Tuesday, July 02, 2013

Whistler CR90 Review/Preview: Whistler 3600 for the Windshield

Whistler CR90 Review/Preview: Whistler 3600 for the Windshield

 
Whistler CR90

Read the full Whistler CR90 review.

Those of you have been following my reviews and articles over the years already know how much of a fan I have been of Whistler.  My support for this company and its value priced models began the day I witnessed a $120 Whistler windshield mount radar detector spank a very expensive remote installed detector (sold by a company with a letter followed by two numerals).  Up to that time, I had considered Whistler, quite frankly, an also ran.  In reality, I couldn't have been more wrong.

Since that time, Whistler's engineering has continued dazzling me with more improved offerings, year after year, of value-priced over-achievers.

A couple of years ago, I had the pleasure of installing Whistler's first GPS-capable remote radar detector, the Whistler Pro-3600, into my wife's Subaru and since that time, we have been well-served with its capable radar, laser, red light, and photo enforcement alerts as well as all the capabilities that I have come to expect from the addition of GPS.

Had it not been for some legal disputes that tied up several detector manufacturers--we likely would
have seen this detector sooner rather than later.

With the Whistler CR90, it is nice to see that the GPS-circuitry is all internal and I personally find the revised chassis more attractive than the Whistler Pro 78-SE models that the Whistler CR90 supersedes.  I say the Pro-78 series because the display will be the same high quality OLED blue display found on that most recent model. 

Unique to Whistler is verbal augmentation of RSID.  In other words, the detector can be configured to verbally indicate a specific Ka frequency, such as 35.5.  The CR90's power cord includes a secondary USB connection to power smartphones, such as an iPhone, a very handy thing, indeed.

Performance wise, nothing really new here, so I would expect essentially the same detection ability to radar and laser as the most recent SE series of detectors.

The CR90's GPS database can be quickly be kept current however the unit will need to find its way to your laptop or PC as it does not directly mate with a USB thumb-drive like the Pro 3600.  Beyond the preloaded GPS database, the CR90 supports about 1000 custom user-marked locations.

Unlike Escort and Beltronics, the Whistler comes preloaded with the GPS and doesn't require an annual renewal fee to stay current.  This makes these new radar detectors from Whistler even greater compelling values.

The suggested retail price of the Whistler CR90 is set at $279.95 USD.  The street price is surely to be less.  Expect to see the CR90 to begin shipping mid later this month and I expect to get my hands on one for an early review sometime before that as has been typical with Whistler's previous models.  Until that time, I am pleased to see that Whistler has imbued a windshield-mount radar detector with the same capabilities as their venerable Pro 3600 remote.

Happy and safe motoring!





Sunday, June 09, 2013

Escort Passport Max Review/Preview: How Much Range is Enough?

Escort Passport Max Review/Preview: How Much Detection Range is Enough?

 

Escort Passport Max Radar Detector

Updated: 12 DEC 13, By Veil Guy

Read the full Escort Passport Max Review, published on 12-17-13.

Hot on the heels of the release of the revised uber-Escort Redline windshield mount radar detector (which I just published a review), Escort is preparing for the release of a new radar detector that they are billing as their most sensitive and longest detection range radar detector to date.  The Escort Passport Max is the replacement for their very popular Escort Passport 9500ix windshield-mount GPS-enabled radar detector.

What's in a name?  


It only seems logical that Escort is moving away from assigning numbers to their radar detectors.  Over the last several generations of radar detectors spanning more than a decade, their detectors have been named 7500, 8500, and 9500.  I suppose a 10500 would be a bit too much numerically, almost looking like a product sku, not a model name.  The Escort Max's name immediately implies maximum performance...again logical, and I am fully expecting that Escort will deliver on its nomenclature.

While the Escort Max is not being marketed as a stealth (RDD undetectable radar detector), like their Escort Redline, it looks that it may one-up their Redline by offering increased sensitivity (potentially greater detection range) and improved false rejection while providing all of the advanced GPS capabilities of the outgoing Passport 9500ix--redlight camera and speed photo enforcement detection, GPS false lockout, variable speed-based sensitivity, improved (off-axis) laser detection (especially useful for drivers who use the Veil anti-laser stealth coating), and an advanced OLED display (a first for Escort).

