13 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHNew form of Radar???
Leading reported evidence
Use therefore it has
Suggestion or failed attempt
No successful repair reported for this finding.
0
Reported fixes
0
Unsuccessful attempts
1
Discussions
Read evidence and context
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion
+1 There is no "new" radar frequency in use, therefore it has to be a setting or detector issue.
Leading evidence: 'Use therefore it has' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, The most frequently discussed action is 'Use therefore it has' (1 discussions). For that action, 0 discussions report a resolution and 0 report an unsuccessful attempt. No action has an explicit, attributable resolution report under the current rules. These are forum reports and suggestions, not a confirmed diagnosis.
Source reports, not a diagnosis or a success probability. Counts refer to discussions and can overlap.
Counts describe captured discussions, not unique people or a diagnosis. Author identities are not reliably stored. Exact duplicate evidence is counted once across matching discussions; one discussion counts at most once per action/state. Multiple repairs reported together remain a combination. Suggestions and failed attempts do not establish a fix. Matches cover whole discussions and can include related faults, model variants and incomplete threads.
13 eligible posts · 0 unverified posts · 1 discussions match the subject in their title or opening post.
Rennlist: 1 discussions
0 evidence records excluded for query context · 0 excluded by outcome qualification · 0 adjusted by outcome qualification.
1 acknowledgements have no verified action link; they do not establish a repair result.
Outcome without a verified action link
As I said earlier, on my trip it worked when it needed to, but these signs made me wonder...
I was driving back home (from Indiana to Pennsylvania) for the Thanksgiving holiday last week and noticed in the Cincinnatti area that there were some signs "your speed is" and then displayed my vehicle speed...not a churp out of the V1.. Is there something new out?
My V1 also fails to alert at some of those "your speed is" signs.
My theory is that the V1 interprets the low-power radar as a false signal and doesn't report it.
This summer I drove back and forth past one about 20 times to try to figure it out. V1 chirped once.
[Image-only post; no author-written text. Original image references:]
http://www.linkstink.com/images/FunnyHaircutsandInspirationalQuotes_C91A/your_speed5.jpg
https://rennlist.com/forums/images/smilies/wink.gif
What mode are you using? I leave both of mine (I have a V1.7 and a V1.8 in different cars) in Full Logic (big L) mode all the time. I typically start detecting speed signs (most are X, but I have seen some K) .5 to 1 mile away. Most likely you need to either switch modes or you turned off X band.
I leave mine in full logic mode as well (it's also version 1.8). That's why I'm raising the question, with these signs it didn't make a peep. These signs were different from most and that's why I'm asking the question. As I said earlier, on my trip it worked when it needed to, but these signs made me wonder...
