And while this "Protector Of The Public" is playing speed trap games, real
crime against the populace goes unnoticed. Glad to see that wasteful
expenditure of tax dollars is a universal constant. Police stereotypes? Oh
no, that would be politically incorrect, in spite of the facts...
gk
________________________________________________________________________
Gary E. Klim - Somewhere In Connecticut mailto:garyklim@snet.net
http://pages.cthome.net/garyklim/ mailto:gklim@harman.com
________________________________________________________________________
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-dakota-truck@buffnet4.buffnet.net
> [mailto:owner-dakota-truck@buffnet4.buffnet.net]On Behalf Of Craig
> Baltzer
> Sent: Saturday, October 03, 1998 11:24 PM
> To: 'dakota-truck@buffnet.net'
> Subject: RE: DML: Undetctable Radar Detectors
>
>
> This feature on the V1 saved my hide this weekend. Was on a rural 2 lane
> road with a posted limit of 50mph, and the V1 went off saying oncoming
> Ka band radar. I slowed down to 50, and about 60 second later a cruiser
> went by in the opporite direction. I picked the speed back up to 75 or
> so after a couple of minutes, and about 20 minutes later I started
> getting a Ka warning from behind me. Dropped back down to 50, and within
> 10 minutes the same cruiser was on my butt. Looks like he decided to see
> if I had just slowed down for him :-)
>
> Craig
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Klaus Wilkens [mailto:klaus@buffnet.net]
> Sent: October 3, 1998 9:11 AM
> To: dakota-truck@buffnet.net
> Subject: Re: DML: Undetctable Radar Detectors
>
>
> Jon brings up a good point about detecting a radar in back of you. as
> far as I
> know the only detector which provides true 360 protection is the
> Valentine One.
> It's the only detector out there with a front and rear antenna.
>
> Also I'd research the detector and find a test to verify how
> undetectable it
> really is I think C&D did a test and found some of the "undetectable "
> detectors
> were quite detectable. (say that 3 time as fast as you can!)
>
> KW
>
> Jon Steiger wrote:
>
> > At 11:41 PM 10/2/98 -0500, you wrote:
> > >Most of the newest radar detectors do not emit the signal the trouper
> can
> > >detect so I am getting one of the undetectable, remote mount units.
> I have a
> > >perfect mounting for 97 and newer daks that "looks" right through the
> > grill and
> > >cannot be seen from outside the truck unless you raise the hood and
> even then
> > >will not be recognized as a detector unless one really know what he
> is
> > looking
> > >for.
> >
> > Sounds pretty cool. Two things come to mind though... Make sure
> > it is *really* undetectable before you fork over your cash, and also,
> > having the sensor in the grille would leave you vulnerable to radar
> > from behind. It might be worth it to buy another unit and point it
> > behind you. (Though I have no idea where you'd mount something on the
> > back of a truck; not too many locations to hide it!) Maybe you
> > could disguise it as a hitch plug or a cargo light?
> >
> > -Jon-
> >
> > .--- stei0302@cs.fredonia.edu ------------------------------------.
> > | Affiliations: DoD, EAA, MP Race Team, NMA, SPA, USUA. RP-SEL |
> > | '96 Dodge Dakota v8 SLT CC (14.77@92.97), '96 Kolb FireFly 447 |
> > `----------------------- http://www.cs.fredonia.edu/~stei0302/ ---'
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 12:10:32 EDT