TX Recommended Distances

[BestRadarDetectors]

We have been talking with many customers with TX Sensors and discussing test results and one think is becoming clear... When sensors are mounted overall more than 30" apart it is creating some center issues. When using TX Sensors the Maximum distance from sensor to sensor can not exceed 30" Recommended spacing is closer to 24-26"

5814

[angrypenguin]

Ok, so time to add my data point.

Yes, I ran into issues with my setup (will decline to say further).

In my case, the distance between F1 & F2 is 10", and the same for F2 and F3.

The total width of the entire install from outer to outer is only 26" though.

Here's my question Prior to me ripping everything out and starting again (which I'm prepared to although I'll need to buy a new grill then (sigh), is, is there any harm in trying to flip the orientation of the heads? That means, receiver (bubble) will be towards the center of the grill. This buys me 1" one either side.

I can't imagine anything wrong with that as long as the 7.5" minimum is still there.

Thoughts?

[BestRadarDetectors]

Ok, so time to add my data point.

Yes, I ran into issues with my setup (will decline to say further).

In my case, the distance between F1 & F2 is 10", and the same for F2 and F3.

The total width of the entire install from outer to outer is only 26" though.

Here's my question Prior to me ripping everything out and starting again (which I'm prepared to although I'll need to buy a new grill then (sigh), is, is there any harm in trying to flip the orientation of the heads? That means, receiver (bubble) will be towards the center of the grill. This buys me 1" one either side.

I can't imagine anything wrong with that as long as the 7.5" minimum is still there.

Thoughts?

Yes, Moving the receiver end closer might help but it will only gain you 1" on each side.

[angrypenguin]

Yes, Moving the receiver end closer might help but it will only gain you 1" on each side.

Thanks. Maybe I'll start with that. To confirm, no real concerns then given the fact that there is now a tx head in my setup? This goes against everything I've learned over the years, LOL :p

In an effort to keep this thread neat, this then will mean angrypenguin's setup will be:
Respective receiving head to tx distance: 9"
Distance between outer receiving sensors: 24"

[BestRadarDetectors]

Thanks. Maybe I'll start with that. To confirm, no real concerns then given the fact that there is now a tx head in my setup? This goes against everything I've learned over the years, LOL [emoji14]

In an effort to keep this thread neat, this then will mean angrypenguin's setup will be:
Respective receiving head to tx distance: 9"
Distance between outer receiving sensors: 24"The recommendations above are only for use with a TX Sensor.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[angrypenguin]

Here's the other thing worth thinking about.

In my case, I/we believe the issue behind what's going on in my setup is because the receivers are too far apart from CM. Here's a huge problem

I just measured (the same setup that gave me grief and BEFORE I flip the heads as per above) a few distances worth mentioning

1) Middle of car to middle of each receiving bubble in the standard ALP head: 12.5"
2) Middle of receiving bubble in standard head to middle of headlight: 12.5"

This means my receiver is currently "perfectly" positioned to receive a hit for CM and the headlight assembly.

By moving the receivers closer together, my concern (logically) is that if I get hit on the headlight then I'm toast, but if I get hit at CM then I'll be fine.

[BestRadarDetectors]

Here's the other thing worth thinking about.

In my case, I/we believe the issue behind what's going on in my setup is because the receivers are too far apart from CM. Here's a huge problem

I just measured (the same setup that gave me grief and BEFORE I flip the heads as per above) a few distances worth mentioning

1) Middle of car to middle of each receiving bubble in the standard ALP head: 12.5"
2) Middle of receiving bubble in standard head to middle of headlight: 12.5"

This means my receiver is currently "perfectly" positioned to receive a hit for CM and the headlight assembly.

By moving the receivers closer together, my concern (logically) is that if I get hit on the headlight then I'm toast, but if I get hit at CM then I'll be fine.Not necessarily the case. We have lots of vehicles with 1 Regular + 1 TX in the rear with no issues. The center of your car will also be the primary target so you want more focus there so you get that time to slow before they start fishing for the edges of your car.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[angrypenguin]

Not necessarily the case. We have lots of vehicles with 1 Regular + 1 TX in the rear with no issues. The center of your car will also be the primary target so you want more focus there so you get that time to slow before they start fishing for the edges of your car.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

Thanks. Just thinking out loud, is there any supported way to have 3 standard ALP sensors on one side? In my case, the third standard ALP sensor doesn't even have to transmit. I'm trying to figure out if there's a way to get 3 receivers on the front.

