I have personal experience on this question, I ran a V1 and a 9500i together for about two weeks, one on each side of my car. I found that both responded very much the same with the V1 possibly a bit more sensitive. However, I couldn't stand the "noise" from the V1, going off all the time on stuff that wasn't interesting. Yes, if you pay attention the arrows help narrow down if a hit is interesting or not, but pretty soon you get numb to the alerts and start ignoring everything. The 9500i after you have trained it on stuff you know is a fixed radar source is quiet most of the time and when it goes off, you know you better pay attention. I sold the V1 and kept the 9500i. The 9500ix may be better because it self-trains, but I have no experience with it (yet).
Escort 9500i vs valentine
- Thread starter thunder24
- Start date
mazdaspeedster3
Member
- :
- Mazdaspeed3. 2008
So... All boils down to personal taste. You give up one thing for another, make the choice. If you are opting for the 8500 X50 let me lend you this advise, the Bel 940i is the exact same technology and is ovr $100 cheaper. Same menus, display and features, exact. The only is no blue display available.
Lil_vicious559
Banned
- :
- Mazdaspeed 6
How do you like the 9500i?? I got one and also have a 8500 x50!! for some reason i think the x50 has get's better signals and picks up al ot quicker.
It is not hearsay, the records are in the court where the financial settlement took place. Don't you think if the GuysofLidar were lying that Craig Peterson from RadarTest.com would sue the GuysofLidar for slander or libel? Their non-profit website would be shut down in one day after RadarTest.com's lawyers sent a nice letter. It is the truth and you can choose to believe Craig Peterson's BS or not but isn't it interesting that RadarTest.com has paid reviews on Bels and Escorts sites.
You can't run two or more detectors together at the same time and expect accurate results.
http://guysoflidar.com/twodetectors.html
Two Radar Detectors in the Same Vehicle?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Many people familiar with radar detectors know that false alerts can sometimes be caused by other radar detectors operating nearby. But just because two radar detectors do not cause alerts on each other mean that they are not interfering with each other. Here are a few reasons why you shouldn't run two radar detectors together in the same vehicle.
It can "Fool" the false alert filtering
Summary:
"Detector A" sees the police radar and also sees signals which leak from the other detector in the vehicle, "Detector B". Detector A thinks that the police radar is also leakage from Detector B, and tries to suppress the alert. This results in diminished range or no alert at all from Detector A.
The Details:
Radar detectors "sweep" the radar bands for police radar. But what is not so obvious is that during their regular sweep, the detectors are also scanning for other non-police radar frequencies that, if detected, could block or prevent an alert. This is due to filtering techniques which attempt to prevent Ka falsies from other detectors. These techniques work wonders in normal situations. But with another detector operating close by, range can be reduced or alerts can be completely blocked.
Superhetrodyne radar detectors contain "Local Oscillators" (or LO for short). LOs create a radar signal that is utilized to "mix down" the incoming radar signal for detection. Although the LO is generated inside the detector, in most cases the LO is "leaked" or "transmitted" from the radar detectors. Many detectors on the road have a 1st LO that operates in the 11-12 GHz range. The problem is, that these LOs also produce "harmonics" at multiples of the LO frequency. So, in once classic example, an LO operating at 11.558 GHz would produce a harmonic at 34.674 GHz, well within the valid bandpass for a Stalker Ka radar unit.
Of course, this poses a problem for detector manufacturers: they must filter the Ka false alerts caused by these other detectors on the road, while still providing superior protection against Ka radar.
Luckily, they have a novel technique at their disposal. In the example above, not only is there a Ka signal produced at 34.674 GHz, but because the Ka signal is being produced by oscillator harmonics, there will also be signals present at the oscillator's fundamental frequency of 11.558 GHz and the second harmonic at 23.116 GHz. These signals would not be present with real Ka police radar since it transmits Ka directly. So if the detector sees a signal around 34.674 GHz, the detector might also look for signals around 11.558 GHz, or the second harmonic at 23.116 Ghz. If one or both of these were present, the detector would know that the Ka radar was a false harmonic from another detector and not police radar, and can suppress the alert as a false.
For example, if there is any interference seen in the 11 GHz and/or 22 GHz range, some detectors might "lock out" Ka band or a section of Ka band for a certain duration in order to prevent a false alert from another detector in the area.
The whole technique gets pretty complex:
-the 11.558 GHz scenario mentioned above is only one example. There are several frequency schemes used by different detectors, that detector manufacturers must account for in order to prevent K/Ka false alerts from other detectors.
-the oscillators in the detectors are sweeping
-the oscillators in some detectors will "park" at different points throughout their sweep
One other technique that is sometimes used, is the detector will look for brief recurring "blips" of radar at certain frequencies which are indicative of the sweeping oscillator of another detector. When the detector sees these blips, it might "lock out" or raise the threshold for a section of K or Ka band for a certain duration in order to prevent false alerts from the nearby detector. Of course, if this other detector is in the same vehicle, then these blips never go away, and sensitivity is never restored as long as the interfering signal is present.
