Radar Detectors

[deadheadskier]

BG, I know there's nothing you like more in life than winning the internet by telling others that they are wrong, but I think most people are going to stick with conventional wisdom and side with the guy who actually works for the state police.

 

[Funky_Catskills]

So I'm in VA right now... I used WAZE and my detector..
And WAZE doesn't seem to be updated/crowd sourced on 95 as much as it is on my usual 84/87..

People...

 

[MadMadWorld]

This is nonsense. If you are aiming a lidar unit you can not also be estimating speed. It is also almost impossible to estimate the speed of a car at the shallow angle (as close to straight on) you need to make sure the lidar is accurate due to cosine error.


Weather does affect the lidar units. Some have a precipitation setting that shuts off the unit at closer than 250 ft. The next time I am driving underwater I will keep my detector on.



The width of a beam at 1000 ft is about 4 feet. A small movement by the officer while pulling the trigger can make the beam sweep over multiple lanes giving an inaccurate reading and also setting off the detector.



Most lidar manufacturers do not recommend shooting through windows due to the reduced accuracy (glass refraction, glass coatings, dirt and/or precipitation on the glass). That means most officers will shoot thru an open window. That also means dealing with cold/heat and rain/snow directly due to the open window. While the lidar units themselves work at night, there are no lidar units with night scopes. Aiming and IDing a target at night is very difficult. The cops that I know hate lidar units. It is too much work and too much weather exposure especially when compared to a fixed mount radar unit.

With LIDAR you don't need a visual estimate you can get a new reading with every pull of the trigger. I realize you are getting your information from some Internet lawyer but if you go into court arguing cosine effect, you will be interrupted by the magistrate and politely asked to leave. Officers are trained to use these on straightaways and to take at least 2-3 readings. If there was a cosine issue, the officer would see readings all over the place and probably wouldn't bother pulling you over.

Those weather setting you talk about are only need in severe weather situations where it probably wouldn't be used anyways.

The width of the unit we use is 3 ft but regardless that's 3 football fields and the max range of the unit. Most officers will mark the range of the reading on the ticket. A magistrate might take your side on a reading from 800+ feet but otherwise you have no argument.

LIDAR world just fine through a windshield but yea some manufacturers say you shouldn't. Mattress manufacturers also tell you not to remove the tag under penalty of law. LIDAR is used to identify the topography of the ocean floor, military uses it to guide missiles with in feet of a target from thousands of feet in the air. Do you really think it has an issue with a little rain, snow, or dust? And yes there is no night scope but radar doesn't either. The officer is required to visually identify the vehicle and then get a reading. They are trained to aim the unit at head lights/tail lights and license plates. So at night those headlights are an easy target.

 

[MadMadWorld]

BG, I know there's nothing you like more in life than winning the internet by telling others that they are wrong, but I think most people are going to stick with conventional wisdom and side with the guy who actually works for the state police.

Shit is entertaining at least. I would love to be in the court room when BG contests a ticket!

 

[Not Sure]

How fast over the limit are you guys going? They just raised the Pa. TPK limit to 70 people are doing 90 -100 . Seems to me that all the authorities have to do is look at time stamps on tickets or EZ pass data , so much for detector use on TPK .
Dry conditions ,Ok but this is setting the stage for some major wrecks! A Winter snow squall is going to be a death trap. I speed also but usually not more that 10% over .

 

[deadheadskier]

On highways I typically drive 5-9 over the limit up to 80 MPH. It seems like 9 over is the Magic number. I don't use a radar detector or Waze and the last ticket I got was in 2001. I also drive a ton (42K miles in the past year).

I don't purposefully drive above 80. As an example, the limit on 95 north of Bangor is 75 and I don't think to myself, "okay, I'll drive 84 and not get pulled over."

 

[Funky_Catskills]

Seems to me that all the authorities have to do is look at time stamps on tickets or EZ pass data , so much for detector use on TPK .
.

If they ever did that - EZ Passes would be sent back in droves...

