Jump to content

Xenox

+Premium Members
  • Posts

    7
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Xenox

  1. Quick Update: My Vista HCx was running version 2.30 of the firmware. I've updated to 2.40 (the latest) and will perform additional testing with the new firmware. My initial impressions are that the accuracy numbers reported by version 2.40 are more realistic. I see numbers like 195 ft. accuracy when inside of buildings now instead of 35 ft. However, this could be coincidence. I will test the new firmware outdoors with a clear sky and follow up to this thread.
  2. The specifications section of my manual states: Accuracy: GPS: 10 meters (33 feet) 95% typical [...] DGPS: 3 meters (10 feet) 95% typical* *Wide Area Augmentation System (WAAS) accuracy in North America Therefore, with WAAS enabled (which is a collection of ground stations performing post-processing), Garmin says I should expect 10-foot accuracy 95% of the time. This was my experience with my MAP 330. I don't expect centimeter accuracy, but a 70-foot diameter circle (especially one that I don't know the center of) is much too big when hunting for micro-caches. Please keep in mind that I'm not criticizing the accuracy of the GPS system. I've used it for years, and have reasonable expectations. What I'm doing is questioning the accuracy of the Vista HCx in particular, because it appears to be much worse than another inexpensive consumer unit I've owned for nearly a decade.
  3. I have a question for you hardcore GPS users out there. I just purchased a Vista HCx to replace my old Magellan MAP 330 for geocaching. I've used the Vista HCx on nine caches so far, and so far, I'm concerned with its poor accuracy. With my MAP 330, I land within 10 feet of the cache and the reported position seldom drifts by more than 5 feet when I'm standing still. (The MAP 330 uses averaging to establish a better positional fix.) With the Vista HCx, the unit will wander from 0 feet to 35 feet away from the cache in different directions, even when I'm remaining perfectly still with ten strong satellite locks. This create a very large area over which I must hunt for each cache. Worse yet, the unit reports an accuracy of +/- 15 feet even when it's clearly far less accurate than that. As a test, I set a waypoint while sitting on my couch (near windows -- 8 strong "D" satellite locks) in my house and watched the Vista HCx's display without moving. The Vista HCx has reported that I'm anywhere from 7-35 feet away from where I set the waypoint, even though the accuracy was reported as +/- 13 feet. Another thing that confuses me is that the reported accuracy doesn't seem to improve when WAAS is enabled and all satellites are labeled with a "D" on the satellite screen (presumably for "differential" correction). Does this mean WAAS isn't helping to establish a better position, or that the effect of WAAS isn't taken into account when reporting accuracy? Additional questions: 1) What are the best options for increasing accuracy on the Vista HCx? Does WAAS significantly improve accuracy on the Vista? If so, why is it disabled by default? 2) Is there any way to improve the reliability of the "accuracy" number? I've read that some manufacturers only report a 50% reliable accuracy (i.e., the unit is only within the stated accuracy 50% of the time), which is pretty much useless. I'd much prefer a 95% reliable accuracy, so that I'd know how far I need to search when looking for a cache. 3) My wife likes to turn the unit off between caches. Is it better to leave it on? If so, how long does it take before the unit is running at optimum accuracy? (e.g., How often are WAAS updates sent? Does the unit use any kind of internal averaging to improve accuracy over time?) 4) The Visa HCx is far more sensitive to satellite signals than my MAP 330. Is there any value in intentionally attenuating the signals in an area with lots of reflections? I've read that signal reflection can add up to about 6 feet of additional error. Thanks in advance for any answers, advice or experience you wish to share! ---Gary
  4. I'm looking at upgrading my old MAP 330, so I decided to stop by REI today for a side-by-side comparison of the 60csx and eTrex Vista hcx. Here are my own observations: * The Vista locked onto four satellites from within the store. The 60csx tried, but was unable to establish a single satellite lock. (Both units showed full battery strength.) * I was able to enter text about twice as fast using two hands on the 60csx versus one hand on the Vista. However, the two-hand operation is very similar to the MAP 330, to which I am accustomed. I found both systems very easy to use, but the Vista felt much more natural during one-hand operation. * The Vista is clearly designed to be held in the left hand. This works great for me, because I'm right-handed and tend to use my left hand for the GPSr. However, my wife is left-handed and prefers using her right hand for the GPSr. This meant she was covering the screen with her thumb while navigating the UI, which was a bit frustrating for her. Neither of us had a problem using the 60csx with one hand, although it would be easy to accidentally drop it while entering text. * The resolution of both systems appeared similar (and are similar), although the 60csx has a much bigger screen. This wasn't a problem in the store, but I could see that the 60csx would have an advantage in unfavorable reading conditions (bright sunlight, rain, poor vision, etc.) The brighter backlight on the Vista should help compensate under these conditions. The smaller pixels on the Vista gave the impression of a sharper image for icons and maps, but the larger pixels on the 60csx made the text more readable. * The Vista has a good backlight, but it wasn't nearly as bright as I imagined after reading this thread. It seemed like what I would expect from a modern GPSr. I didn't try the backlight on the 60csx. * The firmware is very similar on the two units. After using both units, my wife and I have a slight preference for the Vista hcx, even though the 60csx is more similar to the unit we already have. After we factor in the $100-$150 price difference, it's a no-brainer for us. The Vista seems to be a far better value for our needs. Although there seems to be a lot of tension in this thread, I found it very useful reading before evaluating the units myself. Thanks to everyone who has participated in the discussion!
  5. I was just at REI and asked about the sales price. They haven't seen the flier yet, so they couldn't confirm the sale. However, they told me that REI has a 30 day price-reduction guarantee. If the price drops within 30 days of your purchase, they will refund of the difference.
  6. Thanks for the responses! I didn't have a problem with my MAP 330 losing lock while looking for caches and its accuracy placed me within 10 feet of the cache every time. I'll try to get my hands on a newer GPS receiver to see if the interface is more responsive or the satellite locks more robust than my MAP 330. If the newer units are 20% better in every way, maybe it would be worth an upgrade. ---Xenox
  7. I bought a Magellan MAP 330 many years ago. Over the first several years, Magellan did a fantastic job of providing firmware updates. The maps improved, new screens were added and WAAS and averaging support were added. It became faster and better with each firmware revision and remained a competitive GPS receiver. That was several years ago. Ever since I bought a TomTom for my car, my old MAP 330 has spent most of its time sitting in the closet collecting dust. This past weekend, I dusted off the old MAP 330 and began my adventures in geocaching. I had a blast and I'm hungry for more. My MAP 330 is seven or eight years old, so it seemed logical that I should consider buying a modern GPS unit. I assumed newer GPS receivers would be far better. However, when I read the user manual for the Garmin 60csx, I was saddened to see that it looked almost identical in functionality and user interface to my much older MAP 330. It has color, a higher-resolution screen, expandable memory, some gimicky games and a special "geocaching" waypoint type, but the only real GPS tracking improvements I saw were more accurate elevation and direction while standing still (via an electronic compass). I had expected to see velocity and acceleration profiles, downloadable hiking trails with commentary, landmark-based position triangulation (for when GPS satellite reception is poor) -- even something as simple as an LED flashlight -- but it looks as though handheld GPSr technology has been stagnant for the past few years. Is there something I'm missing? Is it worth several hundred dollars to upgrade to a new GPS -- or am I better off adding a cheap magnetic compass to my arsenal, which will probably be far more accurate? Thanks in advance for any advice you may have! ---Xenox
×
×
  • Create New...