A detailed description of the methods used to filter alerts from other detectors is beyond the scope of this article. Hopefully the above examples are enough to illustrate how running two detectors in the same vehicle can be a problem in light of the techniques used.
It can cause a detector to "park" often during it's sweep or switch to a "slow scan"
Summary:
"Detector A" is kept busy analyzing and rejecting false alerts due to leakage from "Detector B", instead of looking for police radar. This results in diminished performance.
The Details:
Some detectors operate by sweeping quickly until they see a radar signal, then they "park" their LO or switch to a "slow scan" to get a closer look at the signal, in an attempt to determine if it is really police radar. With another detector operating in close proximity, it might see leaked oscillator interference from the other detector and "park" or "slow scan" in order to analyze them. Even if the detector determines that it isn't police radar and does not trigger an alert, this will still have the effect of unnecessarily slowing down the overall sweep, reducing effectiveness against real police radar. This can be especially critical to performance against weak instant-on at a distance, or POP.
It could raise the "noise floor"
With microwave oscillators operating in close proximity, it has the potential to raise the "noise floor" in the radar bands. Modern DSP detectors use averaging of multiple sweep samples in order to reduce the noise floor for maximum sensitivity. Raising the noise floor would have the effect of making it so that a stronger signal would be necessary for the detector to be able to pick out radar signals from the noise.
But I've ran two detectors together before and they seemed OK. I didn't notice any difference.
Sometimes two detectors running in the same vehicle will operate quite normally and there is no problem at all, at least part of the time. It might be OK on some bands or frequencies, but problematic on others. It might work just fine, except for certain times when the sweeps of the two detectors coincide with each other in a certain way. And, there's no way to test this, or to "try it out and see if they interfere" because you just don't know what the detectors are doing internally.
The bottom line: there's no way to be sure when they might be interfering or when they're not.
What about the BEL STi Driver?
People frequently ask the question: since the BEL STi Driver does not "leak" then it shouldn't interfere with another detector, right? Actually, the BEL STi does technically still "leak". However, the leakage is so low that there is no detection from today's RDDs (Spectre).
Consider the following facts:
Compared with today's high-end radar detectors, Spectre isn't all that sensitive: it uses the same receiver as cheap "Quintezz" radar detectors sold overseas.
The normal operating range for Spectre is well beyond the separation you would have when operating two detectors in the same vehicle.
So, could there be a problem with operating a radar detector which is more sensitive than Spectre at a distance which is much closer to the STi than the normal operating range for Spectre? We have posed this question to some of the brightest minds in the industry, but there's no clear-cut yes or no answer. The STi still has the potential to interfere.
Can other detectors interfere with the STi? Definitely.
Conclusion
My recommendation: don't run two detectors in the same vehicle if you are depending on them for protection. As for comparing performance between two detectors: any results are always going to be questionable if they are obtained when running two detectors together. For unquestionable results, test each detector individually against the radar source. After that, if you want to run both together for demo purposes, go for it. If the results happen to be significantly different than when the detectors were run individually, you'll know why.
http://valentine1.com/lab/DoItYourself.asp
First Problem: Detectors hate each other - Every superheterodyne receiverthat includes all of today's radar detectorsreceives and transmits during normal operation. As you probably know, these detector signals sometimes set off other detectors. Out on the road, other detectors are the most common nuisance signal V1 has to deal with.
What's not so obvious is this. Even if a detector isn't set off by another one, its internal defense system may be affecting its radar sensitivity. This problem compounds when you bring two operating detectors into the same car. Up close, the transmitted signals become much stronger than a normal design would anticipate, and the weak signals that wouldn't bother at normal distances can send the defense system into hyperdrive.
V1 inspects every signal it receives and decides, Is it really radar? Is it maybe radar? Is it not radar. But it isn't designed to operate within a few feet of another detector, and we know of no other detector designed for that high-stress condition either.
Here's the irony: If you put two detectors together and one of them seems sluggish, you might decide that one is inferior. In fact, it may have a superior defense system, and the detector that appears to work better may be a grotesque polluting transmitter.
It's more trouble to test detectors by powering up one at a time, but it's the only way to tell which is better at finding radar.
Second Problem: What if they don't seem very different - Since all detectors warn when they go line of sight with the radar transmitter, they often sound their warnings well before you see the radar. But as I explain at length in Radar Detector Tests, the critical test of early warning is, What do you get "when the headlights are still beyond the hill?" The point here: To test meaningfully, you need to know the location of your radar. Are you really over the hill, or are you dipping in and out of line-of-sight as you approach. If you're dipping, both detectors will seem very similar in their response.
Reliable measurements of early warning are rarely done in normal driving. I recommend this approach: find a false alarm (they don't move on you). Go out of range, preferably beyond a rise in terrain. Then approach, and note where the alert begins. Test each detector separately. Make at least three runs for each. For different bands, find different false alarms.
One caveat here: the typical false alarm is very weak compared to real radar, so range will be short and the difference between detectors will be compressed. Expect much larger differences against traffic radar.
