[TSi+WRX]

Originally Posted by '09 Milan

So you're saying that the head engineer from the manufacturing company doesn't know his own design? Has any of the naysayers from this other forum ever actually studied a schematic of the 9500ci, or is there 'evidence' all anecdotal from one person to the next?

No schematic, but it's from the likes of Jimbonzzz, and even RadarRoy, who was among the very, very few who were allowed early access to the ZR4, as well as participated in the product's development, have confirmed this (look at Roy's Blog, dated April 28th, and you'll see that he refers to it as an LED-based system; similarly, in his YouTube overview of the ZR4 [

YouTube - Escort Shifter ZR4 Laser Jammer

] at time-markings 4:38 to 4:48, he cites again that the ZR4 is LED-based).

I truly think that this is a case of mistaken nomenclature/crossed vocabulary (and has even been called marketing propaganda).

Yes, it's "diode," but it's a (L)ight (E)mitting (D)iode, versus laser-diode.

When the RD.net Forums return, I will try to search-up the pertinent posts.

Also, out of curiosity - try calling your contact back, and ask him about the ZR3, and whether that's also "diode-based."

Any solid data to back this up? From the data that I see here and here that is not the case. BTW-please note the difference a cars color makes in the test results.

^ The data I'm citing is from the Central-Florida enthusiast group.

Although a later re-test, after having even more carefully leveled the heads, did show the ZR4 to perform better in terms of frontal protection, it still was very disappointing in terms of rear protection.

Yes, there's a difference in terms of the cars - and also the testing situation.

The Central-Florida group's testing scenario was much more vigorous, and was specifically focused to try to "force" a PT, which is on-par with most enthusiasts' "testing goals."

Also, while I have absolutely *NO* reason to doubt Roy's word, it is undeniable that he is financially vested in this system doing well - in this manner in and of itself, I place more trust with the Central-FL guys.

Also, I believe that the CT-area enthusiast group has also tested the ZR4 (but maybe not....as the person who was to meet-up with the group of testers failed to make the meet on-time, I don't know if there was another ZR4 present). I'll again have to search this up on RD.net, when it comes back.

Also, not to get off on a tangent but the 9500ci was recently tested against the V1, and in every single case it ate the V1 up, although that is not surprising but was entertaining to see

I'd love to see this data, linky, please?

This was long rumored to be something that the 9500ci was going to take home the prize on. It'll be interesting to see where the 9500ci actually edged-out the V1.

Still, given that the two detectors satisfy distinctly different markets (there's still no easy way to conceal the V1, and it is still "visible" by Spectre), I don't see this as an apples-to-apples comparison.

I do see that this is a potential bragging-point for Escort adherents, but even so, the comparison is not nearly as valid as it would be for a 9500i -to- V1 pairing.

You don't need to send hardware in for firmware/software updates. See here

^ I see that it does mention firmware!

I can only imagine that they'd managed to effect some kind of link between the microchip in the jammer heads with the central control-box - otherwise, that would not be possible.

Definitely eager to see if this will apply to the Shifters' capabilities.

I've already got that covered. Once the heads are set up, if they deviate in either direction the driver will be notified.

An onboard sensor to that effect would be most cool!

If it's able to actually sense and calibrate to "actual level" (instead of relying on the car's body, or the surface which it's parked on as a reference point), that would be even better. Even with the most careful manual leveling, the latter concern - that the car's not resting on a true-level surface - is still a big problem, currently.

Easily. The sensors take less than 20 minutes to install per tire and can be performed at nearly any tire shop. Fortunately my new car will have these built-in from the factory, but anyone can add them to any car.

^ I know that, I'm a car-nut, remember?

But how will Escort be able to implement this at such minimal cost as you've cited?

Even the cheapest aftermarket systems out there come in at well over $150 for a full system, and at greater than $ 25 per sensor (with the need for at least 4).....

If Escort is able to bring TPMS at that price, with integration to their detectors, they'd have an amazing market presence.