Radar Detectors Under The Gun
07-24-2002, 10:41 AM
#1
Moderator Alumnus
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Washington DC (NOVA)
Age: 52
Posts: 16,399
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes
on
8 Posts
Radar Detectors Under The Gun
The radar-detector industry is on the fritz after a federal ruling that changes the bandwidth available to new detectors. For a few years, Reuters reports, radar detector makers have been shifting their units to operate on bandwidth shared by satellite systems that regulate automatic gas pumps and other devices; operating in those frequencies allowed the detectors to hide from police detection equipment. Now the government has given detector makers 90 days to stop making units that work on those satellite bands. While some makers have already shifted back to their former bandwidth, Reuters reports, some have not, and retailers could be stuck with units on their shelves when the deadline comes.
07-24-2002, 10:58 AM
#4
Community Architect
robb m.
robb m.
phew, I ordered my V1 last week.
07-24-2002, 10:58 AM
#5
Administrator Alumnus
Re: Radar Detectors Under The Gun
Originally posted by gavriil
The radar-detector industry is on the fritz after a federal ruling that changes the bandwidth available to new detectors. For a few years, Reuters reports, radar detector makers have been shifting their units to operate on bandwidth shared by satellite systems that regulate automatic gas pumps and other devices; operating in those frequencies allowed the detectors to hide from police detection equipment. Now the government has given detector makers 90 days to stop making units that work on those satellite bands. While some makers have already shifted back to their former bandwidth, Reuters reports, some have not, and retailers could be stuck with units on their shelves when the deadline comes.
The radar-detector industry is on the fritz after a federal ruling that changes the bandwidth available to new detectors. For a few years, Reuters reports, radar detector makers have been shifting their units to operate on bandwidth shared by satellite systems that regulate automatic gas pumps and other devices; operating in those frequencies allowed the detectors to hide from police detection equipment. Now the government has given detector makers 90 days to stop making units that work on those satellite bands. While some makers have already shifted back to their former bandwidth, Reuters reports, some have not, and retailers could be stuck with units on their shelves when the deadline comes.
07-24-2002, 11:29 AM
#6
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Milwaukee, WI
Age: 44
Posts: 6,227
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
is this for real?? do you have any sources?? nothing has been mentioned on the V1 website or any other detector manufacturer..anybody call V1 yet and find out what their plans are in response to this law, if it is indeed true??? anyone with info, let us know ASAP!!! im in the market for a V1 but was holding out to saveup the cash...if this is true, im just gonna have to bust out the credit card!!
Trending Topics
07-24-2002, 11:39 AM
#8
Happy CL-S Pilot
The V1 is a stealth and imnune for VG2 detecting. Radar Detector does not transmit anything, it's like a radio.
The Osillating frequency if shielded should not be detectable.
The Osillating frequency if shielded should not be detectable.
07-24-2002, 12:09 PM
#11
Moderator Alumnus
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Washington DC (NOVA)
Age: 52
Posts: 16,399
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes
on
8 Posts
Originally posted by jimcol711
is this for real?? do you have any sources?? nothing has been mentioned on the V1 website or any other detector manufacturer..anybody call V1 yet and find out what their plans are in response to this law, if it is indeed true??? anyone with info, let us know ASAP!!! im in the market for a V1 but was holding out to saveup the cash...if this is true, im just gonna have to bust out the credit card!!
is this for real?? do you have any sources?? nothing has been mentioned on the V1 website or any other detector manufacturer..anybody call V1 yet and find out what their plans are in response to this law, if it is indeed true??? anyone with info, let us know ASAP!!! im in the market for a V1 but was holding out to saveup the cash...if this is true, im just gonna have to bust out the credit card!!
http://www.thecarconnection.com/inde...&sid=173&n=156
07-24-2002, 01:30 PM
#15
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Milwaukee, WI
Age: 44
Posts: 6,227
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
check www.valentineone.com
07-24-2002, 01:42 PM
#16
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Orlando, Fl
Posts: 385
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Nashua_Night_Hawk
The V1 is a stealth and imnune for VG2 detecting. Radar Detector does not transmit anything, it's like a radio.
The Osillating frequency if shielded should not be detectable.
The V1 is a stealth and imnune for VG2 detecting. Radar Detector does not transmit anything, it's like a radio.
The Osillating frequency if shielded should not be detectable.