 

[Domeskier]

This is a joke. There is no way to tell how fast a car is going by your eye. You might be able to tell that a car is slower or faster than the posted limit if you were familiar with the location and perpendicular to the traffic, but no way you can tell the speed. Guessing will not hold up in traffic court.

It's simple math to judge speed relative to stationary landmarks. All you need is time and distance.

 

[x10003q]

It's simple math to judge speed relative to stationary landmarks. All you need is time and distance.

There is no way to accurately give the speed of a car by looking at a moving car unless you have a calibrated eyeball like Steve Austin.

 

[BenedictGomez]

BG, I know there's nothing you like more in life than winning the internet by telling others that they are wrong, but I think most people are going to stick with conventional wisdom and side with the guy who actually works for the state police.

Regardless of whom he works for, virtually everything he said was literally incorrect, as x1003q pointed out in detail (and it the reason for the slight amendments/clarifications, shift changes, and backtracking).

Regardless, my point (i.e. the one I was actually talking about), stand, which, to reiterate ---> is that radars are still quite useful due to the fact LIDAR is not used nearly as much as you'd think, even by the departments own the technology, it's not insignificant limitations, and the fact that that it's a P.I.T.A. that many cops dislike.

 

[Domeskier]

There is no way to accurately give the speed of a car by looking at a moving car unless you have a calibrated eyeball like Steve Austin.

Depends on the level of accuracy you want. By optimizing the distance over which speed is judged, the margin of error could probably be reduced to within limits that are reasonable for purposes of law enforcement.

 

[BenedictGomez]

If they ever did that - EZ Passes would be sent back in droves...

Which is why government has floated/explored the (awful) idea of mandating it.

 

[Edd]

There is no way to accurately give the speed of a car by looking at a moving car unless you have a calibrated eyeball like Steve Austin.

Bionic Man references be dope.

 

[BenedictGomez]

I hadn't looked up the cost of laser jammers in several years, so this thread just made me do so..... disappointed to find that they're still outrageously expensive.

My favorite radar detector company, for instance, has an integrated model that's $1,600. WTH is the sense in that? I'd have to get a slew of tickets before it pays for itself.

 

[Jully]

Which is why government has floated/explored the (awful) idea of mandating it.

Toll workers unite!

Wouldn't you run the risk of a cop detecting a LIDAR jammer and pulling you over for that regardless of speeding?

 

[x10003q]

Bionic Man references be dope.

I was hoping somebody caught that. :-D

 

[Cannonball]

 

[BenedictGomez]

Wouldn't you run the risk of a cop detecting a LIDAR jammer and pulling you over for that regardless of speeding?

It's illegal in something like 10 states or so, and I've heard the fines are very high.

 

[MadMadWorld]

Regardless of whom he works for, virtually everything he said was literally incorrect, as x1003q pointed out in detail (and it the reason for the slight amendments/clarifications, shift changes, and backtracking).

Regardless, my point (i.e. the one I was actually talking about), stand, which, to reiterate ---> is that radars are still quite useful due to the fact LIDAR is not used nearly as much as you'd think, even by the departments own the technology, it's not insignificant limitations, and the fact that that it's a P.I.T.A. that many cops dislike.

Amendments....Shifts....Backtracking? On what stance I'm confused? I can show you an operating manual that would back up everything. This is a ridiculous conversation to even have when you have never used one or had experience with one.

The technology is amazingly accurate. They are not hard to use at all. It's as easy as looking through the scope, aiming the beam at a reflective object (head lights and license plates), and squeezing the trigger.

 

[BenedictGomez]

The technology is amazingly accurate. They are not hard to use at all. It's as easy as looking through the scope, aiming the beam at a reflective object (head lights and license plates), and squeezing the trigger.

Nobody doubts/denies that.

It's all the other stuff we're disagreeing with you about (e.g. radar detectors are useless because of LIDAR, e.g. bad weather has zero effect on LIDAR, e.g. LIDAR is easy-peasey for police to use at night, e.g. most cops love to use LIDAR, e.g. it's commonly used through the windshield, and other examples I wont bother listing).