Testing results w/ and w/o TX sensor

[angrypenguin]

Interesting to note

http://radarandlaserforum.com/showth...Compact-PART-2

When the ALP came out in 2014, they used a 2 head ALP setup on this SUV and it jammed the DE well.

Therefore, definitely very interested to see the test results that I'm looking for above. 2 ALP regular heads vs 2 ALP regular heads + TX in the front.

Perhaps the TX system is overkill? Without testing, as consumers, we won't know!

[BestRadarDetectors]

Interesting to note

http://radarandlaserforum.com/showth...Compact-PART-2

When the ALP came out in 2014, they used a 2 head ALP setup on this SUV and it jammed the DE well.

Therefore, definitely very interested to see the test results that I'm looking for above. 2 ALP regular heads vs 2 ALP regular heads + TX in the front.

Perhaps the TX system is overkill? Without testing, as consumers, we won't know!

DragonEye has changed its operating methods many times and guns from 2014 operate nothing like new guns in 2017.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[angrypenguin]

DragonEye has changed its operating methods many times and guns from 2014 operate nothing like new guns in 2017.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

Just going to throw this out there (only mean this respectfully)

If that's the case, then there has not been any information available to us as consumers because organizations like RALETC haven't published testing information to support or deny the claim that DE guns have changed between 2014 and 2017 which has resulted in efficacy changes with CM; and even if that is verifyable, then now we, as consumers, have no idea how two head ALP setups fare vs these type of 2017 VLPR guns, let alone a two head + 1 tx head setup.

I know you probably have far more connections than any of us do but would respectfully request that you pass on a message to the testing gurus to begin publishing some information so consumers can make educated choices.

Right now from what I read on here and on other forums it's very much a "buy a tx head if you want effective protection against DE" - without testing, however impartial it may be, consumers like me who are evidenced based buyers will not just hand over our money

I can only speak for myself but I remember back in the 90s when RMR had huge marketing campaigns that showed how their RDs could jam radar...they simply said "believe us!" and people bought it. Many of us on these forums were smart enough to see some proof, and thus bought CMs that work. I feel that right now we're at an impasse because there simply isn't published information to help us consumers make educated decisions about how best to fight DE.

Whether or not two heads is sufficient, and if not, what do the improvements look like with the new tx head? e.g. PT at 1500 feet with two heads now is a full JTG with two heads + tx (as a pure example. I'm making up these numbers of course)

[BestRadarDetectors]

Just going to throw this out there (only mean this respectfully)

If that's the case, then there has not been any information available to us as consumers because organizations like RALETC haven't published testing information to support or deny the claim that DE guns have changed between 2014 and 2017 which has resulted in efficacy changes with CM; and even if that is verifyable, then now we, as consumers, have no idea how two head ALP setups fare vs these type of 2017 VLPR guns, let alone a two head + 1 tx head setup.

I know you probably have far more connections than any of us do but would respectfully request that you pass on a message to the testing gurus to begin publishing some information so consumers can make educated choices.

Right now from what I read on here and on other forums it's very much a "buy a tx head if you want effective protection against DE" - without testing, however impartial it may be, consumers like me who are evidenced based buyers will not just hand over our money

I can only speak for myself but I remember back in the 90s when RMR had huge marketing campaigns that showed how their RDs could jam radar...they simply said "believe us!" and people bought it. Many of us on these forums were smart enough to see some proof, and thus bought CMs that work. I feel that right now we're at an impasse because there simply isn't published information to help us consumers make educated decisions about how best to fight DE.

Whether or not two heads is sufficient, and if not, what are the improvements with the new tx head?

We are not RALETC, If you have questions for them then you should direct it towards them. They do have their own website. Even mentioning ALP & RMR in the same sentence is insulting. There is lots of research and testing out there if you spend some time and look for it. Our reputation also speaks for itself.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[angrypenguin]

We are not RALETC, If you have questions for them then you should direct it towards them. They do have their own website. Even mentioning ALP & RMR in the same sentence is insulting. There is lots of research and testing out there if you spend some time and look for it. Our reputation also speaks for itself.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

Sorry meant no disrespect as I mentioned the word "respectfully" a few times.

Just looking for said testing results and there doesn't appear to be many, if any out there since 2014 to address these basic questions.

[V1Jockey]

I tested my dual setup last year with Alex from KMPH in Vancouver, and against his 2016 DE I was JTG on CM but PT on headlights around 1300'. This year, with the addition of a TX head and against a newer 2017 DE the same car is JTG period. Google their website and check out the video section. I'm a satisfied customer.