QuantumTheory08

I've seen several pics floating around on the forum and I want to share my experience with the battery powered Escort Solo2.

I find taking the time to "tinker" with the suction cups and bending the little metal clip that the detector slides onto, I'm able to have the detector just rest on the top of the rear view mirror. With some adjusting, I prefer having the detector tilting down in the back display side, thus exposing the "rear view" detector out the back window of the car.

Having the detector up high and "hidden" by the black dots on the front of the upper wind shield; the detector picks up the best and is hidden the best IMO.

Here's some pics of what I'm talking about:

Pic #1:

QuantumTheory08

Pic #2:

QuantumTheory08

Pic #3:

QuantumTheory08

Pic #4:

QuantumTheory08

Pic #5:

Doctorr

It is a good solution to the placement issue, the black dots don't hinder the radar reception in the least, however your Laser range will be toast. My Laser pickup is on top of the unit, so it is almost tight to the roof, but even on the front your Laser reception will be in the "thank you for the ticket, officer" range.

You will probably find too, that the suction cups only stick for a few days, then fall off. The reason is the dot surface is slighty porus, and the cups don't adhere for long. I fixed the metal 'cup' bracket to a strip of thin Lexan, and ran it up under the headliner, to a bolt on the sunglass holder, it is truly solid now.
.
.
.
doc

QuantumTheory08

Where I live, there is a grade from the coastal region to the north county; elevation change about 1,000 feet over a mile or two. Cal Trans just finished widening this road to three lanes on both sides.

On the downhill side, they installdc a "your speed" K-band radar detector. What I find interesting is that as I'm headed up the grade in the opposite direction, my detector will go off before I get to the sign due to the signal bouncing off of on-coming cars on the down hill side. Once I pass the radar device going up hill, I will pick it up the signal again through the rear window; I just love that.

QuantumTheory08

Doc: It's not a good shot but Pic 2 shows the clearance for the back detector and it works great.

The front pic (I think pic 4) you can "see" the "magenta" sensor spot which is flat and facing directly forward.

....I'm not sure I understand what you're trying to say. I'm sure happy with the results I'm getting.

This week the detector goes off and I'm doing ~74 mph (Ka band; CHP). I immediately take my foot off the pedal and start looking.

Nope, no one in front or back of me....I keep going. Then, I go under a bridge and I look up on the on-ramp and there he is!!! I've picked up his signal from a reflection from on-coming cars on the other side of the road; I couldn't beleive it and I was so jazzed.

QuantumTheory08

BTW: my suction cups seem to work just fine.

Doctorr

Yes, I can see from your picture, the laser is probably O.K., mine is mounted higher.

The cups will stick for a couple of days, but then I take off from a stop, and I have a lap-full of radar detector. Tried changing the suctions to a soft silicone type, but they still 'lose it' in a few days.
.
.
.
doc

QuantumTheory08

Bummer on that one.

...I say keep trying.

Omicron

I have the exact same detector, Quantum. I mounted mine in the same place as yours, only I made a bracket like Doctorr did and mounted the windshield mount (sans suction cups) to the bracket. I tried to get the suction cups to stick to the dotted part, but as Doctorr says, it fell off in a few days. Let me know if you'd like more details on the bracket I made.

Genom

I have the BEL985 and mounted it in the same exact place. I have a clear view both front and back and I have picked up laser from the front. Cant get anything from above though so those damn choppers are still a problem. Other than that I have no problems.

I have noticed the suction cup failing thing though and plan on mounting the detector as suggested making an extra braket and bolting it in place. Even have some lexan just waiting for it. Only need that precious commodity. Time!

Maybe tomorrow I'll get a chance to make it real quick.

Sputnik

Ya know, rear visibility isn't going to make a difference with your Escort.

---jps

Omicron

Why do you say that? Are you just saying Escort, or any detector?

QuantumTheory08

(grin)
...we've been here before...how I love tradition.

Jeff's continued dreaming of ideas:

1.) reduce radar cross section. (radar absorbing car bra).

2.) Create radar emmiter to state "correct speed" for radar gun. (do thread search...blah, blah, blah).

3.) Realize that Descrete Fourier Transforms, and In phase-quadrature phase, are just "math", and I'm gonna continue to dream how to beat the system with my own radar emmiter.

........Sputnik, you make me smile.

-jcs-

doccable

Interesting. Whats the little window on the top that faces the rear used for, then? (Escort 8500 in use here). Here's my post about working around the suction cup issue...
https://www.rx8club.com/showthread.p...+passport+8500

QuantumTheory08

Doccable: ...just so you know, Sputnik knows what he's talking about. I've learned from his input on more than one occasion.

