[TSi+WRX]

Originally Posted by Subie_07

TSI... You are taking what I said and stretching it out too far... all I said was you mistake the Laser Star for how long it has been on the road... I said nothing of comparing the Laser Star to the LI, EXCEPT on the fact that LI users Silicone and LS uses Epoxy and what that means to buyers and the effects it can have... You on the other hand stretched my comment to a comparison which it was not.

Ah, then I apologize. I did indeed (mis)read your comment as a comparison. You specifically brought up two items - LI and LaserStar. If I were not to read as a comparison, then what? I hope you can see where we miscommunicated.

So the LaserStar uses epoxy as a sealant between the outer "glare/shield-lens" and the physical body of the unit? That is definitely something I did not know, thank you for educating me on that one.

The problem, however, remains - epoxy still does not solve the weathersealing issue, which was explored in-depth on an RD.net posting (specifying no particular jammer, just an academic discussion by various materials [and other] engineers as well as those with professional/academic experience detailing various "glues," as to what might be best), as it, too, as with everything else, expands and contracts, and still suffers the problem of needing to achieve "perfect" bonding between a metal surface, and one that's plastic (or glass). Both pose as problems.

The other question is, then, how automotive components - such as headlights, as just one example - achieve weathertight sealing, for many, many, many years, even though they do use silicone sealant. And even more so in that in many cases, these sealants' bonds can be broken, rejoined - and the cycle repeated many times - without the need for reapplication of the silicone sealant? Such a modification, "headlight clearing," is a very popular one in the Subaru community, and many of us have opened our headlight units two, three, four (myself), and upwards of over half-a-dozen times, without the need to even re-apply sealant, and yet, have maintained weathertight assemblies even after extensive modifications in this area.

Why the problems, then, with these jammer heads?

Alternatively, did you mean epoxy behind the "glare/shield" overlens? If that's the case, then the LPP and AL both serve as evidence that a problem remains - for despite the use of an epoxy fill in an attempt to put the critical electronics behind a weatherproof seal, it was still seen, by fellow hobbyists' pictures on RD.net, that moisture ingress was clearly possible, and resulted in the destruction of such units.

Again, no perfect solutions, yet.

And NO your information is wrong again... the Laser Star was selling several months before the Review of LJTs... It had changed manufactures about 3 to 4 months prior to the review... so it was well into production at that point... and again I am not comparing it to the LI, I am correcting you on your information...

Then how come no one in the mass community, either Stateside or in Europe, had any of these early units?

And if the manufacturer changed, isn't that yet another potential area of concern? and again one which The Goons brought up for exploitation during the time of the MazdaForums "Group Buy," when Ivan and the LI Mother Team cited that they were switching manufacture? The question that was posed by The Goons, then, was one of "how can the new manufacture be guaranteed to be of proper quality?" Doesn't this same question then apply, in the same manner, to the LaserStar's change of manufacturer?

Why, again, the double-standard? Why, again, the faulted logic?

So how early, exactly, were LaserStar units, regardless of manufacturer, placed on the mass market?

And agian, how do we account for this change-of-manufacture?

And if these "other iterations" of the LaserStar are to be "counted" in terms of the product's measureable lifespan, then should we also not count the fact that even the present version of the LI was readily available to our overseas brothers, many months in advance of their stateside presentation?

And also similarly, how far back should we trace the roots of the LI? how many iterations should we stake, as the terminus for our duration-on-market/lifespan data?

You say there is holes in my argument ... but really you just stretch my words to be something they are not and create your own holes... Please next time ... just take what I said and do not assume anything else...

I'm not assuming anything else - and I'm not "stretching" your words.

I'm pointing out the obvious holes that exist, which may be due to miscommunication, or, alternatively, details that you've left out (and are then coming back to fill). It may be holes of omission, or, alternatively, holes in the logic of the presentation/argument, such as those which I've asked questions of, above.

I'm not a fan, as you know, of taking words out of context.

I simply respond to what you've said, nothing more.

I always have answers TSI... I do not always wish to share them... I have my reasons and you can not convince me otherwise.

That's all fine and well - but your not being forthcoming with such critical information simply invites mistrust and, as you've seen above with just our last set of interaction, miscommunication.

How does that serve anyone in the community? And how does that go any length towards restoring anyone's faith in The Goons or LaserStar?

Originally Posted by Subie_07

Also I have heard several problems with condensation on the inside of Blinder heads... So they have had issues...

Escort I have not head of any issues...

Ah, here, please allow me to correct as well as educate you. I've been a long-time user of the ZR3, with my own purchase of them dating back to their origin.

Escort's first run of ZR3's were plagued with head weatherseal issues as well. Mostly in terms of its forward two heads. Such issues did not come to-light until after nearly a year's worth of road-service.

Again, without actual time/miles-on-road, it was simply impossible to have foreseen such potential issues. But those lessons were hard-learned, and Escort rectified such concerns.

Similarly and quite sadly (and quite surprisingly to me, actually, as I thought that they'd perfected the issue, having learned, as I cited above, from their previous mistakes), it was again seen with the ZR4 that more than a handful of initial-batch units reported with faulty rear-head sealant issues. Some of the first documented such failures appeared from/were reported from within the core of RD.net enthusiasts, such as djrams.

As for the Blinder, no, it's track-record is not perfect - akin to with Escort - but for the number of fauts that have been reported of both the 0-suffix and the new 5-suffix units, compared to the number of years and miles-on-road that these units have seen, it's hard to say that their quality has been anything less than stellar.

The true test is time-on-road and miles-on-road, and aside from Escort and Blinder, no-one can truly say that they've had quite as good of a run - or as long of a run.

No, their records are not perfect, but it's definitely head-and-shoulders better, compared to what else is still out there, and what has come and gone.