TopherAC

Early on I was very active in reporting this drift issue. I continue to try the new updates in hopes that Garmin has finally figured it out, but in the end I always end up reverting back to 2.60/2.30. Using this combination, I have not experienced a single drift issue (track log is good but the odometer is off). Once you accept the fact that Garmin will never be able to fix this issue, you will either settle on a version combination and stick with it or return your unit if you are still lucky enough to do so. Don't even waste your time talking to Garmin about this...been there and they refuse to acknowledge this problem exists! Good luck!

I have been running 2.70/2.30 with great track results. The odometer is off, but I care more about being able to tell where I am at and where I have been versus how far I have traveled (besides I can always get distance from the track log). As for 2.80/2.80, I think the jury is still out. I have read postive and negative reviews, which seems to be pretty much par for the course as of late with Garmin. I have no plans to "upgrade" at this time but I will continue to monitor the feedback in hopes that Garmin finally gets it right. Good luck and be sure to share your experiences.

While using version 2.60/2.60 on a weekend hiking trip in Wisconsin (hiked less than 5 miles), I experienced the "drift" issue numerous times. Since then I have been running version 2.60/2.30 and on a recent week long hike in Killarney Provincial Park (50+ miles) I did not experience one single "drift" issue. I repeat.....not a single drift issue even though the conditions were far more challenging. Isolated incident....I think not...on a day hike in South Lake Tahoe running version 2.60/2.30...10 miles and no drift issue. I did a day hike in a local park where I experienced many of the drift issues in the past.....once again no drift issues. Am I happy that the odometer doesn't work well with version 2.60/2.30...of course not. But at least I am comfortable that the unit is correctly reporting my location and I can always get the mileage from the track log. EFIALTIS....what kind of track discrepancies were you seeing running x/2.60 vs. x/2.30? When you say the results running x/2.60 were much, much worse it makes me wonder what type of accuracy you are expecting to achieve. While running 2.60/2.30 I have seen occasional track discrepancies up to 60 ft but the discrepancy quickly corrects itself without having to power cycle the unit (this is acceptable to me). Running 2.60/2.60 I was seeing track discrepancies up to .2 miles which would not get corrected without a power cycle (this was not acceptable to me). My experiences indicate that the "drift" issue is tied to the GPS chipset software and I wouldn't expect that the GPS firmware would have any impact, negative or positive, on the accuracy issue. Maybe I will upgrade to 2.70 and test it for myself, but then again, why would I want to press my luck? My unit is working much better now and for that I am happy…though Garmin’s customer supports still leaves a lot to be desired….but that is another story.

Duplicate---deleted

Coggins - I will be returning my unit as I also purchased mine from REI. However, I will NOT exchange it for another Garmin unit with this chipset. At this point in time it is doubtful I will ever buy another unit from Garmin because the customer service has been horrible and significant accuracy issues with a GPS is unacceptable. I am waiting for the Delorme PN-40 to be released and when it is I will most likely jump off this sinking ship! To answer your question regarding why I am not running version 2.40 or 2.50....the versions you mention relate to the GPS firmware software not the chipset software and prior versions of the chipset software (assuming they exist) are not available. I spoke with several Garmin Reps about obtaining a GPS chipset version that is lower than 2.60 and higher than 2.30 and they point blank will not provide it (again assuming they exist). So....I don't have any other options than to run chipset version 2.30, unless of course I decide it is not important to know where I am actually at.

If it is a bad batch, something I threw out as a possibility many posts ago, wouldn't it make sense for Garmin to try and track the serial numbers of the people who are calling in and complaining? I have spoke to at least 4 different customer services reps about this issue and none of them have asked for the serial number. In my case, the inaccuracy issue went away after I downgraded to version 2.30. Because of this, I have a hard time believing that this is a hardware issue. If I were Garmin, once a pattern has been established that supports a possible problem, I would have offered a free exchange to a small group of these folks just so I could get my hands on these units to test them for myself. If they tested them they would clearly see that there is an issue. Then they can start the process of trying to determine if it is a software or hardware issue. As it stands, Garmin's customer service "system" appears to be totally incapable of tracking customer complaints to identify any patterns. If this is the case, Garmin is probably no closer to fixing this issue and probably has no plans to do so. In my book that represents terrible customer service, for which I have no tolerance. The fact of the matter is that there are bad units that have been sold and Garmin is not standing by their products. It shouldn't be our job to solve this issue and present possible causes to Garmin. They have consistently refused to own up to this issue and as a result the consumer is left with few options aside from ranting and raving on this message board. Another thought...didn't the Colorado come after the Vista HCX? Don't they use the same chip? If so, that would mean that possible chip problems are not the result of startup manufacturing issues but a true manufacturing anomaly. If I were Garmin, this would concern me greatly...or maybe it has since they appear to have chosen a different chip manufacturer for the Oregon.

