if the detector alerts. If it’s not, I wanna know why.

I don’t know what it’s like where you are, but I have a set course of 7 speed signs and 4 door openers all with in a 2 mile radius of my house. If I hit the lights right, it takes me 7 minutes during the late evening to run through the whole course.

How do I know this? I’ve run it at least 500 times with every detector I’ve had in my hands. It’s close and it’s quick.

Guess how many have had a issue flat out missing a k band alert on any of these active 7 signs.

2 detectors. That’s it. Out of all the detectors and all the time 2. Not even testing runs as a lot of these I have to pass to a couple of stores I go to.
Speed sign #2 and speed sign #4 did it to the R3 on 1.46 with MRCD active. I could do it and did it on demand. Yes, I have them numbered to keep track.



The other detector is the Max360C with FW 1.11.
I need more multiple runs on the course. Just a few runs isn’t sufficient. I will say that against Speed sign #1, which I go by multiple time a day when I’m out, has been a mixed bag of inconsistency.

Alert, don’t alert but show its locked out, Dead silence. Today going one way, it showed the lockout of 24.151. Coming home, it didn’t even register. All with in 2 hours time. I could see it, it recorded my speed, but the Max was silent.

Trust me, my testing is sound and I really don’t know why I’m even bothering to put this much effort into it explaining it. Maybe it’s for the betterment of the new members that you think I’m trying to dissuade from buying a Max360?

Far from it. I have the testing results, I have the videos, showing what the hell it’s doing. Not lip service from Larry or anyone else. Actually documented video proof of what’s really going on.

I don’t see this from anyone else showing how or telling me how to constantly make this story true.

Your not looking under rocks under a different stream because it’s a fabricated story. I call BS on it and I can and did prove it.
Anyone else care to prove me wrong? Anyone? Show me

Telling anyone else wise is a disservice to the community. It doesn’t help anyone to go along with the Escort story when there’s many examples of it not working right. When I mean right, I mean like every other detector that’s suppose to detect radar reliably. Consistently.

DrHow
Your absolutely wrong with siding with Escort and believing the that this is normal operation of the detector.

That it does something magical that no other detector does.

This is the same phoney balcony crap I went through with the Uniden R3 when I brought it up before. When they updated and fixed the FW, it no longer does this. It acts like every other detector.

I expect that the Max360C will eventually get fixed once they figure it out and it too will react like every other detector to these same K band signals.

I’m so done with this load of BS. Stop telling me and start showing me or stop with the everything’s fine crap.
 

DrHow

Going “Plaid” ASAP (Tesla S) RDT refugee
Corgi Lovers
Advanced User
Lifetime Premium Member
Joined
May 18, 2018
Messages
3,642
Reaction score
6,076
lol. I’m not using a speed sign as a definitive gauge for anything other than to see if the detector alerts. If it’s not, I wanna know why.

I don’t know what it’s like where you are, but I have a set course of 7 speed signs and 4 door openers all with in a 2 mile radius of my house. If I hit the lights right, it takes me 7 minutes during the late evening to run through the whole course.

How do I know this? I’ve run it at least 500 times with every detector I’ve had in my hands. It’s close and it’s quick.

Guess how many have had a issue flat out missing a k band alert on any of these active 7 signs.

2 detectors. That’s it. Out of all the detectors and all the time 2. Not even testing runs as a lot of these I have to pass to a couple of stores I go to.
Speed sign #2 and speed sign #4 did it to the R3 on 1.46 with MRCD active. I could do it and did it on demand. Yes, I have them numbered to keep track.



The other detector is the Max360C with FW 1.11.
I need more multiple runs on the course. Just a few runs isn’t sufficient. I will say that against Speed sign #1, which I go by multiple time a day when I’m out, has been a mixed bag of inconsistency.

Alert, don’t alert but show its locked out, Dead silence. Today going one way, it showed the lockout of 24.151. Coming home, it didn’t even register. All with in 2 hours time. I could see it, it recorded my speed, but the Max was silent.

Trust me, my testing is sound and I really don’t know why I’m even bothering to put this much effort into it explaining it. Maybe it’s for the betterment of the new members that you think I’m trying to dissuade from buying a Max360?

Far from it. I have the testing results, I have the videos, showing what the hell it’s doing. Not lip service from Larry or anyone else. Actually documented video proof of what’s really going on.

I don’t see this from anyone else showing how or telling me how to constantly make this story true.

Your not looking under rocks under a different stream because it’s a fabricated story. I call BS on it and I can and did prove it.
Anyone else care to prove me wrong? Anyone? Show me

Telling anyone else wise is a disservice to the community. It doesn’t help anyone to go along with the Escort story when there’s many examples of it not working right. When I mean right, I mean like every other detector that’s suppose to detect radar reliably. Consistently.

DrHow
Your absolutely wrong with siding with Escort and believing the that this is normal operation of the detector.

That it does something magical that no other detector does.

This is the same phoney balcony crap I went through with the Uniden R3 when I brought it up before. When they updated and fixed the FW, it no longer does this. It acts like every other detector.

I expect that the Max360C will eventually get fixed once they figure it out and it too will react like every other detector to these same K band signals.

I’m so done with this load of BS. Stop telling me and start showing me or stop with the everything’s fine crap.
I do not run ER systems with MRCD on. That is one difference how you are using it.
Post automatically merged:

Yeah I know you use them with your employees and the preferred is the 360, then M if I remember correctly. You offer a really good perspective because you're both an enthusiast and someone who gets feedback from more vanilla users, maybe slowly turning into enthusiasts too.

You got my interest peaked now to at least try one again in Chicago for testing purposes to compare to my M!

Might need to grab one from BRD, saw he has a few for sale.



Haha you're into something.... and probably right 🤪!!! If I had my way I'd be tearing into the thing and looking up every damn component on it lol. Maybe that's what I'll do during my Christmas vaca, and some more MRCT testing!
Post automatically merged:


Was just gonna say that I looked up a demod technique which uses a PLL. I wonder if that's one of the methods utilized by everyone. The LO is essentially used to track modulation of incoming mixed signal if I remember correctly.

Also if I remember correctly, some of these signals look dirty or have more "unintended" modulation characteristics than others. I believe the bushnell is one of them. Maybe Escort is more aggressive and only allowing really "clean" CW signals to go through, which is why we see inconsistent behavior with cheap guns like the bushnell.

Would also make sense for speed signs since those are probably physically abused from being moved around and out in the elements.

I fully agree Inna sense, seeing how beautiful the internals are for the 360. Outside of the budget horn, she's a dream compared to other things out there. The platform had come a long way since when I had it the first week it was released.
Give one a try (or I will loan one to you over holiday like the EX while back). We can PM on settings. Of course no MRCT on Max 360c platform. MRCD would be off. Pro M, CT is on some of the time up your way. Otherwise CT is off. I appreciate your words of support. I get ecstatic when I read your hardware review of RDs from the inside (same for squirrel). In meantime back to Radenso discussion.
 
Last edited:

Discord Server

Latest threads

Forum statistics

Threads
87,726
Messages
1,334,400
Members
22,096
Latest member
ThatRedCivic
Top