07-24-2002, 02:28 PM
#17
Moderator Alumnus
Originally posted by RaleighNC
That doesn't make sense to me. Detectors are receivers.
I need to read the article.
That doesn't make sense to me. Detectors are receivers.
I need to read the article.
In order to receive a radio signal you must create a local oscilator. That oscilator will cycle at whatever frequency you are trying to tune to . That oscilator will emmit RF on the same frequency it is attempting to oscilate at! (or tune too)
Which is why the V1 is made out of mangesium, it helps shield the local oscilator from emmiting RF noise.
So ya, all receivers are transmitters
You just have to shield the local oscialtor well... or it'll radiate noise on the same RF frequency it's trying to recieve on.
07-24-2002, 02:50 PM
#18
Suzuka Master
Originally posted by SiGGy
All receivers are transmitters!
In order to receive a radio signal you must create a local oscilator. That oscilator will cycle at whatever frequency you are trying to tune to . That oscilator will emmit RF on the same frequency it is attempting to oscilate at! (or tune too)
Which is why the V1 is made out of mangesium, it helps shield the local oscilator from emmiting RF noise.
So ya, all receivers are transmitters
You just have to shield the local oscialtor well... or it'll radiate noise on the same RF frequency it's trying to recieve on.
All receivers are transmitters!
In order to receive a radio signal you must create a local oscilator. That oscilator will cycle at whatever frequency you are trying to tune to . That oscilator will emmit RF on the same frequency it is attempting to oscilate at! (or tune too)
Which is why the V1 is made out of mangesium, it helps shield the local oscilator from emmiting RF noise.
So ya, all receivers are transmitters
You just have to shield the local oscialtor well... or it'll radiate noise on the same RF frequency it's trying to recieve on.
http://www.darpa.mil/MTO/ADC/firstdemo.html
"Digital Receiver Technology Program
As part of the DARPA Digital Receiver Program, MIT Lincoln Laboratory has developed an experimental all-digital radar receiver for the airborne surveillance applications such as the airborne E-2C UHF radar. The all-digital radar receiver directly samples the radio frequency (RF) input and performs the baseband down-conversion and in-phase/quadrature signal generation in the digital domain. The direct RF sampling eliminates much of the mixers, filters, and other analog circuitry in the receiver. The component count reduction is also expected to reduce the receiver size, weight, and cost significantly.
In a conventional analog receiver, the received RF signal goes through multiple stages of down-conversion, which consist of mixers, band-pass filters, isolators, and amplifiers. The down-conversion stages produce the baseband or the low intermediate frequency (IF) signal which is sampled the analog to digital converter (ADC).
In the digital receiver on the other hand, the received RF signal is sampled directly by the ADC, after some amplification and bandpass filtering. The tunable bandpass filter is used to attenuate the interference signals outside the radar's instantaneous bandwidth. The sampled RF signal is then digitally mixed down to baseband and is lowpass filtered to produce the baseband I/Q signals. The digital radar receiver has significantly fewer analog components than the analog radar receiver, since most of the mixing and filtering functions are performed in the digital domain. This is an important advantage because digital components are much less susceptible to drift with time and temperature than analog components. In addition, the lower component count helps in reducing the size and weight of the receiver. This is an important benefit especially for airborne radars with many receive channels..."
RE: Super-hets and mutliple RF stages:
Just as a note -- as long as the local oscillator is put in a can (shielded), its signal can still be detected depending on the number of RF stages and reverse admittance of the mixer and RF stages preceding the mixer.
A "good" design can utilize a cascade of narrow or wide band RF stages before the mixer, and the leakage signal can be made immeasurable.
An analogy could be made for "cable" pirates. A number of cable companies can "sense" the mixer from an "illegal" cable box, by checking the "mixer" leakage "sneaking" back up the cable (outside a business or home) (I’m talking older analog scrambler box and they can even see what channel your watching). A common technique to remove any "fingerprints" is to use a couple of RF isolators with a couple of RF booster amps; this reduces the "leakage" to such an extent that the mixer signal is "buried" in noise and can’t be detected upstream…
$0.02
07-24-2002, 02:54 PM
#19
Instructor
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 216
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How would this impact any of us - what does 'hiding' mean? As I drive around or get stopped by police I've never even bothered to conceal the unit visibly. Can't imagine that I care what frequency its emitting at.
