Atlanta Jammerfest 2 results
Here are the results from our latest testing session. Thought you might like to see how everyone fared.
jammer_results - Google Docs
He is a video of one of the runs made over the course. You can see it's a pretty difficult course involving curves and elevation changes.
YouTube - Georgia Jammerfest 2009 Test Course
Looks like the Laser Interceptor got some serious punch-throughs on your Vette at over 1000 feet, with the Ultralyte LR 125 pulse. I have told many people that the Ultralytes are the toughest guns to Jam due to the beam divergence and Low power compared to the stalker LZ and Laser Atlanta's. Looks like you guys had alot of fun.:)
Looks like everyone had enough time to slow down before getting creamed. As for testing I would have picked a flatter road with less curves and dips. My suggestion for your LI on your Vette is add some veil to the head lights and maybe a black car cover for the front. It seems the red color cars is the closest color to the laser light spectrum, so I'm thinking the red and white cars have more punch-through issue's than the Black or darker colors. :hmmmm2:
Laser Jammer Test Results - Atlanta
Appreciate the work and the results.
I have to agree with Scott on this one, despite the "hype" surrounding certain laser diode type laser jammers, your results do, indeed, demonstrate than no one laser jammer is "perfect" and that punch-throughs can and will occur at varied times.
I too would have liked to see the results when each of these cars had a Veil G4 treatment in both the front and the back.
Like Scott, suggested, I suspect the improvements across the board would have been remarkable and repeatable.
Adding a laser shield or a plate cover that was Veil treated would certainly not hurt either in either the front or the rear targeting scenarios.
Perhaps the day will come when some enthusiasts will actually perform such a extended test.
Again thank you and I appreciate your collective hard work.
Veil Guy :driver:
Like Veil Guy said, you guys did a great job testing. Its always good to know where your weak spots are on your car. I think the veil coating on your vette with the LI would have had much better results. Hats off to you guys for doing such a good job with the testing. :congrats:
Exactly right, on all counts, to those above.
I am also among those few who have always insisted that no jammer is 100%, and I am glad that, finally, more and more people are coming to this realization.
Proper leveling/aiming of the heads, as well as routine function-checking and cleaning (particularly while on road-trips or if one lives in a less-accommodating environment) is a must, and this was illustrated very, very well, just over a year ago, by the CFL guys, during both their initial as well as their second "test" dates. And, of-course, there's concessions to be made in mounting of the heads, and this has been demonstrated many times over - the compromises between aesthetic form, spacial availability, and outright performance/coverage - steagall showed us how even a 5-head (corrected/edited to read proper) Blinder configuration could be exploited by its weakness, and the TX group with Fritter, as well as the CT/NE group (first, chronologically) were among those who showed that just having an LI on your vehicle doesn't necessarily mean that you'll be invincible/invulnerable, and that any weaknesses can and will be exploited.
It's not a matter of what jammer is chosen - it's a matter of simple fact that *ANY* jammer's performance can be drastically affected by these factors.
The "Officer Fritter meet" videos were also among the first to demonstrate that for as much as we may try, the enforcer can still bias things (the hardware used, how he/she chooses to use the hardware, as well as the physical setup of the encounter) enough that *any* jammer can be made to have a hard time (to say the least).
These factors are all why being able/willing to carry passive countermeasures can and will work to the driver's favor - not only is there synergy to be had, with the active countermeasure(s) used, but there is an undeniable benefit, too, to simply making the vehicle's weak-points better-defended/covered.
I originally wanted to come back to this thread and post after I've reviewed the videos in-detail, as well as have seen the ongoing in-depth discussions at RD.net, but unfortunately, due to starting up a new project at work, I've just had no time. :o
In-lieu of that, I think, though, that the above generalities do apply to each and every case, each and every vehicle - to each and every one of us - and should definitely not be overlooked.
|All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:50.|