WR1 issues.

[sone983]

https://dashcamtalk.com/forum/threads/wr1-issues.29819/page-7#post-353219

Yes, I've been reading and watching those. I dont know what can I tell you more or new except that you and all of us have to be patient I suppose, nothing else is left for us.

Sent from my CUBOT MAX using Tapatalk

 

[dash riposki]

Depending on where you bought it from, check the return policy.

If from Amazon or some other site with a realistic return process, it may be your best shot, and also sends a more important (financial) message to Viofo.

There are other cams with a proven track record in that price range

 

[Dashmellow]

So he has no idea about the design and does not work for Viofo. Just as I thought. Sounds like he is trying to gloss over a defect for a fellow manufacturer.

It's simple. Viofo can fix the LED issue in the next batch or fix it when the customers return them at which point they can only be sold as used.

I never said at any time that I was connected to, or had any insight about this product, it was just a comment about what is or isn't possible from a technical perspective, I'm not glossing over anything for anyone, not sure where you get your ideas from, to be honest I don't even know what the supposed LED issue is, maybe you like them bright, maybe the next person doesn't, doesn't make you right and them wrong, it's just obviously not your preference, so be it

So, it turns out that Mr. Anon028 (allegedly a 26 yo from China with perfect English language skills) was a fake identity created by @Whatatay logging in by proxy who was recently banned for a month after trolling @HelenOster and others over in the thread about the back-ordered WR1. Here, he appears to have simply switched over to trolling you in this thread. He and his alter ego Anon028 have now been banned permanently and should no longer be a bother to any of us. Seems he has a long history of accusing various parties of perceived scams on other forums and this is not the only forum he has been banned from.

 

[DT MI]

...He and his alter ego Anon028 have now been banned permanently...

 

[jokiin]

So, it turns out that Mr. Anon028 (allegedly a 26 yo from China with perfect English language skills) was a fake identity created by @Whatatay logging in by proxy who was recently banned for a month after trolling HelenOster and others over in the thread about the back-ordered WR1. Here, he appears to have simply switched over to trolling you in this thread. He and his alter ego Anon028 have now been banned permanently and should no longer be a bother to any of us. Seems he has a long history of accusing various parties of perceived scams on various other forums and this is not the only forum he has been banned from.

I was a bit suss of the Anon028 account supposedly being from China, not something I was letting get to me but not surprised there was more to it, appreciate the update on what was going on though

 

[Dashmellow]

I was a bit suss of the Anon028 account supposedly being from China, not something I was letting get to me but not surprised there was more to it, appreciate the update on what was going on though

There's actually a little more to the story and when I get some time maybe later or tomorrow I'll post about it over in the "other" thread where this all started. I think members might like to know.

 

[c4rc4m]

Luck you. My pre-formatted Sandisk card would not work in the camera... at all. The camera was not capable of formatting the card... at all. The camera would not connect to my phone (so I could format the card) without lots of futzing. Not a very user-friendly initial experience... at all.

Can't recommend the WR1 as it stands. There are too many other cameras that function properly.

Mac I appreciate your frustration but I've already indicated the solution above - the pc app works fine if you use a card reader.

My advice as given before is invest in a decent card reader - they're less than £20 and will cover you for a whole host of situations in the future. I admit I don't use mine very often, but when I do it's invaluable. If nothing else, if you ever need to transfer a lot of very large files from the SD, it's going to be far quicker than any camera - USB 3.0 vs USB 1 / 2 depending on the camera standard.

As for Sandisk, they used to be great cards but there appears to be compatability issues reported with some dashcams. Equally, pre-formatting doesn't equal formatted in a format the camera can use - there are different file allocation unit sizes, hence why the format option is there for the camera / software.

So you can't assume a preformatted card -= the format you need even if stated FAT 32.

 

[jokiin]

So you can't assume a preformatted card -= the format you need even if stated FAT 32.

I would think that most people that are having issues are using something larger than 32GB which the camera can't use while it's using the default exFAT file system, bit of a catch22 of the larger cards in a screenless camera

 

[Deleted member 46308]

So, it turns out that Mr. Anon028 (allegedly a 26 yo from China with perfect English language skills) was a fake identity created by @Whatatay logging in by proxy who was recently banned for a month after trolling @HelenOster and others over in the thread about the back-ordered WR1. Here, he appears to have simply switched over to trolling you in this thread. He and his alter ego Anon028 have now been banned permanently and should no longer be a bother to any of us. Seems he has a long history of accusing various parties of perceived scams on other forums and this is not the only forum he has been banned from.

Will probably be back posing as someone else

 

[Dashmellow]

Will probably be back posing as someone else

I have it on good authority that he will keep being banned until he gives up.