07-24-2002, 03:47 PM
#20
Moderator Alumnus
Originally posted by EricL
You might want to look at this first:
http://www.darpa.mil/MTO/ADC/firstdemo.html
"Digital Receiver Technology Program
As part of the DARPA Digital Receiver Program, MIT Lincoln Laboratory has developed an experimental all-digital radar receiver for the airborne surveillance applications such as the airborne E-2C UHF radar. The all-digital radar receiver directly samples the radio frequency (RF) input and performs the baseband down-conversion and in-phase/quadrature signal generation in the digital domain. The direct RF sampling eliminates much of the mixers, filters, and other analog circuitry in the receiver. The component count reduction is also expected to reduce the receiver size, weight, and cost significantly.
In a conventional analog receiver, the received RF signal goes through multiple stages of down-conversion, which consist of mixers, band-pass filters, isolators, and amplifiers. The down-conversion stages produce the baseband or the low intermediate frequency (IF) signal which is sampled the analog to digital converter (ADC).
In the digital receiver on the other hand, the received RF signal is sampled directly by the ADC, after some amplification and bandpass filtering. The tunable bandpass filter is used to attenuate the interference signals outside the radar's instantaneous bandwidth. The sampled RF signal is then digitally mixed down to baseband and is lowpass filtered to produce the baseband I/Q signals. The digital radar receiver has significantly fewer analog components than the analog radar receiver, since most of the mixing and filtering functions are performed in the digital domain. This is an important advantage because digital components are much less susceptible to drift with time and temperature than analog components. In addition, the lower component count helps in reducing the size and weight of the receiver. This is an important benefit especially for airborne radars with many receive channels..."
RE: Super-hets and mutliple RF stages:
Just as a note -- as long as the local oscillator is put in a can (shielded), its signal can still be detected depending on the number of RF stages and reverse admittance of the mixer and RF stages preceding the mixer.
A "good" design can utilize a cascade of narrow or wide band RF stages before the mixer, and the leakage signal can be made immeasurable.
An analogy could be made for "cable" pirates. A number of cable companies can "sense" the mixer from an "illegal" cable box, by checking the "mixer" leakage "sneaking" back up the cable (outside a business or home) (I’m talking older analog scrambler box and they can even see what channel your watching). A common technique to remove any "fingerprints" is to use a couple of RF isolators with a couple of RF booster amps; this reduces the "leakage" to such an extent that the mixer signal is "buried" in noise and can’t be detected upstream…
$0.02
You might want to look at this first:
http://www.darpa.mil/MTO/ADC/firstdemo.html
"Digital Receiver Technology Program
As part of the DARPA Digital Receiver Program, MIT Lincoln Laboratory has developed an experimental all-digital radar receiver for the airborne surveillance applications such as the airborne E-2C UHF radar. The all-digital radar receiver directly samples the radio frequency (RF) input and performs the baseband down-conversion and in-phase/quadrature signal generation in the digital domain. The direct RF sampling eliminates much of the mixers, filters, and other analog circuitry in the receiver. The component count reduction is also expected to reduce the receiver size, weight, and cost significantly.
In a conventional analog receiver, the received RF signal goes through multiple stages of down-conversion, which consist of mixers, band-pass filters, isolators, and amplifiers. The down-conversion stages produce the baseband or the low intermediate frequency (IF) signal which is sampled the analog to digital converter (ADC).
In the digital receiver on the other hand, the received RF signal is sampled directly by the ADC, after some amplification and bandpass filtering. The tunable bandpass filter is used to attenuate the interference signals outside the radar's instantaneous bandwidth. The sampled RF signal is then digitally mixed down to baseband and is lowpass filtered to produce the baseband I/Q signals. The digital radar receiver has significantly fewer analog components than the analog radar receiver, since most of the mixing and filtering functions are performed in the digital domain. This is an important advantage because digital components are much less susceptible to drift with time and temperature than analog components. In addition, the lower component count helps in reducing the size and weight of the receiver. This is an important benefit especially for airborne radars with many receive channels..."
RE: Super-hets and mutliple RF stages:
Just as a note -- as long as the local oscillator is put in a can (shielded), its signal can still be detected depending on the number of RF stages and reverse admittance of the mixer and RF stages preceding the mixer.
A "good" design can utilize a cascade of narrow or wide band RF stages before the mixer, and the leakage signal can be made immeasurable.