While some may be disappointed that the Passport Max is not undetectable, like its sibling the Redline, Escort's have been getting harder to detect at much shorter ranges by the Spectre RDD for quite some time.  I suspect the Max will continue in this vein.

So, if that weren't enticing enough to get you on the waiting list to purchase one, Escort is promising (for the first time) an extremely quick reacting radar detector.  This last point is significant (because it is a departure from Escort's products of the past both in terms in marketing and function) and it is this topic that I would like to subsequently explore.

And with all the marketing hype of the Passport Max's extreme detection range, I thought it important to provide a bit of a reality check, here.

The difference between increased sensitivity and increased long-range detection


The notions of sensitivity and detection range are complex ones as there are a good number of dynamics that come into play--all of which must be delicately balanced by sophisticated signal processing and subsequent alerting behavior.

For starters, increased sensitivity performance doesn't necessarily translate to increased detection range.  This isn't the fault of the radar detector, it is the nature of radar wave propagation, itself.  There are instances where I have found a modestly sensitive $150 mid-level radar detector can alert ahead of or in unison with a $1600 high-end ultra-sensitive radar detector.  The reasons for the apparent contradiction may be two-fold.

The first and perhaps the most important dynamic here, is the nature of the radar wave-form that is being detected.  If you can picture the wake that a boat makes in the water, suppose you were crossing its path perpendicularly in another boat.  You wouldn't actually feel that wake until you actually crossed the wake's outer disturbance wave.   Another example of this is when you watch a high speed jet fighter fly by you.  You may not hear the sound until well after it passed by you.  This phenomenon is not unlike some radar encounters.  In cases such as these, more sensitivity doesn't translate into increased detection range.

The second dynamic is the signal processing speed and pre-alert radar detection qualification.  Just because your radar detector doesn't go off, doesn't mean that it isn't working.  On the contrary it is.  Most drivers are not aware that their radar detector is always working--listening for radar and pre-qualifying what it hears before deciding whether to alert or not.

Just in the earlier example, it is not uncommon that a lesser radar detector--that is quicker or has less processing overhead--can out alert a more capable radar detector that (may detect earlier) but either does a lot of signal processing or waits longer before alerting to a signal that is has seen.  I have documented and written about this any number of times.

How much detection range is enough?  


Can you have too much detection range?  Certainly, I believe so.  I find reviews that tout super-long range detection (in excess of 9 miles or more)--to constant-on steady state radar--as being the end-all-be-all of radar detection performance to be laughable and ultimately of little value.  Why?  For a good number of reasons.

The failings of these tests are where and how they are performed.  Tests that produce super-long detection ranges are conducted in places where the vast vast majority of us drivers don't even drive--on remote desert roads out West which experience super low humidity (humidity reduces detection performance) and have flat unobstructed terrains that extend as far as the eye can see.

Such tests are misleading because even the most sensitive radar detectors alert no where near these distances in areas of development, like suburban and urban roadways where we spend 99.99% of our driving.  In these remote areas, detectors that are capable of alerting at 14 miles in the most optimal test conditions often alert in mere hundreds of feet in the real-world.  Again, as I mentioned earlier, this is not the function of the radar detector, but the function of terrain, weather condition, and radar propagation.

One testing facility has performed long-range detection tests for years.  But, in the not so distance past, their tests produced no clear winners.  Everybody likes a winner, especially in radar detector shoot-outs.  This presented a problem to both the tester and the participating manufacturers.  When a lowly inexpensive Cobra can, in perfect testing conditions, alert at 9+ miles-the same as a high-end a much more expensive (justifiably so) radar detector--the manufacturers of these top-of-the-line radar detectors didn't take too kindly to the result (and I don't blame them, either).  The test itself, became meaningless.

So what is one to do?  Throw out the test and devise another more useful test to reveal the differences that indeed exist?  Certainly not!  You modify the test by adding another seemingly important (but utterly useless) parameter: signal strength alert level.  The idea being if--at the outer ranges of detection--detector A alerts with a signal alert of 6 out of 9 levels versus detector B which alerts at a signal strength of 2 out of 9 levels, then detector A must be more sensitive.  On the surface and to the layman, that premise may sound plausable, but in reality, it is entirely false.