[studio1930]

Since my state has no front plate, I find it waaaay easier to target headlights to get a reading. Many vehicles will only register by hitting their headlights. I imagine our local police have the same results and probably always target our headlights. Your state may differ, but I assume headlight shots here.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

[BestRadarDetectors]

Thanks. Just thinking out loud, is there any supported way to have 3 standard ALP sensors on one side? In my case, the third standard ALP sensor doesn't even have to transmit. I'm trying to figure out if there's a way to get 3 receivers on the front.No and more receivers is not always better. More chances for more reflections.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[angrypenguin]

No and more receivers is not always better. More chances for more reflections.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

Thanks. I don't know if this is a warranted concern (just thinking out loud), but considering I drive a small-med size sedan and there are issues that we're working through, I'm interested to see how bigger cars, let alone trucks, are dealing with this issue. Thankfully it's cheap for me to buy a used grill off of Kijiji so I plan to hack the heck out of this thing to find the ideal placement and then I'll install it on a new used grill so it looks better :D

And interesting that you mentioned "pair of tx sensors" in your OP. Wasn't that an idea I was going for on the other forum? :D :D

[gapi]

I'm about to start my rear install today knowing my options are limited and hoping for a best case scenario of being targeted @center mass from a substantial distance.
I hope in the least I can call it better then nothing.

If I do test really poorly I have the means to put the TX in the third brake light opposite the end of the trunk button and adding a RX to the tag area.

Would like to hear your words on it. Thanks

5815

[angrypenguin]

I'm about to start my rear install today knowing my options are limited and hoping for a best case scenario of being targeted @center mass from a substantial distance.
I hope in the least I can call it better then nothing.

If I do test really poorly I have the means to put the TX in the third brake light opposite the end of the trunk button and adding a RX to the tag area.

Would like to hear your words on it. Thanks

5815

VERY few cops will target you @ CM from a very far distance when they're shooting your ass. Why? Because they have a HUGE ground to cover in order to catch up to you.

Hoping for this scenario is not a good idea.

[Mirage]

I'm about to start my rear install today knowing my options are limited and hoping for a best case scenario of being targeted @center mass from a substantial distance.
I hope in the least I can call it better then nothing.

If I do test really poorly I have the means to put the TX in the third brake light opposite the end of the trunk button and adding a RX to the tag area.

Would like to hear your words on it. Thanks

http://radarandlaserforum.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=5815&stc=1


Having a second RX head will be beneficial and a TX in/or around the center brake light would be ideal, but even this single RX/TX configuration in the license plate has shown to be JTG.

[Holla]

angrypenguin

put a picture of your car up so we can see the placement--I find it hard to believe you are having issues with your 2 reg and 1 TX setup, and you saying you have a small car?

[angrypenguin]

angrypenguin

put a picture of your car up so we can see the placement--I find it hard to believe you are having issues with your 2 reg and 1 TX setup, and you saying you have a small car?

5817

I have an issue with CM hits only. By definition, the vehicle I drive is a compact sedan. (same size as a Camry in the front end).

Pls ignore the lines.

[gapi]

VERY few cops will target you @ CM from a very far distance when they're shooting your ass. Why? Because they have a HUGE ground to cover in order to catch up to you.

Hoping for this scenario is not a good idea.

Thanks,

I agree and have seen all kinds of distances over the years and its all over the place. We will be testing it 9/10.

[gapi]

Having a second RX head will be beneficial and a TX in/or around the center brake light would be ideal, but even this single RX/TX configuration in the license plate has shown to be JTG.

Thanks,
Work in progress here for sure, still routing cables taking and break, don't let the image toss you, they are level and straight.
Its by no means stealth. And those who know me will tell you I will not stop until its the best it can be. For right now if I had to use bubble gum to stick them on for testing I would.
Still working on getting the TX backed in a little.