An analogy could be made for "cable" pirates. A number of cable companies can "sense" the mixer from an "illegal" cable box, by checking the "mixer" leakage "sneaking" back up the cable (outside a business or home) (I’m talking older analog scrambler box and they can even see what channel your watching). A common technique to remove any "fingerprints" is to use a couple of RF isolators with a couple of RF booster amps; this reduces the "leakage" to such an extent that the mixer signal is "buried" in noise and can’t be detected upstream…
$0.02
cool, thanks for the info! I wish gavriil wasn't so secretive about his postings and would post the publishers URL. It's nice to give credit to whomever wrote the article. Plus others can research other things they might find interesting in the reading/website.
Not that I don't like to read his posts, actually I look forward to them.
...
Ya, your writing at the bottom makes sense. Interesting with TEMPEST technology you can even detect the downconversion from a good distance away. For instance a LNB on a 2.4gz satellite dish.
Time to wrap your house up in aluminum foil right?
Unfortunetly even just lighting up a bulb on a device will emmit some RF. TEMPEST is kinda scary.
Anyone using the "RF sampling" technology yet? (consumer product)
07-24-2002, 03:53 PM
#21
Moderator Alumnus
Originally posted by DreamU
How would this impact any of us - what does 'hiding' mean? As I drive around or get stopped by police I've never even bothered to conceal the unit visibly. Can't imagine that I care what frequency its emitting at.
How would this impact any of us - what does 'hiding' mean? As I drive around or get stopped by police I've never even bothered to conceal the unit visibly. Can't imagine that I care what frequency its emitting at.
also... here's one for ya... Radar guns cause cancer suposedly. Now if you have a leaky radar receiver, which is emitting the same/near frequencys as a radar gun. How good can it be if your sitting around a transmitter in your car day in and day out for a few years. Even if it is low RF emmisions....
Just a thought... Scary some some crap-o detectors set off my V1 at 1/4 mile easy...
Be curious to hear EricL's views... He seems to know his RF very well
07-24-2002, 03:59 PM
#22
Suzuka Master
Originally posted by SiGGy
Time to wrap your house up in aluminum foil right?
Unfortunetly even just lighting up a bulb on a device will emmit some RF. TEMPEST is kinda scary.
Time to wrap your house up in aluminum foil right?
Unfortunetly even just lighting up a bulb on a device will emmit some RF. TEMPEST is kinda scary.
Ur a yeah... I used to turn my TV to channel 3 and show the characters that were being displayed on an older monochrome video display in 80x25 character mode. It would work up to around 200-feet (with 1) TV 2) POS roof antenna…
AND
The “carrier” current from the power lines “sneaks” out on the power lines as conducted RFI…
They can read a non-lcd video display at some distance...
All the TEMPEST stuff is RF shielded to death... (Faraday Cage City)
I wouldn't start wearing aluminum-foil hats just yet
07-24-2002, 04:19 PM
#23
Suzuka Master
Originally posted by SiGGy
[B]
A leaky receiver is usally a crappy one. And could also possibly pickup a reflection of it's own RF noise.
[B]
A leaky receiver is usally a crappy one. And could also possibly pickup a reflection of it's own RF noise.
also... here's one for ya... Radar guns cause cancer suposedly. Now if you have a leaky radar receiver, which is emitting the same/near frequencys as a radar gun. How good can it be if your sitting around a transmitter in your car day in and day out for a few years. Even if it is low RF emmisions....
Kind of like sitting in front of a CRT monitor all day (mini X-RAY machine).
As to how much is good or bad -- who knows? Ever dragged out a field strength meter inside a city with hills and towers covered with microwave repeaters and dishes.
All's I know is you wouldn't want to get in front of some of the phased arrays and/or search/track radars on an Aegis Warship...
Just a thought... Scary some some crap-o detectors set off my V1 at 1/4 mile easy...
07-24-2002, 07:00 PM
#24
Banned
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Western MA
Posts: 2,157
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This FCC action was adopted on July 12, 2002. You can read the entire issue from the FCC web site here.
