Stalker option

Does anyone know the specific trade off in sensitivity when selecting the optimal Stalker setting? I'll be in CO for a week or two this summer, so no jam codes are an absolute necessity, but so is maximum sensitivity and range given that I'll be riding in an unfamiliar area.

Go with Max. It won't throw jam codes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yellowcab

Go with Max. It won't throw jam codes.

---

Much appreciated, thanks!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yellowcab

Go with Max. It won't throw jam codes.

---

In all our testings we had no issues with Max, I would not run it any other way.

I personally have experience with the Stalker, Go Max every time, or expect PT's
I have not seen any jam codes on my Stalker unit

Agree - never seen any jam codes on my Stalker running A 5.6 SUP firmware with my ALP set at max power

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by winterbrew

Agree - never seen any jam codes on my Stalker running A 5.6 SUP firmware with my ALP set at max power

---

Are their any jammers that makes the 5.6 stalker show jam codes?

http://www.guysoflidar.com/jam-codes.html

Stalker LZ-1 Version 1

An E04 code is very common to see on the version 1 Stalkers, even when targeting vehicles without jammers. This gun has the most "jam code false alerts" of any gun used in the US. This is possibly caused by light sources such as running lights or sunlight reflections. If an officer using one of these guns sees an E04, this isn't probably isn't suspicious by itself, since he probably sees it all the time.

Stalker LZ-1 Version 2

Stalker revised their guns, and on version 2 guns an E04 is very rare to see. No jammer that we have used this gun against triggers an E04. Most likely, this can only be triggered by "brute force" jammers such as the older Lidatek LE-10.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shanetrainST

http://www.guysoflidar.com/jam-codes.html

Stalker LZ-1 Version 1

An E04 code is very common to see on the version 1 Stalkers, even when targeting vehicles without jammers. This gun has the most "jam code false alerts" of any gun used in the US. This is possibly caused by light sources such as running lights or sunlight reflections. If an officer using one of these guns sees an E04, this isn't probably isn't suspicious by itself, since he probably sees it all the time.

Stalker LZ-1 Version 2

Stalker revised their guns, and on version 2 guns an E04 is very rare to see. No jammer that we have used this gun against triggers an E04. Most likely, this can only be triggered by "brute force" jammers such as the older Lidatek LE-10.

---

Isnt the 5.6 comes only on the version 2 ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by max

Isnt the 5.6 comes only on the version 2 ?

---

I'm fair sure that is correct, lower versions in the 3.X produce more jam codes

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by max

Isnt the 5.6 comes only on the version 2 ?

---

Here's my Gen I, manufactured March 2003 ;

Attachment 1125

Attachment 1126

Manufactured March 2006, Gen II

Winter, yours must have been for a FW update at some point

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by winterbrew

Here's my Gen I, manufactured March 2003 ;

Attachment 1125

---

Gen I but has genII firmware. If will not generate jam codes

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shanetrainST

Attachment 1126

Manufactured March 2006, Gen II

Winter, yours must have been for a FW update at some point

---

This unit can go as high as 5.7 FW.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shanetrainST

Winter, yours must have been for a FW update at some point

---

Last cert/cal in June 2009 / Expired June 2012

It still has a knack in detecting weak spots in rear installs, that the LRB won't find.