Motorbike Radar Detectors

[humvee]

In the past I have always mounted my radar behind the windshield on my bikes (vf750 & vfr750) and that has worked well but my current one is tinted & i have since learnt the expensive way it does not work through the tinting. So I have a few options stop using radars (not an option) change the windshield to a non tinted one (prefer not to) or mount radar someware else.

Any help or suggestions would be great. Im also looking at getting a new radar detector (prob valantine 1) what would your suggestions be? How have you guys mounted yours?

[What?]

Tint won't make any difference to radar detection. Mine used to work just fine behind an opaque screen. Laser detection may be reduced, though, but (generally) if your laser warning sounds, you are stung anyway.

[Blackbird]

What? is spot on - no reduction in signal strength with normal microwave but up to 40% apparently with a laser. If you're really serious about lasers, get a jammer/diffuser but do your research as a lot of them are a rip-off. Escort do one to go with their X50 detector and Bel do a proven one too. That's the extent of my knowledge!

Use the search facility to find other threads on detectors as there are a lot of them. The Escort 8500 X50 and Valentine1 are reputed to be the best available. I've got the Escort and it's pretty impressive. Regarding mounts, check out www.motorcycleradar.com. They do VFR mounts. I bought a custom mount from them for the Blackbird and both the product and service was great. Took 4 days to come from the States.

Got my Escort from Ryan Gounder at DiscountBay for about $500. If you look up DiscountBay on the membership list, you can email him.

Hope this helps

Geoff

[Lou Girardin]

How did you find out it didn't work? Did you get get pinged with minimal warning?
If so, it means the cop used 'instant on' mode. There isn't much defence to that unless you pick him up sampling cars ahead.
Remember, 1st in line, gets the fine.
The Blinder M10 laser jammer is tried and tested, works well.

[humvee]

He locked on to me took my speed and then pulled be over all without the radar making a single cherp or showing any signs of detecting him. I also know with ~90 % certianty he was not using instant on. The tinting is very dark almost black. The detector works fine in my car. and worked on my old bike. But now I think about it it has never ever gone off on my new bike

[Lou Girardin]

A tinted screen won't prevent it detecting a signal, except for metallic coated screens used on some US cars, instaclear is one. Does your detector power up correctly?
Was the cop mobile or using a handheld unit?

[scumdog]

A tinted screen won't prevent it detecting a signal, except for metallic coated screens used on some US cars, instaclear is one. Does your detector power up correctly?
Was the cop mobile or using a handheld unit?

Hmmm, academic. He got done. Next. :rofl: :whistle:

[pritch]

Check these out

http://www.saeng.com/cockpit.htm

[Lou Girardin]

Hmmm, academic. He got done. Next. :rofl: :whistle:

We're just fighting the good fight. Trying to avoid it happening again. :motu:

[humvee]

Yes it powers up correctly. I also know it works perfectly fine in a car and also on my old bike and the only differerance is the tinted screen is almost black on my current bike (its aftermarket and was on the bike when I got it.)

the cop was using one of those ones that you dont even need to aim the just point out the back of the cop car desplaying speeds of traffic approching and if he wants to lock on he just pushes the button to lock on.

[humvee]

thanks for the link pritch I'm wondering about http://www.saeng.com/2590.htm as any of the dash or handle bar ones will suffer the same issue.

Have any of you guys tried fork mounting radars?

I was looking at a valantine 1 with remote display and sound (prob not into helmet though)

[humvee]

A tinted screen won't prevent it detecting a signal, except for metallic coated screens used on some US cars, instaclear is one. Does your detector power up correctly?
Was the cop mobile or using a handheld unit?

If its not the tinting what could it be?

[pyrocam]

hmmm a helmet mounted one?

[Biff]

Some photos of my detector an a mount supplied by Motorcycle Radar:

[Lou Girardin]

If its not the tinting what could it be?

Any metal objects in front of the unit will affect it.

[Blackbird]

If its not the tinting what could it be?

So we've steered clear of shonky tactics by the police then? :no:

[loosebruce]

If its not the tinting what could it be?