The summary (for those of you too lazy to click and read):
In the past, FCC has regulated radio transmitter output in the 30 - 960MHz range very closely. This covers CBs, radio towers, police radios, cell phones, etc. Devices that transmitted above 960MHz were exempt from controlling extraneous emissions that might interfere with other devices. Some detectors radiate unregulated emissions in the 11.7 - 12.2 Ghz band, and up until now this hasn't been a big problem. Now, however, the FCC claims these emissions, because they are unregulated, are causing unnecessary interference with other receivers in that band--namely VSATs (Very Small Aperture Satellite Terminals). VSATs are used for a number of purposes including linking retail establishments with remote computers for verifying credit card transactions and providing video, data and audio broadcast services to businesses. They typically operate with a 14 GHz satellite uplink frequency and an 11 GHz satellite downlink frequency. The downlink frequency is much more susceptible to interference than the uplink frequency. Radar detector manufacturers have claimed that such a restriction will make radar detectors more costly to consumers because they will have to redesign their current and future products. The FCC has manadated this restriction on emissions to be in place for all radar detectors manufactured in the US 60 days after this ruling was published, or September 12, 2002. All imported detectors only have 30 days, or August 12, 2002 (there will be a few exceptions to these limits, but not many).
IMPORTANT: There is *no* retroactive aspect to this ruling, meaning all current radar detectors in service do *not* need to comply with this ruling. HOWEVER, they are now subject to the standard FCC interference rule (that you find on the back of your PC, cell phone, TV, radio, etc) that says if the device is causing interference with someone else's equipment, you must cease operation of your device. So when the gas station attendent says your V1 is keeping his SpeedPass from working correctly, you would be violating a federal law by not turning it off. (Would anyone ever enforce this? Have you ever seen this enforced on any other device? NOT!!)
Also worthy of note: VG-2 (radar detector "detectors") will become obsolete and will not function with these new detectors as they currently look for that unregulated emission in the 11.7-12.2 GHz range. Once that is gone, they will have to find another way to find you cannucks!
The long and the short of it: Radar detectors (old and new) will continue to work just fine, but new ones will probably cost a little more to absorb the new engineering costs.
The summary (for those of you too lazy to click and read):
In the past, FCC has regulated radio transmitter output in the 30 - 960MHz range very closely. This covers CBs, radio towers, police radios, cell phones, etc. Devices that transmitted above 960MHz were exempt from controlling extraneous emissions that might interfere with other devices. Some detectors radiate unregulated emissions in the 11.7 - 12.2 Ghz band, and up until now this hasn't been a big problem. Now, however, the FCC claims these emissions, because they are unregulated, are causing unnecessary interference with other receivers in that band--namely VSATs (Very Small Aperture Satellite Terminals). VSATs are used for a number of purposes including linking retail establishments with remote computers for verifying credit card transactions and providing video, data and audio broadcast services to businesses. They typically operate with a 14 GHz satellite uplink frequency and an 11 GHz satellite downlink frequency. The downlink frequency is much more susceptible to interference than the uplink frequency. Radar detector manufacturers have claimed that such a restriction will make radar detectors more costly to consumers because they will have to redesign their current and future products. The FCC has manadated this restriction on emissions to be in place for all radar detectors manufactured in the US 60 days after this ruling was published, or September 12, 2002. All imported detectors only have 30 days, or August 12, 2002 (there will be a few exceptions to these limits, but not many).
IMPORTANT: There is *no* retroactive aspect to this ruling, meaning all current radar detectors in service do *not* need to comply with this ruling. HOWEVER, they are now subject to the standard FCC interference rule (that you find on the back of your PC, cell phone, TV, radio, etc) that says if the device is causing interference with someone else's equipment, you must cease operation of your device. So when the gas station attendent says your V1 is keeping his SpeedPass from working correctly, you would be violating a federal law by not turning it off. (Would anyone ever enforce this? Have you ever seen this enforced on any other device? NOT!!)
Also worthy of note: VG-2 (radar detector "detectors") will become obsolete and will not function with these new detectors as they currently look for that unregulated emission in the 11.7-12.2 GHz range. Once that is gone, they will have to find another way to find you cannucks!
The long and the short of it: Radar detectors (old and new) will continue to work just fine, but new ones will probably cost a little more to absorb the new engineering costs.
07-24-2002, 07:31 PM
#25
Moderator Alumnus
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Washington DC (NOVA)
Age: 52
Posts: 16,399
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes
on
8 Posts
Originally posted by SiGGy
I wish gavriil wasn't so secretive about his postings and would post the publishers URL. It's nice to give credit to whomever wrote the article. Plus others can research other things they might find interesting in the reading/website.
