RALETC Official Results of Veil G5 Testing - Part 1

[Salty]

I actually must have skipped over the painters tape comment... I cant believe he is going to tape the whole front end of his Camaro with tape and then put G5 over the whole front end for testing. That is pretty crazy.

Not only is it crazy, but for G5 to perform acceptably only with tape all over the front end of the car is not acceptable.

[The Only Sarge]

Of course I do not speak for Mirage......I would suspect the man (Mirage) is showing both ends of the spectrum. Extreme on the low end being the manufacturer application instructions and results to the other end of the extreme....and the results.

[Veil Guy]

Not only is it crazy, but for G5 to perform acceptably only with tape all over the front end of the car is not acceptable.

Is that what he meant? I took that as taping off painted areas. NOT the whole vehicle!

Since G5 can go on paint now, I would suggest to eith tape off certain sections after Veil was conventionally tested. Look at what other areas are hurting you. Rerun them and then determine which portions of the vehicle are the culprit. If the overall performance isn't good, I would say augment the vehicle with jammer heads close to those areas.

VG

[Veil Guy]

Why is stuff like this not on your own FAQ Pages? http://www.stealthveil.com/faq
Stuff like "If you don't treat the plate you'll be cooked." is stuff that people buying the product need to know when they install G5.

You have plenty of other stuff on your FAQ's which me might start a debate about at another time such as:

Q. Can Veil G5 really outperform laser jammers?
A. Yes, in a growing number of circumstances.

But I dont see anything showing the limitations of G5.

I'll look at it again. The site is still a work in progress. We had something like that on the old laser veil site.

If there are those interested in maximizing their odds getting a darker car than a lighter one is better. That applies to using any/all CMs and actually RADAR and shape really can help here too.

When jammers have IPTs that statement is true: After LIs/Blinders starting failing with the DEs.

I'm going to back off here as Sarge suggested. You guys have at it.

VG

[Veil Guy]

Of course I do not speak for Mirage......I would suspect the man (Mirage) is showing both ends of the spectrum. Extreme on the low end being the manufacturer application instructions and results to the other end of the extreme....and the results.

That's all I ask for. Show both sides of the spectrum. Not only the worst case. That's the one thing I like about some of RT's meets. Testing out on a lot of different vehicles used by our community. A lot is learned from that.

VG

[Veil Guy]

Why is stuff like this not on your own FAQ Pages? http://www.stealthveil.com/faq
Stuff like "If you don't treat the plate you'll be cooked." is stuff that people buying the product need to know when they install G5.

You have plenty of other stuff on your FAQ's which me might start a debate about at another time such as:

Q. Can Veil G5 really outperform laser jammers?
A. Yes, in a growing number of circumstances.

But I dont see anything showing the limitations of G5.

With respect to marketing claims and truths (or mistruths) consider the following "marketing/sales" language:

Rocky Mountain Radar

The RMR C450 and RMR C430 will scramble all radar and laser signals from police radar or laser gun returning a blocked signal. Thus, making it virtually impossible for police to read your vehicles spped...laser jamming portion cover the front of your vehicle 180 degrees for unbeatable protection...Completely legal in all states...

Here's another gem:

OnTrack Photo Stopper Photo Blocker Spray

The Photot Stopper Spray Reflects photo radar flash. Spray it and make your license plate invisible to cameras. Proven to beat photo radar cameras

How's that for truth in advertising? I believe I recall privately communicating with this vendor on multiple occasions that they were doing our community a real disservice and advised to drop them. Guess we've come a long way from those days...haven't we?

Cheers.

VG

[BestRadarDetectors]

With respect to marketing claims and truths (or mistruths) consider the following "marketing/sales" language:

Rocky Mountain Radar

The RMR C450 and RMR C430 will scramble all radar and laser signals from police radar or laser gun returning a blocked signal. Thus, making it virtually impossible for police to read your vehicles spped...laser jamming portion cover the front of your vehicle 180 degrees for unbeatable protection...Completely legal in all states...

Here's another gem:

OnTrack Photo Stopper Photo Blocker Spray

The Photot Stopper Spray Reflects photo radar flash. Spray it and make your license plate invisible to cameras. Proven to beat photo radar cameras

How's that for truth in advertising? I believe I recall privately communicating with this vendor on multiple occasions that they were doing our community a real disservice and advised to drop them. Guess we've come a long way from those days...haven't we?

Cheers.