Any detector company wanting to "win" (or at least appear to win) these sorts of silly tests would only need to excessively ramp up their reported signal strength.  The problem is by doing this, the value of the signal strength meter is utterly destroyed.  I am afraid this scenario may have already happened at a certain expert professional review site and, I believe, has created some unfortunate and long-lasting side-effects that have only recently begun to be mitigated

The purpose of the signal strength indicator is to convey the sense of urgency of the approaching radar threat.  That is it!  It has nothing to do with sensitivity.  At 9-14 miles away there is no urgency as it's going to take nearly 8-15 minutes to actually come within the clocking range of the police cruiser.  At a signal strength of 6 or more out of 9, you would believe that you were about to have a close encounter and you would react accordingly.  In reality, the appropriate reporting level should be a 1 or perhaps, at most, a 2 out of 9 at such a vast distance.

Which brings us back to the question, how much range is enough?  The dirty little secret is: today most radar detectors, regardless of price, have more than sufficient detection range in many (most) conditions.  Other attributes of radar detection performance, that are just as important, need to be considered .  Does this mean then that there is no value to owning a radar detector that has greater sensitivity?  Of course not! Why do you think my favorites are the SmartRadar, STi-R series, and the new Redline?

So, when does long range detection really matter?


In my opinion there are only a handful of cases (important as they are!) where sensitivity and radar detection range really matter:

The first and by far the most important one, in my opinion, is in the ability of a radar detector to alert to brief instances of I/O (instant-on radar) at great(er) distances.  Since radar is being operated in such a furtive manner; is only being broadcasted for very brief periods of time; and is representative of the most lethal form of police radar (as the officer is selectively clocking speeds of individual drivers) one needs to be made aware of these threats as absolutely as early a possible.

Years ago, I experienced a number of real-world speed traps where my Beltronics STi Driver provided me additional alerts--of approaching instant-on X-band and K-band police radar to the Valentine One with which I was also driving.  Here the increased sensitivity (and subsequent detection range) of the STi Driver was extremely useful as it provided me with nearly a 30 seconds of additional reaction time over the V1--not an inconsequential amount of time, to be sure.

Another case where sensitivity and detection range matters is in detection of extreme off-axis or reflected portions of police radar.  If a radar detector is sensitive enough to "hear" a weak reflected off-axis signal it could provide its driver with an increased level of protection.  Instances such as these can happen when a cruiser is shooting vehicles ahead from behind and a more sensitive detector may be better suited to picking up on those weak (and brief) reflections.  However, to also be effective in this, a detector must be quick enough to be able to alert to the brief windows of opportunity that may exist in these targeting scenarios.

Can a detector be too sensitive?


Yes, I would say it could--provided that it didn't have extremely sophisticated processing or there was no way to differentiate between real and bogus sources (even if it had).  If a radar detector is too sensitive, it could alert to sources of radar which are too far away or are of no threat (like the ubiquitous X and K-band door openers).  If a super sensitive radar detector ends up alerting all of the time or to non-existent threats, the driver will either discount all of the alerts (including the real ones) or simply turn the detector off.  In either case, the value of the detector and the protection it affords have been marginalized.

Does one really need to be alerted to an approaching radar threat 20 miles away?  Are you crazy?  I certainly wouldn't want to be!  That would mean that I would likely either drive slowly for 20 minutes (not likely) or mute the alert and ultimately see my speed inadvertently creep back up.

To put long-range detection tests into their proper context, one could reasonably assume that a given detector than can alert at much farther distances (than another given detector)--in their most optimal test condition--has the potential to alert before that other same detector, even if the more sensitive one provides its initial at merely 1000 feet--in a real-world radar encounter.

In other words, those potentially vast and eye-popping differences in detection range (ie; miles) may only appear, in the real-world, separated by just 200 feet.  But those 200 feet could provide very valuable additional time, indeed.

For me I want my radar detector to provide me with just enough time to safely and mildly react to an approaching police radar threat (within a single mile away), no more or no less.  Simple, isn't it?  

What makes a quick radar detector?


