^ I honestly don't know - the other "claims" of the M25/35/45, the other side of the coin, if you will, is that on the videos where they do "JTG," it has been openly accused that the maker of the videos actually fudged the data by manipulating the police LIDAR device in an inappropriate manner.
There's just too much speculation - and in-light of the fact that there is no good, solid, independent proof, I just find it impossible to make a good-faith recommendation for them, as I have in the past, for the M20/30/40.
The other problem that is seen with the LED-based jammers is that in order to get effective "protection" (
yes, you're correct, "jamming power" at longer distances is a distinct concern - thestaton's early videos on the M20, fitted to a black Evo VIII, was among the first to document the extreme long-range PTs that the LED-based systems can suffer, however this is also a concern not only in terms of "jamming power," but also in terms of reception; as demonstrated by IRCMUSA's IR-videos, the Blinders simply cannot match the leading diode-based jammers' receptive capabilities, which is yet another reason why more heads are needed, to provide "equal" protection) - to equal that of the leading laser-diode based models, more heads are needed, as you've cited yourself, which increases cost. With an M45 system pushing into within stone's throw range of a dual-head AL or LI, the argument of "cost-effectiveness" just doesn't hold much water. Additionally, more heads means more real-estate, which is something that many of us do not have the luxury of, due to vehicle size/configuration - and yet others find difficulty due to the legality of jammers in their geographic location or routes-of-travel.
Yes, I do see - and have readily discussed - that there's too many "he said/she said" kind of arguments with regard to the M25/35/45. There's definitely more in-fighting and background going on than meets the eye, and undoubtedly, this means that some of the "testing" footage is less than totally aboveboard, and thus cannot be taken at face value.
However, the one thing that speaks to me as being the most negative about all of this is that Blinder has been, so far, unable/unwilling to provide any kind of aggressive counterattack - in the kind of "quantitative" manner that we've come to expect and demand in this community - to the data presented by those who've been less-than-favorable about their new product line. As with the example I cited on the above-reference RD.net thread, when the manufacturer promises counterproof but cannot deliver, CONCLUSIVELY, this, to me, as a consumer, raises more doubt.