Not that I don't like to read his posts, actually I look forward to them.
I wish gavriil wasn't so secretive about his postings and would post the publishers URL. It's nice to give credit to whomever wrote the article. Plus others can research other things they might find interesting in the reading/website.
Not that I don't like to read his posts, actually I look forward to them.
I posted the URL right after someone requested it. What is the matter with you? Like I am trying to hide my sources. Wow! If anyone of you asks me where i got a post from, I will tell you right away. What makes you think the opposite?
07-24-2002, 08:59 PM
#26
Old Fella
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: San Diego, CA. USA
Age: 76
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Message is
to buy your unit now to possibly get a unit that will operate at the frequency's they don't want you operating at. Right? The so-called "hiding" freqs?
Hmmmm.
Hmmmm.
07-24-2002, 09:22 PM
#27
Suzuka Master
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Northern VA
Age: 43
Posts: 7,601
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why you guys all worried if you don' t live in va or dc?
Shit I gotta be under survallance 24/7 concealing my detector.
One thing I do know is that the Escort 8500 is FULL vg-2 immune.
Shit I gotta be under survallance 24/7 concealing my detector.
One thing I do know is that the Escort 8500 is FULL vg-2 immune.
07-25-2002, 01:48 AM
#28
Moderator Alumnus
Originally posted by gavriil
Are you trying to continue attacking me, or is it something else I am missing?
I posted the URL right after someone requested it. What is the matter with you? Like I am trying to hide my sources. Wow! If anyone of you asks me where i got a post from, I will tell you right away. What makes you think the opposite?
Are you trying to continue attacking me, or is it something else I am missing?
I posted the URL right after someone requested it. What is the matter with you? Like I am trying to hide my sources. Wow! If anyone of you asks me where i got a post from, I will tell you right away. What makes you think the opposite?
Only reason I said that, is because you answered everyone elses posts even after I requested it... So I assumed you weren't going to post it...
Oh well... SiGGy: "Not that I don't like to read his posts, actually I look forward to them. "
If thats an attack, you need to lighten up a little bit their big chief. You rarely post sources. If you would look back to my 1st post, when I asked for it, it wasn't an attack, but a request.
Either way, thank you!
LOL, take a chill pill dude
07-25-2002, 01:50 AM
#29
Moderator Alumnus
Originally posted by NOVAwhiteTypeS
Why you guys all worried if you don' t live in va or dc?
Shit I gotta be under survallance 24/7 concealing my detector.
One thing I do know is that the Escort 8500 is FULL vg-2 immune.
Why you guys all worried if you don' t live in va or dc?
Shit I gotta be under survallance 24/7 concealing my detector.
One thing I do know is that the Escort 8500 is FULL vg-2 immune.
07-25-2002, 09:50 AM
#30
Moderator Alumnus
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Washington DC (NOVA)
Age: 52
Posts: 16,399
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes
on
8 Posts
Originally posted by SiGGy
I asked too, you must have missed it... or I posted it at the same time as they did. My bad.
Only reason I said that, is because you answered everyone elses posts even after I requested it... So I assumed you weren't going to post it... Oh well...
SiGGy: "Not that I don't like to read his posts, actually I look forward to them. "
If thats an attack, you need to lighten up a little bit their big chief. You rarely post sources. If you would look back to my 1st post, when I asked for it, it wasn't an attack, but a request.
Either way, thank you!
LOL, take a chill pill dude
I asked too, you must have missed it... or I posted it at the same time as they did. My bad.
Only reason I said that, is because you answered everyone elses posts even after I requested it... So I assumed you weren't going to post it...
Oh well... SiGGy: "Not that I don't like to read his posts, actually I look forward to them. "
If thats an attack, you need to lighten up a little bit their big chief. You rarely post sources. If you would look back to my 1st post, when I asked for it, it wasn't an attack, but a request.
Either way, thank you!
LOL, take a chill pill dude
I am cool. I thought you were not. But if you were, then I was wrong.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
ITSJESTER
4G TL Audio, Bluetooth, Electronics & Navigation
17
12-06-2018 02:29 AM
chrisr
5G TLX Audio, Bluetooth, Electronics & Navigation
4
12-04-2015 02:17 AM
sockr1
Car Parts for Sale
22
10-01-2015 01:31 AM