Lil_vicious559
Banned
- :
- Mazdaspeed 6
You're the only person claiming the V1 is better than the x50 or 9500i!! a buddy of mine owns one and admits it throws to many false signals!! Not only did (car&driver) say the same thing but they chose the V1 over 8500 because of the arrows, which i think is useless!!
I have no personal experience with the V1 but I've had people tell me including my buddy that the V1 throws to many false signals. "He likes the x50 better!!
I live in the valley, so there are quite a bit of open areas around here. x50 has always done it's job and it's well worth the price for what you pay.(thumb)
Last edited by a moderator:
Have you seen the court records? Can you link to them? Still hearsay without even a footnote on your part. I am not trying to be difficult or insulting to you so don't take this personally.
My man has a Valentine in his Z06. It never lies. Out here in the High Desert we can see the CHP unlike other areas with lush vegetation. So the warnings are easy to validate. It is in logic mode 2,and is never fooled and displays where the radar or radars are located. On a trip To Vegas it paid for it self as we were caravaning in a small pack of BMW's and a Ferrari at over 110MPH. The Valentine went off we pulled into the slow lane and hit the brakes. Our friend's M3 with the Escort 9500 was in the front and got NAILED! He said he didn't get enough warning and then hesitated to slow down in time. Ruined his trip.
My CX-7 has one also. But I don't speed! And that is the real truth.
My CX-7 has one also. But I don't speed! And that is the real truth.
Lil_vicious559
Banned
- :
- Mazdaspeed 6
:bs:
The Valentine One alerts to all police radar and laser which is why it seems more "noisy" than the 8500 X50 and the 9500i. The 8500 X50 doesn't alert to quick pulls of the radar gun's trigger 100% of the time like the Valentine One and the 8500 X50 doesn't alert to the Laser Atlanta laser gun in stealth mode. Just because your detector is quiet doesn't make it better. The only people that find the arrows useless are the idiots that can't afford a radar detector with 2 radar receiving antennas and arrows like the V1 instead of one radar receiving antenna and no arrows like every other POS detector. Valentine One for the win forever!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rieai6mk5Ug
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kiSaa-7I0-s
Last edited:
Lil_vicious559
Banned
- :
- Mazdaspeed 6
1.)Your completely just a Fanboi!!
2.)Who need's arrows to tell you where the signal is coming from!! If your radar goes off, do you need to stay on the gas until you see the Cop? (NO) Just back off!! Simple
3.) I have multiple radar detectors ranging from RMR to Escort!! I Can afford just about any radar i want!!
4.)There is a Reason why valentine one radar detectors send to many false signals!! (Hence why they made the arrow's to make up for the goofy false signals that go off). I wouldn't want to brake all the time my (V1) goes off because of a false signal.
5.)escort 8500 X50 has and detects laser mode!! (You don't know what the heck your talking about).
6.)Your talking bad about the X50 but probably don't have any/no experience with it!! Me on the other hand, don't know to much about the V1. But my buddy thinks it's a POS!! (Thats sad) He even admits the x50 is better!! but that's just an opinion.
7.) test results showed the x50 is the better radar detector over the V1. But the V1 got chosen over the x50 due to the lame (ARROWS)(loser)
Check the videos you friggin dumb fu** because the 8500 X50 does not detect the Laser Atlanta laser gun in stealth mode and it will not alert 100% of the time when a cop does a quick pull of the radar gun. You show your lack of intelligence by disputing my evidence on video and unbiased websites that I have provided. It is not a false signal when the Valentine One alerts to all police radar and laser and the 8500 X50 is completely silent which results in a ticket for the dumba** 8500 X50 owner.
You also own a RMR detector which further proves my point that you aren't very smart because they barely work and they can't jam radar or laser. You base all of your thoughts on the V1 by listening to what your "buddy" says which is a joke. Mike Valentine, the owner and inventor of the Valentine One, started the Escort radar detector company back in the day but sold his shares because they were getting commercial and crappy which is why they filed for bankruptcy after he left.
Last edited:
Lil_vicious559
Banned
- :
- Mazdaspeed 6
WOW!! Now I'm a dumbfuck?? uh oh an E-THUG over the internet along with just being completely a Fanboi.
I don't need to check any videos. I own one and know how it works!! My radar goes off on "Ka band" when my radar detects a (highway patrol).
When a in-town cop on a motorcycle bike is pointing his gun at me. My radar detects and reads just only "K"band.
Sometimes my radar will go off in laser mode!!
You don't have a fricken clue what the heck you're talking about. Yet you say I'm basing my facts off of other people. Yet You're basing yours off of a video.
Your STUPIDITY just really shows right here!!(gossip)
Neither can the V1 or any other radar!! You can't Jam any cop's radar!!
I experience radars unlike you.
I've gone through many radar detectors ranging from a (whistle) to a (bel) to (Phantom laser jammer) to (RMR C-302, C-312), to (Escort passport 8500 to the X50 to a 9500i)!!
I buy radar's, because i like to experience and know how one's different from the other. Unlike you, you base off of a website and video's from (youtube)!!
Who said i base all of my thoughts!! I said my buddy completely thinks his V1 is garbage. (You have selective hearing)smart guy!!
Quit being a (magazine instigator). FTL