Those that have been following me for any length of time know that my preference is always towards a quick radar detector over a more sensitive (and slower) one.  When I first discovered and wrote about the implications of band segmentation and reduced filtering options that first appeared in the Beltronics STi-R (evolving into the STi-R Plus), it quickly became my favorite radar detector of all-time not--only because of it was the most sensitive ever detector, but because it was also the most quick reacting detector.  At the same time, the originally released Escort Redline had little appeal to me, because while it was certainly sensitive and capable of long-range detection, it was slow and had a choppy and too aggressive signal-strength ramp-up (see earlier section about long-range tests).

Making an accurate radar detector


Getting back to the Escort Passport Max, Escort is claiming to be offering a radar detector that can "intelligently" decide, extremely quickly, whether a radar source is real or not and whether it merits alerting.  I suspect this advanced capability is due to some very powerful and fast CPU processing.   Just like a faster computer, a radar detector who's "brain" runs at 200Mhz* (versus one that operates at merely 16Mhz) can perform a lot more (complex) pre-qualification tests of detected radar signals in short amounts of time.

Truth be told, signal processing, I believe, (no matter how fancy or fast) can only take you so far.  CW (continuous waveform) radar will always appear as bonafide police radar whether it is or not.  I don't believe it's possible to analyze them or filter them in and of themselves.  In these instances, I believe GPS lockout may be the only viable solution (provided it is a fixed stationery source).

But, perhaps an advanced detector could see a previously locked-out stationery source of K-band radar and an additional radar source of the same band at another time.  Perhaps such a detector would then alert to the presence of the additional source (and not to the original locked out stationery source).

Another example of radar that can be filtered out are the false Ka-signals emanating from the LOs (local oscillations) of other proximate radar detectors.  Where the Valentine One models have the 'J' feature which occurs after its alert to such a false source, it is very conceivable that with enough processing horsepower, these initial Ka false alerts can be dismissed in their entirety.

However, other radars can be effectively differentiated by careful analysis.  An example of radar that can potentially be filtered out is the FMCW (frequency modulated continuous waveform) radar found on lane departure, adaptive cruise control, and collision avoidance systems that are appearing with greater frequency--all based upon frequency modulated K-band radar.

Perhaps yet another and even more impressive example is the ability of an extremely advanced radar detector to alert to a briefly appearing I/O of K-band radar while at the same time it is detecting (but not alerting to) radar from a speed sign and/or a FMCW source from a vehicle your are overtaking.  Again a detector such as the V1 may indicate a bogey count of three (in this case), but the decision is still left to the driver what is actually going on here.

If its an area that is routinely driven, then perhaps the V1 owner would recognize the additional threat source, but if it the driver's first encounter in this area, there really is no way to know what is actually going on and whether or not a real threat is being merited by the detector. However, if a detector could filter out two of those three sources and only alert to the real-threat (the I/O police radar), the utility of such a capability, I believe, would exceed the value of a bogey counter altogether and present a real breakthrough in radar detection.

The above examples certainly demonstrate the value of extremely quick high-end digital signal processing when used to accurately identify and alert to bonafide radar threats that have been thoroughly parsed out of the RF noise that often exists in areas of population and moderate to heavy travel--where 99.99% percent of driving occurs.

Wrapping things up


In closing, I believe Escort, in creating the Passport Max, is continuing its pursuit of manufacturing the "perfect" radar detector.  Assuming the Max performs at the same level that marketing claims it can and perfectly balances its advertised extreme levels of sensitivity and accurate false alert rejection, Escort is promising that their new Max radar detector will leave all other would-be competitors in the proverbial dust.

As always, once I get some extended driving time under my belt, I will follow-up with a detailed review to see if these bold claims hold true in the real-world.  One thing is for sure though, the updated Escort Redline is going to be a really tough act to follow.

Drive safely!

Update 8-5-13: Given preliminary experiences, I am currently recommending that those interested in obtaining this detector, either be very mindful of frequently updating it with the latest firmware available on a regular basis for a time, or waiting until such time the Max receives sufficiently more tweaking/updates from Escort. I will continue to post updates on its development and refinement progress.  So be sure to check back from time to time for the latest status.

