Varia V3.40 The radar detection distance becomes shorter and dull

As my previous post (quoted above) indicates I have had issues with the Varia radar which prompted me to do a lot of testing to obtain data to present to Garmin that I had a faulty unit. The above testing was with V/3.0 with replacement unit.


My controlled tests with V3.4 on the same test site with same replacement unit indicated consistently vehicle detection at 50 to 100 ft better than with V/3.0. Garmin pointed out to me that visually eyeballing distances can be deceiving hence the controlled measured test.

As far as real world usage I have put on 200 miles with V3.4 over similar terrain and traffic conditions experienced with replacement unit with v/3.0 installed. Varia performance bore out what my test results indicated-slightly better detection performance. In fact the unit seemed to have noticeable better detection sensitivity to overall traffic.

I am not here to dispute other posters comments but to share with you all my experience and I have had issues.

My bottom line assesment is V3.4 was worth the update. I have never lost connection with the radar unit as well. In fact the tones or beeps when a vehicle is detected seem slightly louder with V3.4 :D

Do you have specific numbers to compare 3 to 3.4? My main issue with 3.4 is multiple vehicle detection. Do you have numbers to compare 3 to 3.4 in that regard as well? I spoke to friend tonight who does mapping for the city. He has some cones and a rollertape I am going to borrow tomorrow. I'll set up cones at 500 feet, 450 feet, 400 feet, 350 feet and 300 feet.

What I am looking for re: your testing is something like this:

V3 detection distance was xxx feet. Multiple vehicle detection was vehicle 1 xxx feet, vehicle 2 was xxx feet (ect, ect, ect)
V3.4 detection distance was xxx feet. Multiple vehicle detection was vehicle 1 xxx feet, vehicle 2 was xxx feet (ect, ect, ect)

I'll test with both versions and will report back tomorrow with my findings.

I used 2 kinds of laser distance measuring instrument,
To calibrate the distance later view of approaching.

I v2.0~v3.40 I've tested.
Dare shows test results.



https://scontent-tpe1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xat1/v/t1.0-9/11825905_1007452399267617_6687133262819558183_n.jpg?oh=05689452a0633a27c9e83c4a467d46cf&oe=5731C02B

Why did you post in this thread? Do you have something to offer or are you just trolling?

Your replies to anyone who disagrees with you are verging on abusive.

I've been waiting for the 810 upgrade before I bought a Varia, so I've only managed a couple of 25 mile rides so far, but the results have been pretty much as I expected and perfectly acceptable for me.
I can't comment on ver 3.0 because I haven't used it.

3.0 -v- 3.4

I used a rollertape to measure the distance from my bike. Cones were placed at 500 feet, 450 feet, 400 feet, 350 feet and 300 feet.

The roadway where the test was conducted is a flat and straight surface in a fairly clear area that was free of obstructions. An Edge 520 on firmware 3.10 was used.

I started on version 3.0 and conducted both single and multiple vehicle tests. I then used my Surface Pro 4 to upgrade the RTL to version 3.4 and conducted the same tests. I did not test slow moving vehicles.

Version 3.0 -- Single Vehicle detection:

Car 1: 500 plus feet
Car 2: 475 feet (estimated as it was in between cones)
Car 3: 500 plus feet
Car 4: 500 feet
Car 5: 500 plus feet
Car 6: 500 feet

Version 3.4 -- Single vehicle detection:

Car 1: 450 feet
Car 2: 425 feet (estimated as it was in between cones)
Car 3: 400 feet
Car 4: 475 feet (estimated as it was in between cones)
Car 5: 450 feet
Car 6: 475 feet (estimated as it was in between cones)

Version 3.0 -- Multiple vehicle detection:

Group 1: Initial car @ 500 plus feet. Car 2 @ 500 feet. Car 3 @ 500 plus feet
Group 2: Initial car @ 500 feet. Car 2 and 3 (side by side) @ 500 feet. Car 4 @ 500 plus feet. Car 5 @ 500 feet
Group 3: Initial car @ 500 plus feet. Car 2 @ 450 feet. Car 3@ 500 plus feet
Group 4: Initial car @ 500 plus feet. Car 2 @ 500 plus feet
Group 5: Initial car @ 450 feet. Car 2 @ 500 plus feet. Car 3 @ 475 feet (estimated as it was in between cones)

