[TSi+WRX]

Originally Posted by Subie_07

The Reason I deleted all of your quotes... well... you type alot, . But wont do that again.

It's all right thanks for understanding - you could've just said " ^ All you wrote.... ", instead of using the quote function, that would've been just fine.

Bottom line is this... when it comes to testing... RESULTS MAY VARY!

Exactly.

And not only that, but testing situations are just that - they're controlled situations, and may not reflect, fully, real-world.

Give me any jammer... ANY JAMMER... and I can make it fail a test! It will look as its placed properly and level ... but I can make it fail... This is the biggest reasons I will not trust something unless I have shot it my self.

And this ties-back into the statements just prior ->

Even if you tested it yourself, it's still no guaranty, as the testing situation, once agian, is just that.

Yes, you could've spent hours optimizing the setup of your specific jammer - but as we've all seen, as with C55/C63's CFL #2 session results, having spent just one week on-road, combined with routine opening and shutting of the trunk, managed to throw both his front and rear LI heads enough out of alignment that medium-short to medium-range PTs could easily be elicited, on what was, from both prior testing as well as after remedial actions undertaken to re-level, a "true-JTG" setup.

Even if you've shot your setup - whatever the countermeasures - and it provides "X" distance of protection, that is still no guaranty that, real-world, you can consistently count on such, as there are just too many variables at-play (and not always one that can be controlled for while routine and religious head cleaning and re-level/alignment can address those issues which may be said to be user-error, an unexpected dip in the roadway or even unexpected panning/targeting errors elicited by the LIDAR operator can all still make your "perfect" setup suffer that one unexpected PT).

No matter what's done, there's just no guaranty.

All that these tools do for us is to try to swing the odds back in our favor - but they're always so stacked in favor of the house that any unexpected factor can ruin our day, instead of theirs.

And sense this is the only real test that the laser star has been in, I will be looking forward to somepeople buying some or if you drive an Audi or BMW sign up for a free single head... and get it for free once you get it test it.

^ So that doesn't somehow affect the testing, in the way that you and the rest of The Goons perceive bias/conflict-of-interest?

How does that work, logically?

Wouldn't this be akin to "taking a bribe," as you've put it - for *even if* the tester returned with less-than-stellar results, the item was still obtained free-of-charge.

Why the double-standard, here?

But let's forget about the double-standard, for a moment.

It's rather sad - and I'm speaking these words in all sincerity - that no-one in the community has yet truly independently tested the LaserStar.

But at the same time, say what you and the rest of The Goons about the Laser Interceptor results from the GOL, but it's been proven by many individual and independent hobbyists - some who would have liked, for nothing more, to again burn the LI group for having taken so long to complete the MazdaForums "Group Buy" by having the ability to prove that their units did *not* work as-advertised as a "true-JTFG device" - time and again, that the LI, the production version, really does perform as well as the GOL tests show.

And at the same time, the GOL's results for the Blinder as well as the ZR4 are further corroboration of other independent community results - NOT what was hailed by either their manufacturers/distributors/retailers/resellers nor those with further ties in the industry, such as Radar Roy.

Logically, thus, the argument that, somehow, the GOL improperly skewed their data in-favor of the LI? - it just doesn't hold water.

The *only* valid claim that The Goons - or anyone, for that matter - may make would be that the GOL's data for the LaserStar was inaccurate.

All of the other data fits with current community/independent data.

And it is only the lack of such for the LaserStar, combined with the *personal-level* conflict-of-interest between the GOL and The Goons, that *potentially* taints that SPECIFIC set of data.

That is the *only* logical argument that can be made, when examining the GOL data.

And as consumers... You should want this product to be a good working one as advertised... It would force other companies to lower their prices...

A dual head is 599 quad head is 899 ... LPP can not compete with that no one can.

Exactly.

I've very well made this a point of discussion this on RD.net, in the thread that someone brought up about the LI's continuing "slow march up," in terms of pricing.

The LI, itself, reset the pricing-for-performance bar when it arrived. Despite the fact that it was never able to achieve the $499-and-below pricing that Ivan/Elvis had initially hoped for it, it still drastically undercut the LPP - and at that point, before The Goon's ban on the Laser Pro Park Forums ( BTW, care to explain, exactly, what happened, there? why Audi was trying to end-run around go.mouse with a supposed "Group Buy" of LPPs, here, at that time, to also incite trouble with the stateside-authorized LPP reseller and site sponsor Vendor, DMI-Sport? and also care to explain why Audi PM'ed me to try to sell me a LaserStar, even at that early time, while he was still involved on the LPP side? nothing funny going on there, right? ), that was always something they boo-boo'ed, time and again.

Yes, I agree - lower pricing will help the consumer. And even if it didn't do so directly, by forcing more competitive pricing across-the-board, it should still do so, by-extension, in driving the technological competition to offer better jammer performance and more technical innovations, at the trade-off of increased price over lower-line (be it lesser performance, or less features) units.

That's all well and nice, but if the lower-priced item does not perform as well as advertised? Then it's simply not going to sell.

Similarly, when the unit comes "backed" by those with so much negative history in the community, and by inciting the anger of so many others via SPAM-type advertising and forced (non-community-supported or highly contested) "Group Buy" campaigns, that's not going to get anywhere, either.

And as far as the issue of trust goes...
GOL has too many connection not to have a conflict of interest, and people put so much power in their hands, that its along the lines of "Absolute power corrupts absolutely" And I guess not many people see how much power they have. I guarantee that Ivan sells will go up atleast 10% because of this test.
This is a VERY DANGEROUS power that the GOL has. Where as you have LJT... people already do not trust them and yet they still have a site and videos. They dont have Manufactures come to test or have people that sale multiple products come to their test. So as much as power as LJT has... why worry about it... Let them make all the claim they want... they can influence a few people ... GOL.... they influence a whole industry. So when you take a step back and look at the big picture... I would be less likely to trust GOL then LJT... And if you say, well they have not done anything right now to misplace my trust. Then you just missed my point, and you need to understand that when the market is so small like this one... and you have a group that can make you money and make 90% of the market buy a single product... just ask yourself... how much money would you pay to have that product be yours... especially if your their to tweek it and improve it.

Thats the kind of power they have.

I agree completely - but on the flip side of this logic, it should be said that the standards which applies to one group should not be overlooked of the other.

Yes, LJT may not be as well-recognized, as well-thought-of, nor have as much influence as the GOL, but that should not give them any passes.

The standards that applies to one *must* apply to the other, and to say that The Goons behind LJT are to somehow be exempt from the standards of conflict-of-interest that you're insisting of the GOL is simply flawed thinking.

Similarly, one must apply the same critical thinking when evaluating the testing that comes from LJT.

To ask us of one but not the other, it's not only unfair, but completely illogical.

"Why worry about it [LJT]," you ask?

Why not just give them the free pass to say what they want to say, without criticism from the community?

The answer, to anyone who can think for themselves, cricically and properly, is readily obvious.

Subie, what you're asking us to do is to turn sheep, and just blindly accept the words from LJT, while critically dissecting everything that comes from the GOL.

At the same time, you're asking us to focus on the industry ties and monetary/non-monetary compensation given to the GOL for its testing, while again, completely ignoring the same of LJT.

That's clearly a set of double-standards.

If that's not Goon thinking, I don't know what is.