Veil Guy

Friday, May 31, 2013

Escort Redline Review: Expert Software Makes this Detector a Wolf in Wolf's Clothing

Escort Redline Review: Expert Software Makes this Detector a Wolf in Wolf's Clothing

Escort Redline with Expert Progamming Features
Updated: 31 May 13, By Veil Guy

Hello and best wishes my fellow driving enthusiasts!  Pardon my extended absence (with my radar detector reviews) from the web.  I have been consumed for the last several years designing and building one of the most energy efficient homes in the world and most of my writing has been directed towards documenting its construction for educational purposes.  Now that this project is essentially behind us I now have more time to resume my role in writing detector reviews and discussing topics important to us driving enthusiasts.

And, I believe, the timing couldn't have been better given Escort's release of a revised Escort Redline radar detector, their top-of-the-line windshield mount.  What makes this a significant release is the incorporation of some new firmware (software)--dubbed as expert software.  What does 'expert' mean? For that answer we have to look at another product introduced nearly four years ago from Beltronics, called the Beltronics STi-R remote

The STi-R was the first ever radar detector offered with Ka-band segmentation.  Unlike other radar bands, X and K, Ka band encompasses a broad spectrum.  Conventional radar detectors have to continually "sweep" the entire range of Ka frequencies (ie; listen for police radar like a scanner does). However being so wide, sweeping the band takes time and it also introduces opportunities for false alerting from other radar detectors and transmitting sources that may be detected across the many frequencies encompassed in the entire Ka-band frequency range.

Some brief history and context

Despite the "wideness" of Ka, only three specific frequencies are currently used in the U.S. by police radar--33.8Ghz, 34.7Ghz, and 35.5Ghz.  Many years ago, Craig Peterson (of RadarTest) suggested to Escort and BEL (now known as Beltronics) to focus its sweep patterns on those three bands instead of the entire Ka-band to reduce falsing.  That was sage advice, indeed.  As a consequence, BEL began introducing radar detectors (Pro RX-65) that had two modes of Ka operation--USA and international.  The standard mode, USA mode, of Ka detection narrowed Ka sweeping coverage and the international mode allowed for extended sweeping in international markets where different frequencies were used.  Escort models did not have this feature as BEL was geared more for the international marketplace.

Fast forward to the Beltronics STi-R (later becoming the STi-R Plus), their high-end remote, Beltronics incorporated a feature called "Ka band-segmentation."   This took the two different Ka detection operations to a whole new plateau as I was the first to discover and write about the alert performance increase when Ka-band segmentation was activated.  When the Beltronics STi-R (and the STi-R Plus) are configured to run with Ka-band segmentation it is like running a radar detector on steroids.  The potential performance increases were staggering.  I have always suspected that this has to do with improved quickness in detection, instead of true detection range improvement.  Either way, though, it provides the driver with an appearance of increased sensitivity and ultimately that is all that matters.

There were some who doubted my conclusions that the features introduced to reduce falsing, also increased its detection range.  However, other users eventually began confirming my observations and began lobbying Escort to incorporate this decidedly Beltronics feature into Escort's products, such as the Redline and Passport 9500ci (Escort's high-end remote installed radar detector).

I am happy to say that Escort has listened and given the high-end performance driving community what they had been asking for.  The Redline now includes the same feature-set of the high-end Beltronics remote installed radar detector

First addition of the Redline.

When I first received an early pre-production and subsequent production models for my Escort Redline review, I was certainly impressed with their sheer detection capabilities.  At the time there was no doubt that Escort had created the most sensitive radar detector to date.  However, truth be told, I wasn't completely enamored with it.  To my way of thinking the Redline lacked refinement.  I found that, while sensitive, it felt slow in its responsiveness.  I also had difficulty in distinguishing between instant-on (IO) and steady-state (CO) forms of police radar.  And what was even more concerning was that the signal ramp-up was choppy and non-linear (and for some time, this attribute made its way to other detectors as well).  In total, these characteristics detracted from what was otherwise an incredibly sensitive piece of equipment.

While my honest and candid feedback may not have been welcomed by some, I believe my observations were spot on and were only intended to improve the model.

Well, enough with the history of the Redline, let's get to the present (and hopefully the future)!

Thanks to Tom of Best Radar Detectors, I've been able to get a close and extended look at the newly revised Redline and I am so very pleased that I have.  In short, all of the "issues" I felt plagued the earlier models have been excised, resolved, or flat-out improved.