Version 3.4 -- Multiple vehicle detection:

Group 1: Initial car @ 450 feet. Car 2 and 3 (side by side) Car 2 @ 350 feet and Car 3 @ 250 feet (estimated as it was WELL past my last cone). Car 4 @ 375 feet (estimated as it was in between cones)
Group 2: Initial car @ 450 feet. Car 2 @ 450 feet. Car 3 @ 250 feet (estimated as it was WELL past my last cone). Car 4 @ 300 feet
Group 3: Initial car @ 500 feet. Car 2 @ 300 feet. Car 3 @ 450 feet
Group 4: Initial car @ 425 feet (estimate as it was in between cones) Car 2 @ 400 feet. Car 3 @ 250 feet. (estimated as it was WELL past the last cone)
Group 5: Initial car @ 450 feet and car 2 @ 400 feet.

The biggest downgrade I see from these numbers and it is also what I’ve noticed on the road with 3.4 is multiple vehicle detection. It is flat out terrible on 3.4.. Single car detection is slightly lower on 3.4 but not anything that I’d consider as a huge issue.

Additionally: On my daily rides where several cars are approaching the numbers get even worse with 3.4. For instance if 6 cars or more are approaching then only 5 might get registered. Some of the cars registered at the last second. Based on my daily rides and real world usage experience, most cars, when there is more than 4 approaching on version 3.4, are not picked up until about 250 feet. And many are not detected at all.

I’ve reverted back to version 3.0 again for my daily rides. I hope the next Garmin update will resolve the multiple vehicle detection issue that 3.4 currently has.

Edit to add quote:

I used 2 kinds of laser distance measuring instrument,
To calibrate the distance later view of approaching.

I v2.0~v3.40 I've tested.
Dare shows test results.

Yes please do post your findings..

There are a lot of variables at play here like vehicle approaching speeds, size, maybe even weather conditions

I fully and 100% agree!

That's why I've been saying real world usage is more important than stale data testing. There are so many variables that come into play that can effect the detection distance. In my mind, my testing really only confirms what I saw on the road with 3.4, As a matter of fact, the test I ran above show better detection distance on 3.4 than what I see on the road and with all the variables factored in.

I ride in medium to heavy traffic so multiple vehicle detection is very important to me.

I fully and 100% agree!

I ride in medium to heavy traffic so multiple vehicle detection is very important to me.

Very important to me as well. Interestingly that is were I thought V3.4 was better. It just was more perceptive and sensitive in tracking multiple cars stacked up behind me than V3.0. It accurately tracked all cars until they passed by me-especially the ones I couldn't see in my mirror.

Multiple vehicle tracking on 3.4 was one of the 1st things I noticed. After initially noticing the degradation I began paying more attention to it.

On 3.4:

Lets say a pack of 7 cars is coming from behind. Maybe only 5 or 6 are picked up at varying distances and one or two are never picked up at all. Of the 5 or 6 that are registered some are 450 feet (I can live with that) some are 400 feet (I can live with that) but many are not even registered until 250 feet or less and that I can't live with..

On 3.0:

Same pack of cars example as above except on 3.0 all 7 of the cars are picked up and all 7 are registered at 450 feet plus..

I don't know why some are seeing the issue and others are not. As I've previously stated, I have over 1500+ miles in medium to heavy traffic with the radar and I have a very good handle on how it operated on 3.0. Immediately after installing 3.4 I noticed a serious degradation. This was confirmed on my subsequent rides and confirmed again with my stale test data I posted above..

3.0 -v- 3.4

I used a rollertape to measure the distance from my bike. Cones were placed at 500 feet, 450 feet, 400 feet, 350 feet and 300 feet.

The roadway where the test was conducted is a flat and straight surface in a fairly clear area that was free of obstructions. An Edge 520 on firmware 3.10 was used.

