jfort

like others, I use Waze and a newer Escort, Escort Live? I like the right lane advice above and have found it to be good advice. What I haven't seen in this discussion is allowing a fast driver to run interference. Fall in about a half mile behind. Let them have the left lane.

Iceter

Quoted for truth. Out of all the times I should have gotten a ticket but didn't, probably the most effective way to avoid the ticket was just not being the biggest dumbass on the road at that moment.

There is always a guy willing to go faster and who has to be at the front of the line (if you have never seen that guy, you ARE that guy). Let him be the point man and let him attract all the attention.

Dozens of times in my driving history, I let that guy past me and he wound up bird-******* a well-hidden State Trooper.

Plus, there are few better feelings than having blue lights come up behind you, you're sure you're caught, and they pass by and fall in behind a car ahead of you.

wjk_glynn

The R7 seems to be the new King. The only thing preventing me from pulling the trigger is Radenso’s Pro-M (supposedly) superior BSM filtering.

In practice, what’s your experience with BSM on the R7? And are you encountering any MRCD up North?

Thanks.

Karl.

PS: For others not familiar with the current state of play in the Radar Detector world in late 2019, here’s an overview...


Some example timestamps:

• Uniden R7: 3:48
• Radenso Pro M: 19:01
• Valentine One w/ JBV1: 34:44

kru911

Yes ...all of the above.

Radenso’s Pro-M was my alternate choice. It was quite the challenge to decide between, to say the least.

The R7, out of the box, is hyper active and noisy. It does not filter out BSM well. I trust, with custom configuring, it can be toned down. To date, I have only spent time tweaking the R7 with settings suggested by RD members. All told, I only use the detector when I'm out for spirited drives. A chirpy detector with exception range is but a minor nuisance to me, when the engine is singing happily in the rear.

I was expecting a form of MRCD to be used, here in British Columbia. Speed cameras were scrapped some 20 years, only to come back this year after a change in our provincial government. However, the new speed camera's rely on road sensors vs. radar. Thankfully, unlike the mobile units of the past, today's speed and red-light camera's are permanent and static. And these are tagged on Waze, whew!!!

mjsporsche

I think that radar detectors are no longer that useful. A combination of waze and the stupid technology of many cars makes false alarms too common and rendering the unit useless.

I am an old timer radar detector user, starting with the Fuzzbusters in the late 70s. I will keep the two V1s I have but will likely retire them when my leases are up and new cars come my way.

Brainz

The usefulness of RDs all depends on what the police use where you are driving. RDs are still the best defense against Ka, particularly in areas with limited Wazers or mobile speed checks. The Uniden RDs (R3 and R7) are really good for the money.

gasongasoff

In the SF Bay Area, I've noticed that the Ka band is still commonly used by LEO, including CHP. I disable alerts for all other bands, so I don't think I'm getting any false alarms. Sure, if they're using laser, you're busted anyway, but I'm told that often LEO leaves their radar on at the same time (for whatever reason), which means you know they're nearby. And btw, it's not that the radar detector is an excuse to drive like an idiot on public roads, it's more if there's a 911 and a Camry both driving 8 mph over the limit, and who's gonna get pulled over? The problem I've noticed with the crowdsourced reporting of speed traps (like ESCORT live) is that the alerts are often old (meaning the LEO has already relocated). And the crowdsourced live Ka alerts are also not that helpful because it doesn't differentiate between a stationary and a moving LEO. Perhaps the technology has improved?

JustinCase

Years ago, circa 1970s, I would routinely drive across Missouri in my Plymouth Fury III (383 cu. in.), which was fully capable of cruising comfortably at about 120+. I discovered the "screen" method, colorfully described above as "not being the biggest dumbass on the road." There was *always* a screen to pick up if you only waited five minutes. If your screen themselves got passed by someone faster, you had the option to upgrade. My rule was to keep them near the edge of the horizon, and if I lost them, to slow back down to roughly 110% of the speed limit (then 75 mph before the gas crises). I have never, ever had a speeding ticket on the open road using this method. It's kind of like hitchhiking.

One time, leaving St. Louis, I was cruising along with the speed of the traffic at large when I was passed by one car in the left lane, and one car on the shoulder, going 100+. After they went by, I switched to the left lane and gently sped up until I was matching them from maybe 1/2 mile behind. I managed to keep them in sight and drove all the way from St. Louis to Columbia, or roughly 120 miles, which we covered in about an hour. I was getting hungry, so I pulled off into Columbia to grab a quick bite at a little dive I knew of just off the interstate. Back on the road again, I was cruising west with traffic, looking for my next screen, when I rounded a wide, sweeping curve around a large bluff and saw a long string of Mo. highway patrol with tons of cars pulled over and being pulled over. That, except for my hunger, would have been my fate, even with my screens. All methods have weaknesses, and you are always playing the odds no matter how much you try to stack them.

