^ A low-positioned antenna, particularly on a low-to-the-ground vehicle, can essentially "see under vehicles."
Brother
ProSpeeder's SR7/V1 setup has the SR7 taking advantage of this, on his C6 'Vette, and it is hard to dispute that the logic of this particular mounting method can and does work.
Additionally, there are other, more technical concerns, when it comes to raw sensitivity. Remember, Escort's had quite a few years to up their game on this one, compared to V1. This engineering factor alone may give the new Escort products an edge.
Still, while I feel that raw sensitivity numbers are a good bragging point, I think that in the real world, any of the top-tier detector would do just as well as the other (particularly with individual/unique-unit variations at-play), and that this kind of academic concern is all but nullified by end variances (and the unaccountable variability of physical circumstances).
With all that said - right now, we just don't know - yes, there's a lot of speculation that the 9500ci may surpass the V1 in terms of raw sensitivity, but so far, that's still all just rumor. Until independent bodies test the unit, it's all just "he said, she said."
---
Honestly,
samq45, based on that last point, I would truly wait until the 9500ci hits the market, and until some independent testing (and full exploration of its features) has been done, before you plunk down that much change.
To me, having money to just throw at this project isn't the only concern - instead, there is significant secondary costs incurred with the proper installation of this product (whether it be a DIY job, which takes *your* time, or if you send the car to the shop, which will cost you additional money - and in either case, your vehicle will be out-of-operation for at least several hours; similarly, the holes that need to be drilled to mount the various components are also "permanent," to an extent, and again of significant secondary cost).
We just don't know anything - factually and truly - about this item, at this time. There's a lot of rumors going around, a lot of hype, and a lot of anticipation.
But if you can, at all, I'd hold-out to see what true first-hand reviewers have to say.
Unless, of course, you, yourself want to be its beta-tester/early-adopter.
----
And as an aside,
samq45, on the new Escort products, you truly may not need to turn-off POP. I've noticed that on my 9500i (date-of-manufacture is cited in my .sig lines, for your reference), even with POP enabled, I just don't get the "Cobra"-induced POP falses anymore.
With that said, I currently ride with POP-detection disabled. Why? Look at how poorly the 9500i (and other Bel/Escort products) fared against 16 ms Ka as well as both durations of K-band POP on the various
GOL tests. Having to put up with even the occasional false while knowing that my chances of actually getting a proper POP warning is less than optimal already, in my estimation, would greatly cut down on the confidence-factor that is required of a good "detector-user" interface/bond.
Since you obviously have expressed a POP concern, I would again encourage you to wait-out, to see if the 9500ci is any better at catching POP (here, I would use the V1 as a benchmark, as it is currently class-leading in this respect).