My V1 saved my butt today

Originally Posted by JackG

Buy an 8500. It doesn't have the "cool" arrows, but it is programmable, can track multiple bogeys (if that's really necessary), and has better KA sensitivity, in my own experience. My 8500 alerted me to a KA threat about 6 seconds before my friend's V1 alerted him. We were traveling side-by-side on a four-lane, and he wondered why I hit the brakes. A little while later his V1 got around to telling him why, complete with a nice arrow pointed forward!

I'll take my 8500.

The arrows are very very functional. That's what makes them "cool". I'm a form follows function kind of guy. If you had one you'd know. I can't tell you why your 8500 had the 6 sec. heads up in your experience, there could be a plethora of explanations and not limited to, e.g., different program running on V1: L, vs l vs A, or different mounting position, different car therefore different diffraction profile, the radar gun was biased to your lane, V1 is broken, baby Jimbo stuck a piece of gum on the front antenna of V1, etc... I dunno.

I do know most scientific testing disagrees with you. The V1 virtually dominates all others, i.e.

Car and Driver,

http://www.caranddriver.com/features/1993/the-great-detector-test-page3.html


And my favorite,

http://www.guysoflidar.com/radar-detector-test-fall-2006/radar-detector-test.html


It can be argued there is a bias there, but that's a stretch. (Although I do believe there are a few dummy forums out there that I ran into, especially Craig Peterson smells fishy http://valentine1.com/lab/V1Hater.asp). I say that because I have read ALL the reviews word for word, and feel he has a clear bias which is unfounded. It's ok to have a bias, it's a free world for the most part. My thing is that I prefer a bias that's well founded. Hey that's why I drive a Boxster instead of a VW bug type I.

[JackG]

boxsterz,

I've had some experience with a V1, and I just didn't find the arrows that useful. If there's an alert, I slow down. When it's gone, I resume. For me, the arrows are not a must-have, just "cool", and not worth an extra $100.

My post was merely an attempt to correct the mis-information that keeps flowing, and to relate a real-world experience I had. It's obvious that many people have become passionate about V1's. Whether it's because of a great product or great marketing doesn't matter. I think they are a good detector, but I'm not a V1 cheerleader. Others are, and that's OK.

As you point out, most of the "tests" and forums out there are biased in some way. You point out two tests that rated the V1 as better, but I'm sure you know that there have been tests that rated the 8500 as the winner as well. Also, even if one of those sensitivity tests were actually run properly so the results can really be compared evenly, that doesn't mean those lab results will translate to the real world. There are abundant examples of that.

In the end, you pay your money and you take your chances.

[QUOTE=JackG]boxsterz,

I've had some experience with a V1, and I just didn't find the arrows that useful. If there's an alert, I slow down. When it's gone, I resume. For me, the arrows are not a must-have, just "cool", and not worth an extra $100.

Originally Posted by JackG

JackG,

I don't think you had it long enough. The arrows help in scenarios like this ( from another post of mine of personal experience) ..."I get 2 signals on my V1. One behind, and one in front. Traffic is light on the freeway and it's lightly sprinkling. Only 4 cars including me. The one in front has me puzzled because it's an Infinity, so I concentrate on the two cars behind me. No biggie, I'm going the speed limit. I've traveled this road many times, and sometimes there is a faint false, but it never follows me. Sure enough I spot the car with cop like running lights. As he closes on me, signal gets stronger. I make damn sure I'm going the speed limit. As he passes I spot him. Yup! State Trooper. The other car was probably going 65 but he doesn't pull him over . About 3 miles later, I see flashing lights. He pulls over a white minivan! I'm so glad I got the V1. Any other detector and I wouldn't have known WHERE TO FOCUS my attention."


If falses never occured, then you simply slow down. However, since falses do happen and far exceed real traps, it's annoying slowing down on every warning (false or legit). That's when the arrows help you weed out the falses. The same is true for the bogey counter, on a familiar overpass that gives me 1 false sometimes. Bogey counter told me 2, so I slowed, and sure enough smokey was on top THAT time zapping people.

Originally Posted by JackG

My post was merely an attempt to correct the mis-information that keeps flowing, and to relate a real-world experience I had. It's obvious that many people have become passionate about V1's. Whether it's because of a great product or great marketing doesn't matter. I think they are a good detector, but I'm not a V1 cheerleader. Others are, and that's OK.