I had to adjust my strategy when I moved to California because at that time, very few LEOs had radar -- it was a politically charged issue at the time. Instead, they would come up behind you and pace you, which utterly defeats the screen method. By then, I was older and more mature, had a family, and drove a Toyota 4-banger, so it did not bother me.

Anymore, on public roads I might still crowd the line, but I drive a Midnight Blue 997 cab in the right lane as much as possible, and I still occasionally pick up screens, but more casually. Still no ticket on the open road.

All that said, I noticed while driving in Germany how many hidden, by-the-side-of-the-road speed and "aggressive driving" traps there are with automatic penalties (i.e., deducted immediately from your credit card). In addition, a plain-clothes car could be literally any vehicle on the road. No wonder our relatives there are terrified to drive anywhere faster than about 10% over! I think this is part of the reason the German public fiercely defends the (shrinking) unrestricted sections of the Autobahn -- as a strain release. Most Germans don't really take advantage of unrestricted sections because it's too expensive in fuel, but they like knowing that they could if they wanted to.

I think automatic speed traps are going to increase in the U.S., too. WA State is thinking about GPS license plates so we can be constantly taxed based on how much we drive on what roads. The state is starting to lose real tax revenue with the increase of electrics and hybrids. A GPS tracker could also constantly monitor your speed as well. As could the automatically tolled sections.

I'm glad I got to live in the golden age of automobiles!

GoldenGorilla

I noticed plenty of people cruising at 130kph in Germany on unrestricted sections in the center or right lanes too. Fuel is much more expensive, so it is a personal decision. But I've also been passed when I'm at nearly 200kph many times. I also found that GPS over there is much better at giving acurate speed for the road section, which is very helpful in case you miss a speed change. I've never gotten a ticket for speeding in Germany or the other 7 european countries I've driven in. That would have saved me from my most recent ticket in WY where they don't have to post a speed limit if it is 55. I'd just turned off a road that was 65mph, hadn't seen a sign, but was looking for one and was evidently going 64 when I crested a hill into the oncoming state patrol.

Living in the western US there are still big stretches where there is no cell signal and radar is used. But in more dense areas there are just too many things causing false signals. I didn't find my escort to be useful until I was past Avon, CO (100 west miles from Denver). But then it was useful all the rest of my drive to Tahoe. With a more modern configurable device, I think I would also just filter out X and K band. I haven't seen a patroller use either in the last 15 years. Too much noise for them too. And I don't see anyone else using Ka or Laser.

Dennis C

The filtering software on contemporary radar detectors really does an excellent job of reducing false signals. It’s important to keep radar detectors updated.

goin2drt

Nailed it. Ka all around here. They love to hide and leave them on. With open rural roads our old Max2’s pick them up miles away. Not a ton of waze users so that doesn’t help all that much. The RD’s have saved us plenty.

Liste-Renn

I am a big fan of Waze after 23K+ miles and zero speeding tickets. It worked flawlessly on my 3 month ED drive across Germany, Italy, Austria and the strictest: Switzerland. Same success on a 3-month Boston to LA drive via Canada and the entire west coast. Also on another 3 month Atlanta to LA drive. Most recently, a month long road trip from LA to Portland with nary a ticket. Here in Hawaii, pre-Waze, my license was always in jeopardy of revocation from laser speed traps.

I have experienced hundreds of alerts in those 23K miles (audible, initially, so not a distraction), and now Apple Car Play supports/displays Waze in a large format via the PCM screen.

Having flown military aircraft where one's life depended on radar detection and avoidance, the most critical factor is an early warning that affords time to react to the threat. Maintaining Situational Awareness (SA) is the golden rule in aviation. Seeing a Police icon or hearing "Police reported ahead." miles prior is invaluable.

The limiting factors with Waze are the number of users in your sector and cell reception to receive the warning.

More users means more accurate and timely warnings. The actual reports are relayed to other drivers who can update the accuracy with a thumbs up/down reply. This can be a real distraction, heads down and locating/pressing a tiny icon is not ideal. But without those updates, the app would be no better than a radar/laser detector spewing stale/false alarms.

Cell reception is found near population centers. So are LEO's. If you are not receiving a cell signal, it is likely he isn't either. His radio is line of sight as well. Setting up a speed trap with no communication is not ideal. I slow down near any remote settlement, cell service or not. Waze works for me when I need it, and when it doesn't work, I don't need it.

Waze is a traffic app, developed by an Israeli company, then purchased by Google for just under a billion $. Google has not changed the app, yet. Google maps displays traffic, but Waze will route you around it, displaying route options and ETA's for each one. Other Waze alerts include road hazards, accidents and stalled vehicles on the roadside. All real time, with enough users.

I wouldn't plan a trip with it, but it provides valuable real time information while driving. It makes me a safer driver, providing information about conditions over the horizon or around the next bend.

So, knock on wood regarding speeding tickets, but it has saved my bacon dozens of time, in 6 different countries, through 20 different states (mostly off interstates) for over 23K miles of "spirited" driving.

YMMV, but I am a believer. It is a free app and the hyperlocal advertising is unobtrusive and temporary.