...I think the point of his "prod" about the radar being ineffective using it from the rear is: If, an officer turns on his radar while driving behind you, depending how far away he/she is from you, it all could be over except the signature and have-a-nice-day.

IMO there are many times that a rear-view detector can make a difference.

Technology, cat and mouse, etc. - continue to develop.

-jcs-

....Okay Sputnik; what really were you thinking?

...and Doc: nice install!

Sputnik

Actually, my point was that unless Escort has come out with a unit that I'm not aware of, they don't have a rear facing radar antenna, only a single forward antenna. So, you don't have to go through the effort of making sure that that particular unit has visibility to the rear, leaving other options open. In fact, there are beneifts in making sure that people can't see your detector from behind your car.

I agree that a rear facing radar antenna can be effective in certain situations. Will it help in every scenario? Certainly not, nothing can, but it is effective. More so on a unit like the Valentine One, where the detector compares signals from both front and rear.

However, due the nature of laser, I cannot think of a scenario where a rear-laser antenna would be effective. A jammer, yes, but not a detector-only.

---jps

S3/P3/E2

Ugh...you guys! Damn, it's bad enough to wade through Fourier Transformations at work; but now I have to come home to it too? :D

QuantumTheory08

S3/P3/E2:

With your comment, I'm curious to your input on ways of beating radar and what you know.

....care to give a little input? (come on, I want to give Sputnik a chance to "think" for once, since he knows all this stuff already and I'm just the novice trying to catch up).

-jcs-

S3/P3/E2

:D
Unfortunately, as much as I'd like to contribute to this from a professional standpoint, I can't (read: not allowed). As things stand now, there's really not much the average consumer can do to combat police radar. Obviously the biggest enemy (even in my business) is radar cross section. The big ticket items here are going to be reflective surfaces, although that's no big surprise to anyone here. Ultimately you can make an argument (once stopped or cited) about the beamwidth error and pulse width of the particular unit. Without a Plan Position Indicator or at least some semblance of a B-scan display that allows an officer to plot and track INDIVIDUAL targets, regardless of what they may say the gun/unit is going to be dependent on the target with the highest amount of doppler shift to give a speed. Newer units may be able to run a Kalman-type fliter based on return signal amplitude in an effort to eliminate possible targets, but it's doubtful that the ordinary highway officer would be able to go into detail about either its theory or practical application. The ultimate Achillies Heel is the resolution of the system. Beamwidth error is going to affect the left/right azimuth separation of two (or more) targets, while pulse width (essentially transmit time) affects the range resolution of the system. Using these numbers, you can compute the actual footprint/ellipse/conic of what the radar can conceivably see at any given time. Without any filtering, any vehicle or item generating doppler (trees in wind - yep, it's true) could give an incorrect speed indication. From the driver's view, the only things you could legally get away with would be low reflectivity paint, removal of light reflectors, license plates - anything that would lower the RCS. You're just never going to see radar absorbent stuff on the market due to its military nature (plus it'd be expensive as hell). Even if you could do all of these things, you'd still have the motion of the car's wheels - big radar reflectors. Without shrouding or baffling like we do for new-construction modern jet fighters and bombers, they'll still crank out plenty of signal return. As for your idea above about an emitter to show a different representation of speed, that'd be what we refer to as a velocity-gate-pull-off. Basically it's to spoof a missile or tracking system into determining an incorrect speed and therefore cause the tracking system to lose lock or track. Unfortunately, it's not an instant process and requires that the "tracker" spend some time actually tracking the target and continue to radiate the entire time - police radar doesn't need that much dedicated time, plus you may even spoof it into a higher speed. Unlike modern air-to-air or surface-to-air systems, if the cop is shooting you it's because he can already see you (vice spoofing a radar trying to make a beyond visual range firing or tracking solution). A noise jammer to deaden or drown their signal return until you get close enough for radar burn-through would conceivably work, but the FCC tends to frown upon such activities in the civilian community. Sorry to say, but my experience in jamming environments or low target signals in high clutter environments don't quite translate to Johnny Law who's already looking at you when he pulls the trigger.

Now, if you were to find a surplus HARM on EBay sometime...well, that might be another matter altogether... :D

QuantumTheory08

Now I enjoyed that!!!

....always something to learn...back to the books and internet and read up.

Thank you,

-jcs-