['09 Milan]

Originally Posted by TSi+WRX

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

I don't know Jimbonzzz, but radar roy has been incorrect before and I do not use him as a source. For example, he says that Cincinnati Microwave is a subsidiary of Escort, but this is not true either. It's just the opposite, Escort is a subsidiary of Cincinnati Microwave, and BELtronics owns 60% of Cincinnati Microwave, so don't believe everything these people say as if it's gospel. They are human and they can easily make mistakes. Also you should keep in mind that radar roy has some sort of a controlling interest in the RD.net forum, so consider the source Short of seeing the schematic, I will (at least for the time being) rely on the one person who wrote the schematic for the product, and he says it's diode based. I'll know more in a month or two when I get the product in my hands and I can reverse engineer... er... I mean examine it myself

I truly think that this is a case of mistaken nomenclature/crossed vocabulary

Anything is possible but I don't see how it can be mistaken as I spoke to him for around 10 minutes talking about nothing but this subject. He was very adamant about it being diode based and asked me where I heard that it was LED based. When I told him "on the net" he laughed and said "where there you go, the internet is not a reliable source for information". Short of a schematic I'll need to get one of these puppies in my hands to know who is correct, but I do see the head engineer as a much more reliable source than those people on that other forum.

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

He already mentioned it is not in the same conversation, but I have to speak with him next week about another technical issue so I can ask again

did show the ZR4 to perform better in terms of frontal protection, it still was very disappointing in terms of rear protection.

That's because the boneheads that designed the rear system never gave it a swivel mount. I'm betting that every single rear head installed from a 9500ci is installed incorrectly because of this. Laser works in a very specific way, and if it's not pointing level then it's performance is going to be terrible. I am redesigning the rear mount for my 9500ci to address this issue. Why they would think that the laser would work differently "just because" it is mounted in the back of the car is beyond me, but I can tell you that the laser will function the same as it does in the front heads and just be pointing in a different direction.

I have absolutely *NO* reason to doubt Roy's word, it is undeniable that he is financially vested in this system doing well

Another reason why I don't trust what he always says. He gets many 'perks' from the company and there is no way that those perks won't skew his reviews. This is the main reason why every single unit that I test comes directly of the shelf of a retail store. Sure it would cost me a lot less and be easier if I just had these companies ship me one of their units for testing, but I do NOT want them to tweak anything before I get it in my hands. I want to see what every other person that buys these units see, and review accordingly. It's the only fair way to do it.

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

Many radar detector enthusiasts consider the V1 the baseline, which all radar detectors should be measured; therefore I began my review by hanging a Valentine 1 radar detector (version 3.864) on my pickup’s windshield.

My first “real life” encounter was on a desolate stretch of a divided four lane highway, north of Buckeye Arizona. The 9500ci first alerted Ka then flashed my speed of 67 mph. A few seconds later the V1 began its alert. As I rounded a sharp bend on the highway I spotted a Buckeye PD black and white vehicle parked in the turnout lane.

My second encounter was in the city of Glendale in a densely populated business/residential area early in the morning. The 9500ci alerted K band and displayed my speed of 51 mph and again a few moments later the V1 alerted. During this initial alert I was concerned that this was a false as I had a clear view of the road ahead, but as I approached the next intersection a Maricopa County Sheriff’s patrol vehicle came into view pulling up to a stop sign at a 90 degree angle from my approach.

Most “low end and mid level” detectors would had failed during both of these “extreme off axis” encounters, but both the V1 and 9500ci performed very well, with the 9500ci having a slight edge.

The most dramatic difference between the V1 and the 9500ci was the increased number of false alerts that the Valentine One alerted to over the 9500ci. The ratio was almost 5 to 1 and once the 9500ci automatically registered the false bogies with its GPS Truelock, the ratio decreased to 5 to 0! link

This was not the review that I mentioned above. That review I will relocate for you and post the link in this thread, hopefully sometime today or tomorrow, as time permits

This was long rumored to be something that the 9500ci was going to take home the prize on.

It's a no brainer really as the v1 is old tech and the 9500ci is current state of the art. It's like comparing a model T to a Corvette. Valentine needs to get off their butts and come out with a more up to date product.

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

Yes, and the reviewers need to start listing which version they are testing.

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.

Yes, actual level, plus last night I designed another system that will allow drivers to turn off their jammers (once they adjust to legal speed) without adding any additional equipment to their cars (except for my new circuit) and they would have almost immediate reaction time. I'll be testing it in a few months just as soon as my sequential turn signal circuit is finished, but it should work flawlessly and I really like the fact that it keeps the car looking completely 'factory' and is immediately accessible to the driver and is only a simple three wire install

Even the cheapest aftermarket systems out there come in at well over $150 for a full system

150.00 retail = 90.00-100.00 dealer cost, which would equate to around 50.00-60.00 manufactures cost (depending on where they have it manufactured). I am confident they can meet this price point IF they really wanted to. I will know more in a few months as I am contacting several manufactures directly.