Hmmmm there could be a problem with your bike, does 6th gear work okay?, if not you may need to look at upgrading to a GSXR (PT)

[Blackbird]

The attached independent radar detector and jammer tests from the USA make interesting reading. The website is: http://www.speedzones.com/

I can’t vouch for the accuracy of the following statements on NZ conditions which came with my detector but have reproduced them anyway. (Maybe Scumdog or Bykey Cop will ignore this post!)

These are the statements:

If you get a ticket, you can probably dispute it successfully in court. SOME traffic police issue tickets based on initial readings. A ticket cannot be issued based on the initial speed reading. By case law/precedent an officer must fulfil 3 crucial steps in determining speed. Firstly, a visual tracking history must be attained, e.g. vehicle make, model, colour etc. Secondly, audio tracking of the change in the Doppler shift of the radar unit which tracks the change/shift in speeds from the initial reading until final lock down of the speed can occur.

SOME traffic police operate their radar detectors in standby mode, then zap speeding vehicles. This is not legal and can be detected by high end detectors. When a police radar is operating in standby / low power mode, it cannot immediately deliver an accurate reading. A “ground pulse” (for a police vehicle in motion) must be emitted to determine vehicle speed before target speed can be calculated. If a ticket is issued, the officer can be asked what steps were taken to measure speed. You may still get issued with a ticket even if the process was wrong. A simple request for a hearing and due disclosure in that matter will most likely suffice for the matter to be dropped, or if it does proceed to a hearing; then it would not be difficult to get a disputed ticket rejected.

[Jantar]

So we've steered clear of shonky tactics by the police then? :no:

There is one cop in the Central Otago area who does have a shonky tactic. When he detects a motorist doing an illegal, but ticketable speed, (say 116 KPH), he leaves his radar locked on that speed. Next time he sees a vehicle such as a sports car or a motorcycle that he wants to catch, he will stop them for speeding. He starts out by saying that he has stopped you for speeding, then asks "..how fast do you think you were going?"

Most people, if they were in fact over the limit will give a speed a few Ks less they actually were doing. If the motorcyclist for example says 112 kPH the the cop will say "..well actually the radar has 116 kPH, but OK, I'll accept your 112..", and then write out the ticket.

If they claim they weren't speeding then he does have 116 showing on the radar if challenged.

So, Humvee, Are you sure the cop even caught you on radar?

[geoffm]

Let me assure you Blackbird, that proof is strictly optional in NZ regrading speeding tickets. A radar reading is not required to issue you a tax demand. Even if there is a procedure, only the cop knows whether or not he followed it, and what do you think he will say...

[scumdog]

The attached independent radar detector and jammer tests from the USA make interesting reading. The website is: http://www.speedzones.com/

I can’t vouch for the accuracy of the following statements on NZ conditions which came with my detector but have reproduced them anyway. (Maybe Scumdog or Bykey Cop will ignore this post!)

These are the statements:

If you get a ticket, you can probably dispute it successfully in court. SOME traffic police issue tickets based on initial readings. A ticket cannot be issued based on the initial speed reading. By case law/precedent an officer must fulfil 3 crucial steps in determining speed. Firstly, a visual tracking history must be attained, e.g. vehicle make, model, colour etc. Secondly, audio tracking of the change in the Doppler shift of the radar unit which tracks the change/shift in speeds from the initial reading until final lock down of the speed can occur.

SOME traffic police operate their radar detectors in standby mode, then zap speeding vehicles. This is not legal and can be detected by high end detectors. When a police radar is operating in standby / low power mode, it cannot immediately deliver an accurate reading. A “ground pulse” (for a police vehicle in motion) must be emitted to determine vehicle speed before target speed can be calculated. If a ticket is issued, the officer can be asked what steps were taken to measure speed. You may still get issued with a ticket even if the process was wrong. A simple request for a hearing and due disclosure in that matter will most likely suffice for the matter to be dropped, or if it does proceed to a hearing; then it would not be difficult to get a disputed ticket rejected.

Hmmm, last time I saw that sort of advice was in the 80's (o.k., the 90's in some cases).

It doesn't apply now, stand-by is no more inaccurate than putting your T.V. on standby and finding it has changed channels.

