here is a link to a scrambler called phantom 2 it is supposed to make a radar gun not be able to catch
you. has anyone tried this and does it work

Scrmbler Review

 

These do NOT work. They have been tested over and over... the ONLY condition they work is on a bench in a lab. Infact, they showed the radar was able to clock these cars further away then car that did NOT use them.

Save your $$ and get a Passport or Valentine-1.

-- Aaron

 

To be more specific (and possibly disagree AND agree with amartin), the theory behind these WOULD allow for a working unit. However, the limited output power of these small units limit the range so much as to make them useless. With a strong enough IR source, you CAN swamp LIDAR and prevent it from making a correct measurement...but again, this would require some very strong IR sources, such as multiple HIDs aimed at the gun. Standard RADAR is easier to defeat by swamping, but again, the output level of these units is too small to make much of a difference at the ranges one would need them to work at. Spend your money elsewhere...

 

These units have ZERO power output. They are passive devices that "reflect" the signal (in theory)...

http://www.escortstore.com/jammer.htm


"this peculiarly shaped device guarantees immunity to any type of radar. A "temporary holographic-type computer virus" accompanies the radar's return signal, supposedly afflicting it with some sort of electronic Alzheimer's. We've never heard of such a virus, nor have any of the microwave engineers we queried about it. In our tests, the Watchful Eye failed to do any jamming but did produce a measurable effect on target range. Against four of our five radars, its presence on the dash obligingly increased target range by an average of eleven percent, no doubt because its very large antenna efficiently receives the incoming radar beam and sends it directly back to the waiting radar. The fifth radar ignored the Eye."

"PHANTOM RCD ($595). Because it's identical down to the last screw to the Stealth/VRCD, we expected similar performance from the RCD. Although it totally jammed the K-55 on one occasion and chopped target range up to 81 percent in some other tests, it inexplicably increased the HR-12's target range by eight percent. Worse, it occasionally failed to detect radar at all and other times showed an alarming tendency to inflate target speeds by as much as 90 mph. Try explaining that to the arresting officer."

http://www.radartest.com/JOS.html

"Except for the Phantom, which contains rudimentary radar-detection circuitry, each is essentially an empty box with a 12-volt power cord, a cheap cast-plastic waveguide assembly, one or two front-mounted LEDs, a basic power-supply circuit and a button or two. Press the button and an LED lights up, accompanied by a tinny bird whistle. ("Our patented 'FM Chirp', " company salesmen proudly proclaim.) We've tested these products a dozen times against every front-line police radar gun and laser, finding all of them utterly worthless. "

"Interestingly, while we were riding with Texas Highway Patrol trooper Mack Wallace near Houston recently, he stopped a Dodge minivan with Colorado plates. On the dash was a spanking new Phantom jammer. The van pilot was told he'd been speeding. "Impossible," said the agitated driver, "my Phantom jammed your radar."

"Didn't seem to be doing much jamming when you came by me," deadpanned the trooper. "I got you at 69 mph in a 55 mph zone. Maybe you should take it back for a refund.""

"After purchasing a Mirage/Watchful Eye anonymously, we discovered why Turner was so insistent on the vast separation between target vehicle and radar: this jammer actually increased the distance at which our three radar units could begin clocking the target vehicle. This is a function of its large antenna. We found that at ranges beyond the radars' typical operational maximum--about 1,400 feet on average--the jammer's big antenna reflected enough extra energy to pump up radar range by up to 500 feet. Try explaining that to the arresting officer. "

"Another significant drawback: only X- and K band are covered. The prohibitive cost and extra bulk imposed by adding Ka-band components dissuaded inventor Sullivan from attempting a triband unit. At the time it probably seemed a worthwhile compromise. But the roads are becoming littered with Ka-band radar these days. "

http://216.239.39.100/search?q=cache:em9cz...adar+Test&hl=en

"PHAZER ($199). A new model from Rocky Mountain Radar, the Phazer is claimed to counter radar and lasers. Unlike previous models, this one has a translucent end panel that permits a glimpse inside at a pair of LEDs and a cheap, chromed plastic antenna. It's also larger and weighs four ounces more-up to 6.5 ounces. Placing it on the dash actually increased the ProLaser II's maximum target range by eight percent. The Marksman radar unit benefited even more: Instead of clocking the target car at 1954 feet, we could reach out and pop it at 2327 feet. We expect this will meet with approval among police officers."





-- Aaron

 

Aren't scamblers usually illegal since they tell funny numbers when a police officer uses his radar gun?

 

The argument for these devices, is that because they are "passive" and thus do not emit energy on their own, they aren't governed by the FCC, and thus "legal". Too bad they don't work, or they would actually be illegal.

-- Aaron

 

My bad...didn't read the article itself, so didn't know these were passive devices. So these are absolutely worthless. Anyway, if they were ACTIVE, and could pump out a bunch of energy, they have a good chance of working....not sure if I'd want something 4 feet from my lap pumping out high-energy radar waves, though