VG

You dont know when to stop digging yourself deeper and deeper. I assume you are referring to a website I purchased 10+ years ago when I bought an electronics company that sold all sorts of electronics and consisted of 20+ websites selling Cameras, TV's, Car Electronics Etc. The difference is when I started to focus on Radar Detectors and dropped the other 20+ websites that I purchased over time I started testing products I sold and dumped all products that did not live up to their claims. I was not a manufacture for RMR or a Manufacture for Ontrack, YOU are the owner of VEIL Corporation and YOU solely are responsible for the claims that you pass on to your customers, distributors and retailers. There is a major difference here.

[awj223]

Do both. If you don't treat the plate you'll be cooked. The plate will be your weakest link. If you have a plate cover even better. If you can pitch the plate forward a bit pointing it down even better. MUCH better. Retroreflective plates are specifically designed to reflect IR and magnify them several orders of magnitude in reflectivity. Look at stealth holistically. That's the best approach.

VG

But one issue is that plate covers are illegal in CA, DC, IL, KS, MO, NY, and SC. That's 26.9% of the US population by current estimates.

Furthermore, AZ, DE, IN, IA, MA, NJ, NC, OH, TN, TX, and VA outlaw covers if they "obscure visibility", "reduce reflectivity", "are opaque", etc. If we add those to the above total, we get 57.2% of the US population by current estimates.

I understand your reasoning to doing this for testing purposes, but it's unrealistic to think that anyone would do this in real life.

I still think it's valuable info from a testing perspective. If you're getting PTs because other parts of the car are reflecting, then it's not VG's fault...so long as he includes a notice on the product that you'd better find ways to reduce reflectivity of the parts of the car that aren't covered by Veil. If you want to find out how effective the Veil really is, then you'd run a test with all other parts of the car covered with tape or some other material, but the plate and headlights exposed as usual, then put Veil on and run the test again. The more variables you can eliminate from the equation, the easier it is to figure out how effective Veil really is. Of course, photos of what the headlights and plate look like to the naked eye are also important, so you know whether the application used was really practical.

[Salty]

But one issue is that plate covers are illegal in CA, DC, IL, KS, MO, NY, and SC. That's 26.9% of the US population by current estimates.

Furthermore, AZ, DE, IN, IA, MA, NJ, NC, OH, TN, TX, and VA outlaw covers if they "obscure visibility", "reduce reflectivity", "are opaque", etc. If we add those to the above total, we get 57.2% of the US population by current estimates.



I still think it's valuable info from a testing perspective. If you're getting PTs because other parts of the car are reflecting, then it's not VG's fault...so long as he includes a notice on the product that you'd better find ways to reduce reflectivity of the parts of the car that aren't covered by Veil. If you want to find out how effective the Veil really is, then you'd run a test with all other parts of the car covered with tape or some other material, but the plate and headlights exposed as usual, then put Veil on and run the test again. The more variables you can eliminate from the equation, the easier it is to figure out how effective Veil really is. Of course, photos of what the headlights and plate look like to the naked eye are also important, so you know whether the application used was really practical.

I understand what you're saying, but in essence this means Veil has no real world purpose. A LEO will shoot whatever part of the car to get a reading. They don't always just hit the plate or headlights. I don't know anyone who would put Veil on any part of their car besides the plate or headlights. I do understand the purpose of doing it for testing, but unless Veil is put on the whole end of a car, AND it proves to be effective, I don't see why anyone would put it on their car.

[The Only Sarge]

But one issue is that plate covers are illegal in CA, DC, IL, KS, MO, NY, and SC. That's 26.9% of the US population by current estimates.

Furthermore, AZ, DE, IN, IA, MA, NJ, NC, OH, TN, TX, and VA outlaw covers if they "obscure visibility", "reduce reflectivity", "are opaque", etc. If we add those to the above total, we get 57.2% of the US population by current estimates.



I still think it's valuable info from a testing perspective. If you're getting PTs because other parts of the car are reflecting, then it's not VG's fault...so long as he includes a notice on the product that you'd better find ways to reduce reflectivity of the parts of the car that aren't covered by Veil. If you want to find out how effective the Veil really is, then you'd run a test with all other parts of the car covered with tape or some other material, but the plate and headlights exposed as usual, then put Veil on and run the test again. The more variables you can eliminate from the equation, the easier it is to figure out how effective Veil really is. Of course, photos of what the headlights and plate look like to the naked eye are also important, so you know whether the application used was really practical.

Not the point whose fault it is.....the entire point here with the testing going on right now and all the discussion is simple:
Does Veil do what it advertises it will do? When applying Veil per the manufacturer specifications does it meet or exceed the claims made on their website.
That's it. Nothing else. "Make your car invisible" with just one coat of veil on the headlights, fog lights, license plate....that is the standard set by Bob's website/ His words not mine.