My V1 saved my butt today

[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]

Originally Posted by 2000SoCalBoxsterS

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.

I was replying to boxsterz, who posted "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."

He's processing the visual indications on the V1.

He also posted "My $100 is well spent on the gas and brake pads SAVED from not slowing down on every single false." That indicates that he is indeed processing the arrows before slowing down. For him and probably many others, that is how it works.

I think you use your V1 the right way. Trust it initially and slow down, then use your eyes, or arrows and eyes, to assess and move on.

Speaking of moving on, I'm outta here.

Oh, and if your LEO's are coming up from behind, you aren't' really using your radar detector to it's fullest potential, are you?

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

[JackG]

Originally Posted by boxsterz

JackG,

I kid, I kid. No hard feelings. Really

I would hope so. I'd hate to think that either of us had that thin of a skin on an internet forum.