I got the inside spread to 10.5 inches.

5820

Using the same mounting system as on my front install.

5819

[angrypenguin]

^ Sheriff's association eh? :D

[V1Jockey]

Thanks. I don't know if this is a warranted concern (just thinking out loud), but considering I drive a small-med size sedan and there are issues that we're working through, I'm interested to see how bigger cars, let alone trucks, are dealing with this issue. Thankfully it's cheap for me to buy a used grill off of Kijiji so I plan to hack the heck out of this thing to find the ideal placement and then I'll install it on a new used grill so it looks better :D

And interesting that you mentioned "pair of tx sensors" in your OP. Wasn't that an idea I was going for on the other forum? :D :D

I have an Infiniti Q50S with 2 RX mounted below the plate and 1 TX at the top of the grill. Tested with Alex at KMPH and was JTG against his newest DE and Truspeed SX, CM and headlights / fog-lights. Previously my dual setup had been JTG against the Truspeed but CM only with PT's on lights with the DE. The TX is very impressive.

[angrypenguin]

I have an Infiniti Q50S with 2 RX mounted below the plate and 1 TX at the top of the grill. Tested with Alex at KMPH and was JTG against his newest DE and Truspeed SX, CM and headlights / fog-lights. Previously my dual setup had been JTG against the Truspeed but CM only with PT's on lights with the DE. The TX is very impressive.

Which DE? DETC or Speedlidar?

I JTG Speedlidar without an issue on my setup. The main difference between my setup and yours is that my TX is mounted 21.5" above the ground. Yours is much higher.

I've been chatting with various experts and I think it's safe to say that TX heads should AT LEAST be 24" off the ground.

I will be replacing my grill with a carbon fiber grill that doesn't have the fucking three pointed star. Should make the install much easier.

Given my results we don't believe it's an issue of receiving the signal, but the tx must be fucking around with the rx with unwanted reflections.

It doesn't explain why I can JTG the Speedlidar though.

[gapi]

^ Sheriff's association eh? :D

Yes, long time member for support because if I get robbed or whatever they are the first people I (we) call.
The perks of the tags have helped in the past. They have got me off more than once I'm sure but its all in ones run of luck.
I don't run them anymore. These days you don't want anything that helps certain people to remember you.

[V1Jockey]

My TX is 25" off the ground. Tested JTG against Dragon full size (2017) and Truspeed SX.

Sent from my SM-A520W using Tapatalk

[angrypenguin]

My TX is 25" off the ground. Tested JTG against Dragon full size (2017) and Truspeed SX.

Sent from my SM-A520W using Tapatalk

Dragoneye full size (speedlidar) was not an issue for me. JTG for everything. The challenge is not with that gun.

[Marcv125]

We have been talking with many customers with TX Sensors and discussing test results and one think is becoming clear... When sensors are mounted overall more than 30" apart it is creating some center issues. When using TX Sensors the Maximum distance from sensor to sensor can not exceed 30" Recommended spacing is closer to 24-26"

5814

so Tom saying this, we still should mount the TX sensor at least 20inch off the ground still correct?.. And we now want the TX in line with the RX sensors?.. Just trying to understand this better. And are you suggesting a second tx sensor for certain applications now?
thx Tom

[BestRadarDetectors]

so Tom saying this, we still should mount the TX sensor at least 20inch off the ground still correct?.. And we now want the TX in line with the RX sensors?.. Just trying to understand this better. And are you suggesting a second tx sensor for certain applications now?
thx TomTX does not have to be in line, separation is actually preferred with TX being higher in most cases. Minimum of 20" is still required if someone wants to use the TX. No one needs more than one TX sensor on any end of a vehicle.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[Marcv125]

TX does not have to be in line, separation is actually preferred with TX being higher in most cases. Minimum of 20" is still required if someone wants to use the TX. No one needs more than one TX sensor on any end of a vehicle.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

ok so just for clarification purposes, if i have my tx sensor mounted higher than my RX sensors, i want no more than 30 inches from outside rx to middle tx to outside rx?.

