[TSi+WRX]

^ Exactly.

Based on the "falsing ratio" (for lack of better words....), it does seem that the 9500i is at least some improvement over even the latest-generation M4 platform x50s, in this respect.

However, without the optical collimator assembly of the V1's front-facing lens - as well as without a true rear receiver - the 9500i's true capabilities really remain to-be-tested (for example, as I've stated on RD.net, this all begs the question of why, even compared against the optical collimator-assisted LPP/AL/LI, the ZR3 is still seen by many very experienced LIDAR hobbyists as being among the most sensitive, in terms of reception radius).

All that can be said now is that the V1 remains a benchmark in this category.

----

CJR -

The Toledo (Ohio) airport *always* sets off laser alert on my 9500i. I suspect that it's (the airport's runways, that is) physical configuration as well as its proximity to the highway is at the root-cause. My 9500i falses much less predictably in proximity to Cleveland-Hopkins International, whose runways (and likely the various beacons/markers/alert-devices) are much further removed from the highways near it, as well as due to the physical elevation change.

I further suspect that there is definitely some inter-unit production variation to this "sensitivity" issue, too.

Esoterica claims that his 9500i has never falsed laser to any circumstance - including the many different, now well-documented, such causes (see above, plus also now noted IR-transmissions from PDAs/Nav/Auxiliary devices, as well as "snow glare"). While it is beyond doubt that he is a 9500i devotee, I don't doubt his claims, either - and this, combined with the various different users experiencing/not-experiencing the different causes of falsing on their unique 9500i units, would make it seem that there is significant end-unit variability (which may be itself exacerbated by unique end-user/vehicle situations and physical circumstances, of-course).