Contour Enthusiasts Group Archives Forums Modifications General Mods Radar Detector

Don't worry.. you weren't trying... ^^^^ He was.....


Ray

Here's the funny thing: I didn't arrange, format, or clarify my statements in any way that would have indicated that I INTENDED for you to understand...

If you must know: I was saying that Pienstars wasn't trying to start the war, again, by posting relevant information (as he was afraid would happen)..

I was, however, stating that you, instead of reading, gaining knowledge, and walking away with a more profound understanding of the subject, chose to (instead) come BACK here, and in fact try to start the flame again.

Now, do you understand what I was saying, or should I just come out and say that you were being a little bit rude?



Ray

Who cares if I was being rude. I looked at the link and read the whole page and continued following more links on the page to learn even more. But the link confirmed what I was saying and I stated that (rudely) and I don't really care.

I was right and some other people were wrong.

Now I've had to take my share of being wrong so it's not a big deal to me and shouldn't be to the other persons involved but anyways.....

You've posted a link to a marketing site that is trying to sell radar detectors. There is nothing in there that scientificly proves either of us right or wrong. I wouldn't take just anything you find on the internet like that as fact without some sort of informative explanation.

If I want to sell a car to an child who thinks "if it has dual exhuast it must be fast" and I create a website saying LOOK AT THIS SUPER FAST CAR, YES IT HAS DUAL EXHAUST SO ITS FAST and it's a stock honda ATX with duel exhaust, it doesn't mean that I've proven that just because a car has dual exhuast it is fast. I'm just trying to make a sale, and am playing to the misconceptions of that child. Its sad, but thats how our world works.

All I'm saying is a site thats trying to sell radar detectors is going to play on the majority of users opinions, even if those opinions are misconceptions that radar detectors can "filter" false alarms. If it gets them the sale, they'll entertain the idea whether its factual or not.

I'm still waiting to hear the scientific explanation of how a radar detector is going to tell if that radar signal is a cop's, or a security system or door.

Like Ray and I discusseed, it isn't possible unless you have a catalog of all registered frequencies, which will probably never be a practical solution for detector manufacturers.

Here's the thing. Radar detectors do not filter out signals based on frequency even though they could. K-band used by police will ONLY be 24.150 and they could filter out all other frequencies of K band and vastly reduce the number of false alarms though the manufacturers don't do that. It would still false occasionally as some doors use 24.15 as well but most don't. X-band can also be done the same (though I don't know the exact frequency for police x-band). Ka can't be done the same as police have a wide range of frequencies to use on Ka, BUT Ka is almost exclusively used by police and a Ka alert should always be taken seriously. BUT that is not how false alarms are reduced. They are reduced by other technologies the radar detectors companies have developed, technologies that do not reduce range either. If you are interested in how they do it, how about contacting the companies or doing some research? So what do you think the best detector is? The one with the least amount of false signals? So $40 detectors are really the good ones not the 8500 or the V1?

And that site just could have easily used your arguement as well to "sell" radar detectors and they could have said any detector had the most false signals which means it's the best.

I still don't understand how in the world you think more FALSE signals equals a better detector. But I guess the cheap companies need someone to buy their stuff.

I guess even though I've explained it (though not thoroughly on how a detector can show less false signals, like I said how about doing some research) and a link has been shown to you that you will still argue in the favor of a beeping box because as you are saying the more FALSE signals the better the detector is. So what is your detector of choice?

Actually, since the Passport 8500 has a mode where it can identify the frequency of the signal, it wouldn't be far from that to be able to filter frequencies. The cost and the processing time may be prohibitive for the consumer market, however.

The problem with saying that police radar is only on a specific frequency, and ignoring the others, is what happens when a new radar gun comes out on a slightly different frequency. Then you're screwed with a detector that thinks it should ignore the signal because it thinks its a door or something else.

Everyone has a right to their opinion, and you definately have the right to be happy with a detector that you think is "falsing" less.

I'll stick with my detector and assume it is going to warn me of all signals, regardless of what they are. I can tell by the number of signals I'm picking up, their direction, and the signal strength if its a threat or not. Besides, I don't speed in city limits anyway up here in the north, too dangerous for pedestrians. On the highway, any hint of a signal I get could be a threat, so I treat it as one. Heck, I'm known to turn my detector off in city limits. I expect my detector to report all signals, and not "think" its a door and not show me. Let me make that call.

As for whether it is possible for a processor to logically decide what signal is a door, and what signal is a cop, thats still up for debate. I've expressed all my reasons for my beleif that its not possible. If I had more time, and it was worth my while, I might try to dig a little deeper on the subject, but honestly, I don't have the time.

I would love to entertain any other theories though if it makes sense. But as I understand radar right now, its not possible.