[angrypenguin]

ok so just for clarification purposes, if i have my tx sensor mounted higher than my RX sensors, i want no more than 30 inches from outside rx to middle tx to outside rx?.

30 inches is stretching it a bit. TX sensor higher is good.

[gapi]

VERY few cops will target you @ CM from a very far distance when they're shooting your ass. Why? Because they have a HUGE ground to cover in order to catch up to you.
Hoping for this scenario is not a good idea.

angrypenguin. I agree with you so don't take this as an argument. Sometimes on these forums my grammar gets folks hair up even if I sugar coat it.

I knew when I ordered my TX for the rear I would be rolling the dice but what the heck I have this spare RX left over from the front TX install so.....

Anyways in reflecting on all the encounters I can remember since 2004 or 5 (can't remember) when I installed my Lidatek LE30 Dual jammers and measuring on maps my best guess for an average distance is about 1000feet. I do get targeted regularly here in town in two places both 1800 feet. From what I gather 1000 feet is on the short side but in the city its probably not so much.

Anyways............. Right Wrong or indifferent with the dragon's beam width specified at 2.5 ft. (30 inches) @1000 feet the picture below is a close representation of what I can hope NOT for eh? And if he is not using a tripod, rifle stock, or laying across his hood (LOL) I may get lucky.

We will be testing Next Week.

5821

[angrypenguin]

dragon's beam width specified at 2.5 ft. (30 inches) @1000 feet the picture below is a close representation of what I can hope NOT for eh? And if he is not using a tripod, rifle stock, or laying across his hood (LOL) I may get lucky.


Cool! PS where did you find this Dragon reference?

[gapi]

Googling around I found this brochure.

5822

[angrypenguin]

Googling around I found this brochure.

5822

Absolutely fantastic. Been trying to find this for a few days. Thanks man!

[RedRocket]

5817

I have an issue with CM hits only. By definition, the vehicle I drive is a compact sedan. (same size as a Camry in the front end).

Pls ignore the lines.Do not forget about my comments concerning the alignment issue I pointed out to you regarding the 2 'outer' Transponders !

[angrypenguin]

Do not forget about my comments concerning the alignment issue I pointed out to you regarding the 2 'outer' Transponders !

Yup. Noted - not only am I dealing with that I'm getting a new grill because I'm tired of the painful install issues with the tx

Go big or go home, as they say :D

[Chelaw]

How do you measure if the Tx is above the horizontal plane of the other two sensors by 6-7"? For example, would it be fine if each of the 7.5" gaps in the original diagram were instead 10" (so 25.5" horizontally instead of 20.5") and the Tx was 6-7" above the horizontal plane of the other two sensors. Thanks.

[nuclearlaser]

We have been talking with many customers with TX Sensors and discussing test results and one think is becoming clear... When sensors are mounted overall more than 30" apart it is creating some center issues. When using TX Sensors the Maximum distance from sensor to sensor can not exceed 30" Recommended spacing is closer to 24-26"

5814

I am about to order some of these, but just to confirm, are you stating the maximum distance between each sensor as stated as between F1 and F3, or between F1 and F2 "TX"???

[Mirage]

I am about to order some of these, but just to confirm, are you stating the maximum distance between each sensor as stated as between F1 and F3, or between F1 and F2 "TX"???

He is referring to F1 and F3. The maximum distance should be less than 30"

Best performance is around 23-26"

[nuclearlaser]

He is referring to F1 and F3. The maximum distance should be less than 30"

Best performance is around 23-26"
Thanks for the reply, but what happens if the distance is around 33 inches between F1 and F3 with TX at F2? Punch through at center of mass? If the distance is brought within the specs laid out, then what about the headlamps on the outer edge of the vehicle that are vulnerable now? Almost sounds to me like we need to be able to keep all three receiver sensors and add the TX above or below F2 with the splitter version TX. Will this not work? Please advise.

[gapi]

You may not want to wander outside the recommendations. I'm not sure if the Dragon Eye's beam pattern spec of 30" @1000' is a factor but........... I feel your concern though. The install on my charger was a pain as can be with most cars. Good luck.