We don't even need to show the motorist the speed he was 'clocked' at, the speed we saw them at is sufficient, no need to stick by the speed locked on the radar.
Having said that I always go by what I have on the radar, save arguments. (even if it is lower than the initial speed seen by me, hence some tickets for 113km)

[Blackbird]

Thanks for all the feedback. I can honestly say that having a detector has slowed me down because I get paranoid every time it chirps. I have no problem with do the speed, pay the money. The trick is to chose the time and place. :nono:

Geoff

[scumdog]

There is one cop in the Central Otago area who does have a shonky tactic. When he detects a motorist doing an illegal, but ticketable speed, (say 116 KPH), he leaves his radar locked on that speed. Next time he sees a vehicle such as a sports car or a motorcycle that he wants to catch, he will stop them for speeding. He starts out by saying that he has stopped you for speeding, then asks "..how fast do you think you were going?"

Most people, if they were in fact over the limit will give a speed a few Ks less they actually were doing. If the motorcyclist for example says 112 kPH the the cop will say "..well actually the radar has 116 kPH, but OK, I'll accept your 112..", and then write out the ticket.

If they claim they weren't speeding then he does have 116 showing on the radar if challenged.

So, Humvee, Are you sure the cop even caught you on radar?

Jantar, I am gutted that you would report this on this site, how current (if true) is this info? has the person that found this out done anything about it??

I would NEVER, EVER stoop to this sort of thing, there are enough speeders out there that exceed 116kph that I would never need to.

I hope this is an 'urban myth'.

[humvee]

I guess its possiable it wasnt me the reading was from but I doubt it. once I had seen the reading he did clear it and leave it sitting on the screen where it auto takes speeds of approching vechles (in the 15 vechles that went past while I was stoped the slowest was traveling 136km) that cop must have earned his keep that day. What has me worried is on the bike the radar also almost never falses even in places it always does in a car. and while on the bike it has never picked up a cop

[scumdog]

I guess its possiable it wasnt me the reading was from but I doubt it. once I had seen the reading he did clear it and leave it sitting on the screen where it auto takes speeds of approching vechles (in the 15 vechles that went past while I was stoped the slowest was traveling 136km) that cop must have earned his keep that day. What has me worried is on the bike the radar also almost never falses even in places it always does in a car. and while on the bike it has never picked up a cop

Top marks to this guy!!!
He has seen it as the 'Truth'
It would be a pretty sorry cop to do as Jantar said, - there is no need eh Humvee?
Always SOMEBODY that is mentally 'duh!' that will come up with some efwit story!!.

Humvee - respect bro!!!

[Lou Girardin]

The attached independent radar detector and jammer tests from the USA make interesting reading. The website is: http://www.speedzones.com/

I can’t vouch for the accuracy of the following statements on NZ conditions which came with my detector but have reproduced them anyway. (Maybe Scumdog or Bykey Cop will ignore this post!)

These are the statements:

If you get a ticket, you can probably dispute it successfully in court. SOME traffic police issue tickets based on initial readings. A ticket cannot be issued based on the initial speed reading. By case law/precedent an officer must fulfil 3 crucial steps in determining speed. Firstly, a visual tracking history must be attained, e.g. vehicle make, model, colour etc. Secondly, audio tracking of the change in the Doppler shift of the radar unit which tracks the change/shift in speeds from the initial reading until final lock down of the speed can occur.

SOME traffic police operate their radar detectors in standby mode, then zap speeding vehicles. This is not legal and can be detected by high end detectors. When a police radar is operating in standby / low power mode, it cannot immediately deliver an accurate reading. A “ground pulse” (for a police vehicle in motion) must be emitted to determine vehicle speed before target speed can be calculated. If a ticket is issued, the officer can be asked what steps were taken to measure speed. You may still get issued with a ticket even if the process was wrong. A simple request for a hearing and due disclosure in that matter will most likely suffice for the matter to be dropped, or if it does proceed to a hearing; then it would not be difficult to get a disputed ticket rejected.


This does not strictly apply in NZ, (it should though)
The speedzone site is notorious for it's BEL bias. The site owner works/has worked for BEL and has a strange antipathy to Valentine. Perhaps Mike refused to give him a job.
The other factor to be aware of with detector tests, is that manufacturers have been known to specially tune models for testing. The tester should declare that the units have been secretly bought from retail outlets.