Radar Detector Recomendation

Page 1 of 7  
For the rest of the year, I'll be on the interstate for a weekly 500 mile round trip-- and want to get a radar detector. They seem to range from $50
on up to$500 or more.
I'm not interested in over working my credit card for "the very best" one. Nor do I need one that gives me the cop's name and what he had for breakfast when he lights me up. I just want a little advance warning of cops in the area if the old needle creeps up too high-- real easy to do in my '07 Accord EX-L Sedan 6 cyl.
So where's the most bang for the buck/sweet spot to buy-- and any specific recommendations?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Butch Haynes wrote:

Use your cruise control. Then, you don't have to worry about speeding.
Jeff
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Well, if I accidentally set it a little too high, the radar detector will still be helpful. So can you recommend anything?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Butch Haynes wrote:

Valentine One! $399.00 Top rated.
Buying a cheap radar detector makes as much sense as buying a smoke detector that "usually" works well but is guaranteed to work once the house is actually burning well.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I have had a passport solo for several years. It is nice in that it runs on batteries and doesn't have a cord hanging. I does a pretty good job, but you still have to be fast on the brake.
wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Get a Valentine One.
Drive with traffic in the right lane.
Don't tailgate.
Don't swerve in and out of traffic.
A radar detector by itself is meaningless. A radar detector against lidar is meaningless.
A radar detector against radar, coupled with intelligent driving, will keep you safe.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Intelligent driving by itself will keep you safe.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Intelligent driving does not necessarily entail adhering to the posted speed limit.
--
Tegger

The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Not driving within the Posted Maximum Speed limit is not intelligent.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Brian Smith wrote:

Not driving at the prevailing speed of surrounding traffic is dangerous.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I agree, for the fools and idiots that can't or won't obey the law and use common sense.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Brian Smith wrote:

how about the law that states you need to keep up with the prevailing speed of traffic?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 08 Feb 2008 18:42:39 -0800, jim beam wrote:

That law is intended to keep folks from driving 40 on the interstate. It implies that you are to keep up, but without exceeding the speed limit. Have you no common sense?
--
"Ubuntu" -- an African word, meaning "Slackware is too hard for me".


Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Dan C wrote:

actually, it's "prima facie speed limit" - that means prevailing speed.

here's where you, and brian and jeff are failing in your efforts: you should stick to challenging the idea - instead, all y'all do is challenge the person. unless y'all are trolls looking to simply provoke personal disagreement, stick to just challenging the idea - that way people won't wait for you in a dark alley with a crowbar looking to get personal back. try it - y'all may be surprised at the result. getting facts straight in the first place helps too.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
jim beam wrote:

Actually, the "prima facie speed limit" is the POSTED limit. Do a Google search and you'll find a ton of legal references to the concept. The traffic engineers do their studies and establish a "reasonable" prima facie speed which is adopted and becomes the legal limit for a given area.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Say What? wrote:

the stumbling block for this debate seems to be not understanding what "prima facie" means. in english, "on the face of it" or "on first appearance" would be working translations.
if you're trying to make a legal case, something may have prima facie merit to proceed, but those initial facts will be tested in the court. "prima facie" does /NOT/ mean the case is done and dusted.
same applies to speed enforcement. there is a prima facie limit of 65 on many freeways in california. but the speed limit enforced by the highway patrol is about 80. and that depends on the weather. bad weather, they'll enforce 65, or lower. no such thing as black and white.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
jim beam wrote:

Until you begin to deal with legal concepts - such as speed limits and the setting and application thereof. Then it becomes a matter of custom and usage and what the courts say it is.
Prevailing is prevailing; prima facie limit is the posted limit.

You can take the words out of context and make them say what you wish but...

Apples and oranges, Jim. If the maximum permissible speed, by statute, in California is 65 m/h (and I don't know that it is) then that is the speed limit. If, for whatever reason, the CHP doesn't write a ticket until you exceed 80 m/h that does not change the prima facie speed limit.
As for enforcement of speeds LESS than the posted limit due to conditions? Gimme a break. How many times have you seen or heard of that happening absent a traffic crash? In such a case, assuming the driver said "Officer, I don't know what happened. I was driving along at about 50 m/h in this 65 m/h zone and I suddenly lost control" I challenge you to find even one example where the driver was charged with driving 50 m/h in a 65 m/h zone. You can find, I'm sure, numerous "Too Fast for Conditions" (with no specific speed alleged) or "Failure to Reduce Speed to Avoid Crash"
One other point with prima facie... you mention that it provides a basis to proceed. Well, that's true and that basis is always subject to rebuttal. Not unlike the 0.08% blood alcohol being DUI. That's an absolute. If you are at or above that level, you're drunk. Period. In the range of 0.06 - 0.079 a prima facie case of DUI can be made but the defendant can rebut that presumption.
Speeding violations are known as "absolute liability" offenses. The only element of the offense is exceeding the speed limit. You don't have to know you were speeding, you don't have to WANT to speed, etc. Do 51 in a 50 and you're guilty. End of story.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Say What? wrote:

<snip for clarity>
so why the confusion? every argument presented so far contends that they're the same. they're not!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I say we debate the PRACTICAL and not the Idealist position here. Fact is,the police only enforce some arbitrary speed well ABOVE the posted SL(+5 or +10),and you have NO way of knowing what that might be at any given time. Often,it depends on the demeanor *at the time* of the patrolling officer.
Ever since the 55 NMSL,it's been clearly apparent that the *majority* of drivers do NOT obey posted limits,unless there's police actually present or known speed traps. Thus there's a "prevailing speed" (or "true average speed")of the traffic actually present on the roadway.
I-4 in Orlando,everybody knows the usual speed is 70-75 mph for a 55 mph posted limit. and that's IN TOWN,dense traffic! and the hazardous effect from LLBs and rolling roadblocks(RRB?) is clearly apparent.
It's 80 or higher outside of the urban areas.
--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Jim Yanik wrote:

we have three rrb's on this thread - and they're all highly sensitive to accidents. could it be that they get to witness lots of them, by some strange coincidence???
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.