Quite simply, I believe this to be the very best windshield mount radar detector yet produced, not just because of its no-holds-barred sensitivity to all radar bands of X, K, and Ka or its ability to hide from RDDs (radar detector detectors) or even its ability to detect new police laser guns, but because of its refinement, balance, and unique capabilities enabled through the use of band-segmentation and its accompanying rejection filtering mode.

This detector does two seemingly incompatible things--it provides extreme range but doesn't punish you with excessive falsing like other radar detectors (think an older Valentine One) may.  That's not to say that doesn't false at all.  But it is far more liveable than others.  Escort's engineering team, I believe, has accomplished an extremely difficult (damn-near impossible) balancing act.

Over the course of the Memorial Day weekend I put this new Redline through it paces.  During the unofficial commencement of summer (when patrols are at their highest), I encountered X, K, and Ka radar. The  Delaware River Port Authority has recently started using (relatively uncommon) 33.8Ghz Ka police radar and this Redline absolutely crushed it.  But the Redline's range was equally impressive with 34.7 Ka as well as X and K bands.

Beyond raw sensitivity, there is refinement.  The signal ramp is silky smooth (as Escorts from the past), predictable, and very usable allowing me to effectively gauge the severity of the approaching threats.

Dealing with the noise

Unfortunately, we are seeing an increased used of radar based lane departure, crash avoidance, and adaptive cruise control systems based upon K-band radar.  Those from Audi (and BMW) are especially bothersome.  The transponders used basically are frequency modulated continuous waveform (FMCW) radar operating within the K-band 24.15Ghz frequency.

Without getting into to much technical detail, these devices can often set off radar detectors and generally the alerts feel like you are being blasted with instant-on (IO) police radar.  Despite their approval for use by the FCC, these things present, what I believe, a real road hazard to all drivers. Imagine overtaking an Audi, BMW, Volkswagen, or any other vehicle with these devices installed and your radar detector goes off at full intensity.  The potential for creating rear-end collisions to those following you (if you happen to slam on your brakes in response) I believe is there, totally defeating the safety benefits these things are promoted to provide and potentially making the roads more dangerous. Years ago I attempted to get this message to the manufacturers and, obviously, there was little concern of the unintended consequences of using these things.

Fortunately, for all of us, Escort provides their TSR (traffic sensor rejection) filter which I found not only effectively filters our K-band alerts from the road-side traffic flow sensors, but also effectively filters out spurious alerts from these Hella-based radar transponders.  What is even better is that Escort has shortened the delay in qualifying alerts to around 0.8 seconds, enough to be above the traffic sensor transmission durations, but below enough to still catch I/O or (the rare quick-trigger).  Originally TSR delayed alerts by more than a second, which was a bit too long for my tastes.   Now that is has been finely tuned, my inclination is to leave TSR on.  It appears to do a very effective job at filtering out a lot of junk noise.

Conclusion

The Redline feels like a Beltronics STi-R.  Which is an awesome thing, to be sure.  When positioned high up on the windshield, it is not uncommon to find the Redline out alerting (if even by a little bit) the remotes that I have installed on my bumper--the increased elevation, especially when in traffic, certainly can help its performance with its improved vantage point.

While this detector is not inexpensive, given the rising costs of tickets (the last one I received was in excess of $600!), driving enthusiasts would be well advised to consider owning one.

For those of us who remain steadfast Beltronics fans (I being one of them), I think it is safe to say that we should be expecting, at some point, to see these expert features on future models of the Beltronics STi Magnum as well (and possibly other models).

Those interested in having their Redline models updated, Escort is providing an update service free and charging merely $14 to cover shipping and handling or, for those willing to wait a bit, the update can be performed with the Escort Live hardware and app.

In conclusion, what Escort has done is essentially put the full power of their high-end remotes into the palm of your hands.  The remotes continue to have their place for those interested in clean/hidden installs, GPS redlight photo enforcement protection, and laser shifting capability--in an all-inclusive-package (these additional capabilities can be optionally added to the Redline).  But for those interested in obtaining the very best of the best in windshield mount radar detectors, one need not look further. This new detector, like its sibling remotes, stands head-and-shoulders above all others in the radar detector food-chain.