Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

i was driving tonite and it was raining .. anyways not light rain but not heavy rain either .. sorta in between if i can remember, well maybe a bit less than that .. anyways ... i'm really concentrating on the road cause its raining ... so then i look at the speedo and it says i'm going over 75 ... give or take ... so then i'm thinkin .. shit thats a bit fast especially cause its raining and step of the accelerator... then i look in my rear view mirror then i see a flash ... **** ... anyways there was another car behind me ... a commodore station wagon ... and he got busted 2 ... so there was 2 flashes in like second ... so yeah i'm wondering if these radar detectors work???

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/16322-i-need-a-radar-detecter/
Share on other sites

Im pretty sure they do give a indication of police presence... They give u good detection of a camera stuck on the front of a car for both directions and for hte laser I heard that it detects it when it's being pointed on you, so u basically have bugger all time to slow down 2 hte speed limit. If ur goin really fast.. handbrake turn and back the other direction in a hurry!

I was thinkn (cos i tend 2 hav a heavy foot sometimes) goin down 2 rocca's and fittin one of those speed warning things. Dunno what they're worth but it can't be too much

Start at $180 all the way up to $999. The cheaper they are the less warning you get, about 2 seconds from my last cheapy. Pretty useless really. A heap of false alarms to. I would reccomend buying a Bel. You will need to spend at least $400 tho to get any useful sort of warning and minimul false alarms. They work in the same way as the sensor eye in your tv and vcr that picks up your remote. The cheaper Detectors have a internal oscilator that can be picked up by the police radar detector detectors (VG2). They still claim to be undetectable, because when they sense they are being detected they cloak themselves by switching of the internal oscilator. This doesn`t work all of the time as I have experienced( and had my detector taken and been fined for the illegal use of a police detection device). The more expensive Bel brand radar detecters don't have and internal oscilator at all, therefore are totally undetectable.

All Bels are detectable by Stalker detector detector.

If you buy a cheap one, be prepare to pay fine and face confiscation. If you are serious then you need to get expensive one :(

Do a little bit more research and you will see the good one

Originally posted by Miss_Nismo

the whistler ones i have used have never been detected before

Ur whistler has not been detected does not means that it's not detectable. missnismo be careful about using it on the highway. They tend to use stalker on highway patrol cars.

Good luck

Hippy yes the cops do use radar detector detector...more so in VIC and NSW. The latest one is designed in Australia called Stalker. It's been around for a couple of years now and will detect all kind of radar detector. However there is always exception :burnout: just do a search on the net and call around :P

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Hi all,   long time listener, first time caller   i was wondering if anyone can help me identify a transistor on the climate control unit board that decided to fry itself   I've circled it in the attached photo   any help would be appreciated
    • I mean, I got two VASS engineers to refuse to cert my own coilovers stating those very laws. Appendix B makes it pretty clear what it considers 'Variable Suspension' to be. In my lived experience they can't certify something that isn't actually in the list as something that requires certification. In the VASS engineering checklist they have to complete (LS3/NCOP11) and sign on there is nothing there. All the references inside NCOP11 state that if it's variable by the driver that height needs to maintain 100mm while the car is in motion. It states the car is lowered lowering blocks and other types of things are acceptable. Dialling out a shock is about as 'user adjustable' as changing any other suspension component lol. I wanted to have it signed off to dissuade HWP and RWC testers to state the suspension is legal to avoid having this discussion with them. The real problem is that Police and RWC/Pink/Blue slip people will say it needs engineering, and the engineers will state it doesn't need engineering. It is hugely irritating when aforementioned people get all "i know the rules mate feck off" when they don't, and the actual engineers are pleasant as all hell and do know the rules. Cars failing RWC for things that aren't listed in the RWC requirements is another thing here entirely!
    • I don't. I mean, mine's not a GTR, but it is a 32 with a lot of GTR stuff on it. But regardless, I typically buy from local suppliers. Getting stuff from Japan is seldom worth the pain. Buying from RHDJapan usually ends up in the final total of your basket being about double what you thought it would be, after all the bullshit fees and such are added on.
    • The hydrocarbon component of E10 can be shittier, and is in fact, shittier, than that used in normal 91RON fuel. That's because the octane boost provided by the ethanol allows them to use stuff that doesn't make the grade without the help. The 1c/L saving typically available on E10 is going to be massively overridden by the increased consumption caused by the ethanol and the crappier HC (ie the HCs will be less dense, meaning that there will definitely be less energy per unit volume than for more dense HCs). That is one of the reasons why P98 will return better fuel consumption than 91 does, even with the ignition timing completely fixed. There is more energy per unit volume because the HCs used in 98 are higher density than in the lawnmower fuel.
    • No, I'd suggest that that is the checklist for pneumatic/hydraulic adjustable systems. I would say, based on my years of reading and complying with Australian Standards and similar regulations, that the narrow interpretation of Clause 3.2 b would be the preferred/expected/intended one, by the author, and those using the standard. Wishful thinking need not apply.
×
×
  • Create New...