 

[Deleted member 46308]

I have it on good authority that he will keep being banned until he gives up.

That works

 

[c4rc4m]

I would think that most people that are having issues are using something larger than 32GB which the camera can't use while it's using the default exFAT file system, bit of a catch22 of the larger cards in a screenless camera

I agree although the advantage of the screenless camera is it's size. Personally, I like the discreetness, white suction cup material aside.

I'm guessing it wouldn't be such of an issue for some without smart phones if the PC App formatted the card successfully in camera, but it appears either by design or error, a card reader is necessary to achieve format via the pc App (unless of course you have a laptop with an SD slot built in - worth checking as many do).

 

[jokiin]

I agree although the advantage of the screenless camera is it's size. Personally, I like the discreetness, white suction cup material aside.

I'm guessing it wouldn't be such of an issue for some without smart phones if the PC App formatted the card successfully in camera, but it appears either by design or error, a card reader is necessary to achieve format via the pc App (unless of course you have a laptop with an SD slot built in - worth checking as many do).

I haven't even seen one to know what's possible but in any screenless model you still need a way to do the basics, for me I would have it set it up to have a long press of the button on the back to format the card

 

[SawMaster]

I haven't even seen one to know what's possible but in any screenless model you still need a way to do the basics, for me I would have it set it up to have a long press of the button on the back to format the card

+1
Well said, and direct to the point

Phil

 

[Deleted member 46308]

+1
Well said, and direct to the point

Phil

Generally the case

 

[c4rc4m]

I have two card readers. No need for any more.

In that case if you tried to format it in the card reader, all I can suggest is maybe it doesn't like Sandisk cards.

I looked here for recommendations:

https://www.carcamcentral.com/guide/recommended-sd-cards-avoid-sandisk-ultra-cards

Until recently, they were advising against Sandisk. They still are I think for Ultras.

I haven't even seen one to know what's possible but in any screenless model you still need a way to do the basics, for me I would have it set it up to have a long press of the button on the back to format the card

I agree it's desirable but if it works fine out of the box, little reason to tune it. I personally have yet to see anything I thought I could improve by tweeking. In my opinion, the main softness in daylight is caused by the low bitrate and that requires a firmware update assuming the hardware can handle a higher bit rate.

 

[Dashmellow]

I agree it's desirable but if it works fine out of the box, little reason to tune it. I personally have yet to see anything I thought I could improve by tweeking.

It's amusing that just because you haven't found any reason to alter any of the settings on your WR1 you keep stating that there is no reason to "fine tune" it as if your experience applies to everyone else or that there might not be numerous other parameters that a user might require or wish to adjust. What's the point of having settings anyway then? Let's see: PAL or NTSC, WiFi settings. EV value adjustments when needed, checking the firmware version, loop recording time, G-sensor sensitivity, resolution and frame rate, auto power off, etc., etc.

While it's great that a user like you can make rudimentary use of the camera at the default settings, 99.9% of other users would probably prefer to make use of the full functionality of the camera and they may need various methods to access that functionality.

Respectfully, I repeatedly fail to understand your logic when it comes to dash cams. It's not that you are not entitled to your logic, it's that you argue that others should adopt it. The notion of insisting that manufacturers should produce ruggedized dash cams because you keep dropping yours on the pavement instead of putting it in a tote bag or protective carrying case is but one example. The idea that if it "works fine out of the box, little reason to tune it." is just another, as it is not quite so simple.

 

[SawMaster]

I have to agree here. If all one has is the WR-1 (no smartphone or PC) then there should be a way to make it function. As it is now you can't format the card so you're stuck with an inoperable cam

This argument keeps going round and round to nowhere so I think we should drop it for now and see what Viofo does to solve the problems. Based on his past history I'm pretty sure this will be addressed adequately in good time

Rather than debating semantics let's focus on helping him improve the cam- that will benefit everyone, even those who are happy with it as-is

Phil

 

[Module 79L]

Here's an example of the audio level.

The first clip is a mobius B, a few inches away from the wr1.

The mobius isn't wonderful for audio, but you hear the 'beep beep' stronger, and also the drone of my idling truck.

"Hey, why did the video suddenly become silent?" That was my reaction when it switched from the Mobius to the WR1. And I had the speakers turned up higher than usual!
In "my book", that's not even considered to be audio, let alone acceptable audio.

 

[dash riposki]

'Inoperable' is a little strong, maybe 'not easily apparently operable' is better.

(this is from guy who bought a wifi security cam thinking I could access the video directly from the cam, without a home wifi network)

If nothing else, they should emphasize strongly the need for a smartphone in advertising/sales sites for this cam, or the limitations you face without one.