That's why I'm here. I wouldn't call myself a cheerleader. I'm like you, here to learn the real deal, and to correct mis-information when I see it. That is my sole purpose in posting this, I have nothing to gain whatsoever and have no agenda. So when you say the arrows aren't that important, you see where I'm coming from. They are important.

Originally Posted by JackG

As you point out, most of the "tests" and forums out there are biased in some way. You point out two tests that rated the V1 as better, but I'm sure you know that there have been tests that rated the 8500 as the winner as well.

I've always felt Car and Driver as being honest and thorough. I also trust GOL. Neither of which have been criticised as biased that I am aware of (which is not to say it's impossible). The Peterson reviews have known critics as you've seen, besides his affiliation makes anything he says suspect.

Originally Posted by JackG

Also, even if one of those sensitivity tests were actually run properly so the results can really be compared evenly, that doesn't mean those lab results will translate to the real world. There are abundant examples of that.

They are comparing it as evenly as possible. It's as good as it gets. Testing conditions are standardized. As for your "anomaly", it does seem strange that it contradicts, standardized scientific trusted sources. I think it was probably due to different sensitivity settings in the respective detectors. I don't know.


In the end, if you're happy with your detector, great good for you. My $100 is well spent on the gas and brake pads SAVED from not slowing down on every single false.

[JackG]

Originally Posted by boxsterz

JackG,

I don't think you had it long enough. The arrows help in scenarios like this ( from another post of mine of personal experience) ..."I get 2 signals on my V1. One behind, and one in front. Traffic is light on the freeway and it's lightly sprinkling. Only 4 cars including me. The one in front has me puzzled because it's an Infinity, so I concentrate on the two cars behind me. No biggie, I'm going the speed limit. I've traveled this road many times, and sometimes there is a faint false, but it never follows me. Sure enough I spot the car with cop like running lights. As he closes on me, signal gets stronger. I make damn sure I'm going the speed limit. As he passes I spot him. Yup! State Trooper. The other car was probably going 65 but he doesn't pull him over . About 3 miles later, I see flashing lights. He pulls over a white minivan! I'm so glad I got the V1. Any other detector and I wouldn't have known WHERE TO FOCUS my attention."

The signal in front was a reflection. The signal behind was the real one. While you were looking at the arrows and around you trying to figure things out, I was lifting and saving my butt. No arrows (falsly pointing at a reflection) needed.

If falses never occured, then you simply slow down. However, since falses do happen and far exceed real traps, it's annoying slowing down on every warning (false or legit). That's when the arrows help you weed out the falses. The same is true for the bogey counter, on a familiar overpass that gives me 1 false sometimes. Bogey counter told me 2, so I slowed, and sure enough smokey was on top THAT time zapping people.

Maybe the 8500 doesn't false as much as the V1, or it is better at weeding out the real stuff. There are places that I travel through that have weak signals (falses), and I've also encountered "real" radar in those places. The 8500 told me very plainly that there was a different signal there.



That's why I'm here. I wouldn't call myself a cheerleader. I'm like you, here to learn the real deal, and to correct mis-information when I see it. That is my sole purpose in posting this, I have nothing to gain whatsoever and have no agenda. So when you say the arrows aren't that important, you see where I'm coming from. They are important.

Not to me.


I've always felt Car and Driver as being honest and thorough. I also trust GOL. Neither of which have been criticised as biased that I am aware of (which is not to say it's impossible). The Peterson reviews have known critics as you've seen, besides his affiliation makes anything he says suspect.

C&D has an adgenda... it's called advertising dollars. GOL may be legit, but it's just some guys that have a common interest. There's no reason to think that they are using good equipment or a true scientific method to do their comparisons. Besides, as I said, a measurement of sensitivity in a lab does not tell the entire story. There are tons of equipment that measure well in a lab, but perform poorly in the real world. Not saying that the V1 is one of them, just that lab numbers are not the only measurement.



They are comparing it as evenly as possible. It's as good as it gets. Testing conditions are standardized. As for your "anomaly", it does seem strange that it contradicts, standardized scientific trusted sources. I think it was probably due to different sensitivity settings in the respective detectors. I don't know.

You're stretching quite a bit there. Unless you are doing the testing, you simply cant make the statement that "They are comparing it as evenly as possible". As you said, you just don't know.


In the end, if you're happy with your detector, great good for you. My $100 is well spent on the gas and brake pads SAVED from not slowing down on every single false.