[RedRocket]

How do you measure if the Tx is above the horizontal plane of the other two sensors by 6-7"? For example, would it be fine if each of the 7.5" gaps in the original diagram were instead 10" (so 25.5" horizontally instead of 20.5") and the Tx was 6-7" above the horizontal plane of the other two sensors. Thanks.On the diagonal would be a longer distance than measuring between them if all were on the same Horiz. plane & staying within the recommended spacing.

[nuclearlaser]

Thanks for the reply, but what happens if the distance is around 33 inches between F1 and F3 with TX at F2? Punch through at center of mass? If the distance is brought within the specs laid out, then what about the headlamps on the outer edge of the vehicle that are vulnerable now? Almost sounds to me like we need to be able to keep all three receiver sensors and add the TX above or below F2 with the splitter version TX. Will this not work? Please advise.

Can an expert advise my statement above in bold please. Thanks.

[RedRocket]

Can an expert advise my statement above in bold please. Thanks.If you're driving a small or std. automobile, 2 RX & 1 TX will provide exc. protection provided you abide by the proper install specifications !

[Mirage]

Remember before the TX head was available only one head was used for receiving in a conventional 3 head setup. When you replace F2 with a TX, you are now making F1 and F3 RXs. This gives you additional receive capabilities as well as improved TX capabilities.

Having said that it is important to stick with the specifications provided in order to avoid other technical challenges. I don't want to divulge any additional details in public, but the end result will be PTs at CM and other locations depending on the conditions. Please follow the specifications as the install is slightly different from a conventional install for a very valid reason.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[nuclearlaser]

Remember before the TX head was available only one head was used for receiving in a conventional 3 head setup. When you replace F2 with a TX, you are now making F1 and F3 RXs. This gives you additional receive capabilities as well as improved TX capabilities.

Having said that it is important to stick with the specifications provided in order to avoid other technical challenges. I don't want to divulge any additional details in public, but the end result will be PTs at CM and other locations depending on the conditions. Please follow the specifications as the install is slightly different from a conventional install for a very valid reason.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

How was one head being used as a rx when we can trigger F1, F2, and F3 with the remote tester?

[nuclearlaser]

Remember before the TX head was available only one head was used for receiving in a conventional 3 head setup. When you replace F2 with a TX, you are now making F1 and F3 RXs. This gives you additional receive capabilities as well as improved TX capabilities.

Having said that it is important to stick with the specifications provided in order to avoid other technical challenges. I don't want to divulge any additional details in public, but the end result will be PTs at CM and other locations depending on the conditions. Please follow the specifications as the install is slightly different from a conventional install for a very valid reason.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

So now your saying when using the new TX head that the F1 and F3 are no longer a tx, just rx?

[nuclearlaser]

If you're driving a small or std. automobile, 2 RX & 1 TX will provide exc. protection provided you abide by the proper install specifications !

What about protection for a large SUV? What setup for it using the new TX?

[angrypenguin]

So now your saying when using the new TX head that the F1 and F3 are no longer a tx, just rx?


Only against Dragoneyes. This has been talked about on the forums.

[Macanuck]

That could make some sense. When all 3 heads were the same, there was probably good temporal phase control of the wavefront from the identical laser diodes. The new TX head diodes may have different characteristics for risetime and fall time, and they definitely have wider horizontal and vertical dispersion. In a situation like that, and given that the Tx/Rx heads need to be closer to the TX sensor, it makes sense the TX is the sole blaster and the original heads are just used for listening.

When a head is listening, it cannot be used for transmission. The light from the transmit diodes would be picked up by the receive diodes as the front lens acts like a light pipe. So they have to be interlaced. If the variable pulse rate guns change frequencies or waveforms during the receiver blanking periods, that could screw things up. By having physically separate Rx and Tx, you can listen all the time.

[nuclearlaser]

How do we protect the front or rear of a large SUV with the new TX head? Is this a future upgrade for these vehicles?

[gapi]

If you already have a triple sensor system up front you would just replace the center RX with the new TX, (making sure you have the latest firmware) do a reset and configure and you should be good.