I started on version 3.0 and conducted both single and multiple vehicle tests. I then used my Surface Pro 4 to upgrade the RTL to version 3.4 and conducted the same tests. I did not test slow moving vehicles.

Version 3.0 -- Single Vehicle detection:

Car 1: 500 plus feet
Car 2: 475 feet (estimated as it was in between cones)
Car 3: 500 plus feet
Car 4: 500 feet
Car 5: 500 plus feet
Car 6: 500 feet

Version 3.4 -- Single vehicle detection:

Car 1: 450 feet
Car 2: 425 feet (estimated as it was in between cones)
Car 3: 400 feet
Car 4: 475 feet (estimated as it was in between cones)
Car 5: 450 feet
Car 6: 475 feet (estimated as it was in between cones)

Version 3.0 -- Multiple vehicle detection:

Group 1: Initial car @ 500 plus feet. Car 2 @ 500 feet. Car 3 @ 500 plus feet
Group 2: Initial car @ 500 feet. Car 2 and 3 (side by side) @ 500 feet. Car 4 @ 500 plus feet. Car 5 @ 500 feet
Group 3: Initial car @ 500 plus feet. Car 2 @ 450 feet. Car 3@ 500 plus feet
Group 4: Initial car @ 500 plus feet. Car 2 @ 500 plus feet
Group 5: Initial car @ 450 feet. Car 2 @ 500 plus feet. Car 3 @ 475 feet (estimated as it was in between cones)

Version 3.4 -- Multiple vehicle detection:

Group 1: Initial car @ 450 feet. Car 2 and 3 (side by side) Car 2 @ 350 feet and Car 3 @ 250 feet (estimated as it was WELL past my last cone). Car 4 @ 375 feet (estimated as it was in between cones)
Group 2: Initial car @ 450 feet. Car 2 @ 450 feet. Car 3 @ 250 feet (estimated as it was WELL past my last cone). Car 4 @ 300 feet
Group 3: Initial car @ 500 feet. Car 2 @ 300 feet. Car 3 @ 450 feet
Group 4: Initial car @ 425 feet (estimate as it was in between cones) Car 2 @ 400 feet. Car 3 @ 250 feet. (estimated as it was WELL past the last cone)
Group 5: Initial car @ 450 feet and car 2 @ 400 feet.

The biggest downgrade I see from these numbers and it is also what I’ve noticed on the road with 3.4 is multiple vehicle detection. It is flat out terrible on 3.4.. Single car detection is slightly lower on 3.4 but not anything that I’d consider as a huge issue.

Additionally: On my daily rides where several cars are approaching the numbers get even worse with 3.4. For instance if 6 cars or more are approaching then only 5 might get registered. Some of the cars registered at the last second. Based on my daily rides and real world usage experience, most cars, when there is more than 4 approaching on version 3.4, are not picked up until about 250 feet. And many are not detected at all.

I’ve reverted back to version 3.0 again for my daily rides. I hope the next Garmin update will resolve the multiple vehicle detection issue that 3.4 currently has.

Edit to add quote:


Yes please do post your findings..

I fully and 100% agree!

But I'm at Taiwan Tapiei Car, motorcycle, bus A lot,

But I tested the distance shorter than you.
Detection of fewer.

I hope Garmin RD can provide car, motorcycle, bus sensor distance data.

But I tested the distance shorter than you.
Detection of fewer.

The only reason I even did the test was because of the blow-back in this thread saying real world use means nothing.. In all reality, real world use means everything! It's impossible to provide data on real world use however because I am on my bike and cycling..

I can easily judge distance by sight (most people should be able to) and in my real world use 3.4 is even worse than my data tests shows. In my mind the stale data I provided means NOTHING as it did not include the ever changing factors and conditions that we would experience on the road. There are so many factors that can effect a unit like this that single area testing is a complete waste of time, but I did it anyway..

My unit gets outstanding distance with both single and multiple vehicle detection on 3.0. I am absolutely thrilled with the radar and I can't see myself ever riding without it again. The 3.4 update is a huge step backwards and I hope the next update addresses it. If not I am happy to stay on 3.0 for as long as needed..