With my earlier detection, I just lift, so no pad wear. After you study the arrows and figure out if you need to slow or not, those poor pads of yours take a beating, don't they?

Originally Posted by JackG

With my earlier detection, I just lift, so no pad wear. After you study the arrows and figure out if you need to slow or not, those poor pads of yours take a beating, don't they?

Who says I brake unecessarily? Prudence would have it that one would slow down more with less information. V1 got top rating for radar selectivity for falses. No need to "study" the arrows, some people such as yourself may require more time, not me. It takes a glance, same time it takes checking the speedo.



"The signal in front was a reflection. The signal behind was the real one. While you were looking at the arrows and around you trying to figure things out, I was lifting and saving my butt. No arrows (falsly pointing at a reflection) needed."

I'm not sure it was a reflection, the rear arrow went out a couple times when the front never did. It's possible the front car had a jammer. Also other detectors set off the V1 sometimes, without displaying the "J".



"Maybe the 8500 doesn't false as much as the V1, or it is better at weeding out the real stuff. "

Says who? All published testing says otherwise.



"There are places that I travel through that have weak signals (falses), and I've also encountered "real" radar in those places. The 8500 told me very plainly that there was a different signal there."

What's your point, V1 has strength signals too.



"C&D has an adgenda... it's called advertising dollars."

That absolutely makes ZERO sense in the context of this argument, as they could rate ANY detector and get ad money. So why did they top rate V1? Are you asserting that CD is paid to give V1 lip service?



"You're stretching quite a bit there. Unless you are doing the testing, you simply cant make the statement that "They are comparing it as evenly as possible".As you said, you just don't know."

I do not take their word as gospel nor definitive, HOWEVER, from their past methodogy, it's more scientific than myth busters and holds a heck of a lot more weight than YOUR unsubstantiated incident, where virtually nothing could be standardized. I don't expect their study or anyones to be exhaustive as if they had gov't funding. That's what I mean by "evenly as possible", given their resources.


So as you said I don't know with certainty of their findings, but I do know this: I trust both those publications TESTS WAAAAAAAY more than YOUR amateur account.

[JackG]

boxsterz,

This is rapidly degrading, but I'll leave you with this...

When my 8500 sounds off, I trust it enough to slow down if needed.

When your V1 alerts, you process that by checking the arrows, looking around you, assessing the situation, then making a decision.

I don't feel the need to second guess the 8500.

To each his own.

[2000SoCalBoxsterS]

Originally Posted by JackG

boxsterz,

This is rapidly degrading, but I'll leave you with this...

When my 8500 sounds off, I trust it enough to slow down if needed.

When your V1 alerts, you process that by checking the arrows, looking around you, assessing the situation, then making a decision.

I don't feel the need to second guess the 8500.

To each his own.

No. That's not how it works. When my V1 sounds off I lift off the gas and hit the brakes immediately, and then I check the arrows. If it's a weak signal then I check the arrows and watch for where it's coming from. Bottomline is this. I felt that the 8500 or new 9500 where equal to the V1 in sensitivity and warning distance. So the tie breaker for me was the added arrows and bogey counter on the V1 and that the V1 was the only one with the rear antena. And very often I've found that the LEO was coming from behind me.

JackG,

I don't second guess the V1, I know it's not perfect, neither is yours, nor any other commercially available detector. The added info allowed by the V1 let's me make a more informed decision. My processing of that added info is MY choice.

I could just as well do as you do and fly without the added info and slow whenever it sneezed. But I don't want to. I prefer to slow only upon real threats, and the V1 let's me make that distinction better.



BTW, do you wear driving gloves? LOL


I kid, I kid. No hard feelings. Really

[RaDaRkInG]

Originally Posted by boxsterz

It can be argued there is a bias there, but that's a stretch. (Although I do believe there are a few dummy forums out there that I ran into, especially Craig Peterson smells fishy http://valentine1.com/lab/V1Hater.asp). I say that because I have read ALL the reviews word for word, and feel he has a clear bias which is unfounded. It's ok to have a bias, it's a free world for the most part. My thing is that I prefer a bias that's well founded. Hey that's why I drive a Boxster instead of a VW bug type I.

Craig Peterson runs Radartest.com and he works for Bel and Escort so he bashes the Valentine One every chance he gets. He tried to sabotage the Guysoflidar radar/laser detector test because he knows they are completely unbiased and the Valentine One usually wins in their testing.

Read about this loser here:

http://www.guysoflidar.com/march-2007/sabotage.html