laser jammer on a dodge ram 2500 with a bit of a lift?

[steelewise]

long time lurker/reader first time posting. I just got a new dodge 2500 and from what i have been reading the more flat surfaces the easier it is to gt hit with a laser is that correct?
Ok so assuming that i have that correct is it even worth it to install a jammer on a large truck? or am i wasting my money?
I have no experience with jammers so im asking u guys, i have an escort 8500 and friggin love it.

[RadarReviews_Net]

Flat surfaces, yes hurt...your truck is a very easy vehicle profile to target. Second anything reflective on your front truck the worst...for example chrome grill, chrome brush guards, etc.

For you truck I would for sure go with a four head laser diode laser jammer, not a led based jammer. Such as the laser pro park or the laser interceptor diode head laser jammer. Go with 4 heads on the front of your vehicle, if you can afford more then mount two more diode based heads for rear protection as well. As starters though the four head up front will be great.

[TSi+WRX]

Mthman30 on RD.net was able to effect JTG when using the "max output" mode of the AL G8, with "only" a dual-head setup, on his 2500 (not lifted). Since the AL G8 has a quad-head enabled box, I'd go with three heads up front, just to be sure....

With such a vehicle, it'll be hard to say that you've got complete coverage, unless, like Mthman30, you were able to test, first-hand, in a quantitative manner.

With the LPP, I would suspect that either a three or even four-head setup will be required. Either of these would require the addition of a second control-box, but based on charles charlie charles's experience (posted on RD.net as well as the Laser Pro Park Support Forums), you should be able to effect JTG performance, with the addition of the second control-box, without worry as to potential cross-talk issues.

My honest guess is that with careful placement, a dual-head LI will be able to sufficiently protect your ride - but failing the ability to test, quantitatively, the system, first hand, I'd hedge my bet, and purchase a 3-head setup, just to be safe.

Given current data on the PASS, in terms of fitment to larger vehicles, I'm somewhat hesitant to recommend this item, even in full 4-head format. If you're interested in either this item or the LaserStar, I would advise that you wait-out the coming set of GOL testing, as well as other legitimate hobbyist groups' (such as the Central-Florida group and the CT-state group) further testing.......

What kind of buget are you working with?

And where are you from? This latter is more to pursue what kind of enforcement you're most likely to see (both hardware as well as practices/circumstances), so that we can better gauge how in-depth you must seek protection.

[RadarReviews_Net]

Originally Posted by TSi+WRX

Mthman30 on RD.net was able to effect JTG when using the "max output" mode of the AL G8, with "only" a dual-head setup, on his 2500 (not lifted). Since the AL G8 has a quad-head enabled box, I'd go with three heads up front, just to be sure....

With such a vehicle, it'll be hard to say that you've got complete coverage, unless, like Mthman30, you were able to test, first-hand, in a quantitative manner.

With the LPP, I would suspect that either a three or even four-head setup will be required. Either of these would require the addition of a second control-box, but based on charles charlie charles's experience (posted on RD.net as well as the Laser Pro Park Support Forums), you should be able to effect JTG performance, with the addition of the second control-box, without worry as to potential cross-talk issues.

My honest guess is that with careful placement, a dual-head LI will be able to sufficiently protect your ride - but failing the ability to test, quantitatively, the system, first hand, I'd hedge my bet, and purchase a 3-head setup, just to be safe.

Given current data on the PASS, in terms of fitment to larger vehicles, I'm somewhat hesitant to recommend this item, even in full 4-head format. If you're interested in either this item or the LaserStar, I would advise that you wait-out the coming set of GOL testing, as well as other legitimate hobbyist groups' (such as the Central-Florida group and the CT-state group) further testing.......

What kind of buget are you working with?

And where are you from? This latter is more to pursue what kind of enforcement you're most likely to see (both hardware as well as practices/circumstances), so that we can better gauge how in-depth you must seek protection.

nicely said

[steelewise]

Thanks guys! my "lift" is really only in the fact its 4x4 and it has bigger tires no real lift kit to speak of. I'm gonna check in to 3 up front and two in back. question i do launch my boat with this ride are the laser diodes waterproof? I assume they would have to be resistant but the back sensor will probably be fully submerged for a few minutes to launch.

[RadarReviews_Net]

dont take my word for this...but I am going to say they are water resistant, not proof. Especially if you have any cracks in and aroud it and water gets into the head....would kill the head right there. The laser pro park only supports currently up to two heads on its control box, so for the 3...might be a problem....

does the laser interceptor control box support more then two heads??

[RadarReviews_Net]

only other alternative for the laser pro park would be to have two control boxes and run two up front, then on the other control box run one wire up front to make a total of 3, and then run the other one on the back (single) for 4. However, with that big of a truck, I would highly recommend 4 diode based jammers up front. Also with the possibility of the heads being submerged in water....might risk not having anything in the rear...I currently have no protection in the rear and have never been hit from the back of the vehicle...however...it only takes just once...

[TSi+WRX]

I agree - it's way, way to early to tell if the heads are "waterproof."

Currently, "water-resistant" is about all that can be said of the LPP and LI - while the PASS has seen demonstration of full submersion, it's at an initial, "new-in-box" time-point, and no long-term data has yet to be seen, simply due to the young age of this unit.

I would *not* submerge any of these units, if I could at all help it.

[RadarReviews_Net]

Originally Posted by TSi+WRX

I agree - it's way, way to early to tell if the heads are "waterproof."

Currently, "water-resistant" is about all that can be said of the LPP and LI - while the PASS has seen demonstration of full submersion, it's at an initial, "new-in-box" time-point, and no long-term data has yet to be seen, simply due to the young age of this unit.

I would *not* submerge any of these units, if I could at all help it.

something about electronics and water....just dont seem to mix well

[TSi+WRX]

^ As long as the casing is totally waterproof.....it shouldn't be a problem.

But that's the issue here - we've seen issues with pretty much *every* brand/make of jammers, in the long run. And sadly, some in the shorter run, too (although resolved).

Right now, there's just no guaranty of this. Insufficient data.

Originally Posted by RadarReviews_Net

does the laser interceptor control box support more then two heads??

^ I forgot to address this one.

The LI is, default, a quad (4)-sensor box. Same goes for the LaserStar and the PASS.

The AL G8 has a quad-sensor box available.

The LPP currently is only two-sensors per head, with no quad-sensor c-box yet available.