Lotta miles using radar detectors -- they detect 3 different bands of radar and some "detect laser." Radar detectors are great insurance, and more useful on the open highway than they are in town, but I've not seen a vehicle give off Ka band emissions that wasn't law enforcement. I have noticed that newer Honda cars set off the K band, which is also used by a lot of the cheap lightpole "your speed" I've seen. Very rarely still I will see X band speed radar being used in the middle of nowhere where the cop cars are older.
Radar detector users just learn to ignore the X and K band alerts while simultanously learning a subconscious quarter second brake reaction time based on the Ka band noise.
If anyone's still reading this: As I read this, I think it makes more sense for the police to replace radar with a high-resolution camera and a computer that can determine speed of vehicles.
Any thoughts on that?
It's hard to find exact stats because of how procurement and statistics works across jurisdictions, states, etc... but from what I CAN find it seems that LIDAR is more common than Radar these days. Over the whole country it looks like a slight majority lead for LIDAR, but in some (quite populous) states they almost only use LIDAR (PA for example had 93% of their tickets come from LIDAR, and I believe most of the rest used speed cameras or 'clocking' rather than RADAR).
Sources:
https://www.legis.state.pa.us/WU01/LI/TR/Transcripts/2018_00...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lidar_traffic_enforcement
https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/lidar-sp...
LIDAR can't be used in motion, the LEO has to be stopped to be pointing it. Your laser detector will warn you, but it's already too late at that point; my two cents is using Waze/Google LEO alerts is state of the art at this point (until someone starts multilateration of patrol cars using their radio RF emissions and SDR networks).
> LIDAR can't be used in motion
To be clear, the reason for this is because the width of the beam requires aiming it like a sniper rifle, not because we can't compensate for operator motion.
It's fine... if you're fine with constant video surveillance.
There's a huge difference between a network of cameras on a road, versus a device that an officer has to set up and take down.
welcome to the UK.
...or you could drive sensibly within the speed limit.
Make the speed limit sensible, and I will.
I don't speed in Europe because 130 km/h is a perfectly fine limit; I've driven faster on uncontrolled Autobahn segments, but I'm not bothered when there is a limit. 65 mph on the NJ Turnpike (and only on the southern part) is not.
Which one is it, driving sensibly or driving within the speed limit?
There are roads here that “feel” like a 35 or even 45mph road. The speed limit is 7. Yes, 7. It’s purely for local revenue.
What fun is that?
That being said, "speed culture" varies a lot from state to state. Where I live it's assumed and expected that you will speed, and in other areas you can get a ticket for going 1 over.
The legal and cultural ambiguity means that someone who is unsure of the real, enforced, culturally-accepted speed limit may want to use a radar detector.
There are back roads out there that drop 15 mph at the state line with no population around for miles. Detectors offer peace of mind for travel at a leisurely self-determined rate.
Then set the limits properly at the 85% mark. And ban speed limit fines from going into local coffers.
...on the long (9 miles to the next town), straight county road just by my house with a 50 mph speed limit that sees maybe 1 car per minute on average. There's a reason that the average speed there is 65mph+