The Vista HCX is anything but accurate. It is very well documented that the Vista HCX and the Colorado (which use the same chip) suffer from very inaccurate readings that can only be corrected by turning the unit on and off. The problem is if you are in an unknown location, you will not know it is inaccurate. I have never owned the 60csx, but I care more about reliablity than I do about a couple of extra ounces. My vote....go with the 60csx with the proven chip and firmware. The Vista HCX COULD be an awesome unit, but the accuracy issue has existed since the introduction of software version 2.60. That was in March 2008 (or 2007 if you go by the date listed on the website...Garmin can't even get that right). Garmin knows about this issue and has done nothing to fix it...4+ months and counting! I would not buy a Garmin product with known bugs with the expectation that Garmin will fix it like they have in the past. It is a new day and it is pretty clear that the Garmin of the past is no longer (resources are focused on automotive units and new handhelds)....go with a product that doesn't require firmware updates....buy the 60csx or take a close look at the Delorme PN-20 or the upcoming PN-40.

That makes no sense to me. Garmin is willing to put a more up-to-date software version on the new units before it is released to the masses? If it's not good enough for us or it hasn't been tested, it has no business being loaded at the factory on new units. Wouldn't it make more sense to release the update as a beta so that more people would be able to test it? Sounds to me like Garmin has lost it's confidence in its ability to deliver a bug free product. If it is true that there is a version 2.70 on the way, I can't wait to read the list of improvements to see if Garmin will own up to the serious "drifting" flaw. I would expect to see something like "Improved upon already outstanding positional accuracy" while in reality it should read something like "After a short five month period we decided to spend some engineering resources on an existing product in an attempt to satisfy a select groups desire to have their GPS unit actually indicate their actual location within +/- 200 meters" Based upon the reviews I have read about the Oregon, I think Garmin is going to have a rocky road ahead of them. You guessed it, the issue of accuracy has been raised again with what is thought to be a different chip from a different manufacturer. I read a review that mentioned the odometer on the Oregon was off by as much as 15% and that the unit was recording more stopped time than actual. This sounds all too familiar (Vista HCX version 2.30)....shouldn't Garmin have learned from their past failures? Do they not test products anymore? There are many of us that would be more than willing to test their products for free! Garmin....get your act together....this is embarrassing!

That's where the accelerometer comes in! If Delorme uses this to detect motion, then the unit should be able to determine motion (say...below 3MPH) without the use of algorithms. It would seem that this could close the gap between the odemter and the track log (as it appears the odometer won't accumulate mileage if the GPS doesn't think you are moving).

The problem with the odometer is that it will show different mileage from what you would get from looking at the track data or comparing it to a known distance. I downgraded to 2.30 to resolve the accuracy issue and on my last hike the odometer showed 6 miles while the track log indicated 7.5 (I hiked the same trail with another GPS and the 7.5 miles is more reasonable). The gap between the odometer and the track log was greatly reduced with 2.60, but like you I care more about accuracy (where am I) versus how far have I gone. It just seems that I shouldn't have to sacrifice positional accuracy for odometer accuracy. In my opinion, the GPS chip in the Vista HCX is a piece of $%^# and makes the unit unreliable. The chip is so sensitive, the GPS isn't able to determine if you are moving or if it is normal drift while standing still. It appears that Garmin is using algorithms to try to differentiate between actual movement and normal "drift" (quite poorly I might add) which is why the unit typically will not register speeds below 3 MPH. That's a wonderfully engineered product for geocaching and hiking isn't it? I can't wait to see what Delorme plans to do with the accelerometer in the PN-40. Logic would seem to point to that GPS being able to tell when you are actually moving versus having to come up with some flawed algorithm to factor in normal drift while standing still. I would expect that the PN-40 odometer and track log should be very consistent, but those are just my thoughts.

The reason that the term "drift" is in quotes is because that is the term that Garmin uses to describe it. The Vista HCX can be off from a know location by 400+ feet (a Colorado user just posted an error of 600+ feet...the Colorado uses the same chip as the Vista HCX) and if you are moving, your track will continue to be +/- 400 feet off. This is not normal drift. If you powercycle the unit, the location changes to reflect where you actually are. Unfortunately, your track log is pretty much worthless not to mention the backtrack feature. Out of curoisty...why wouldn't an odometer be necessary if you were walking/hiking? Wouldn't you like to know how far you have traveled? If you are using it just for geocaching, maybe not. But as a backpacker, it's pretty nice to know.

There are many people who have reported the so called "drift" issue on this forum. If you are running software version 2.60....you get the "drift" issue. If you downgrade to an earlier version....you get the odometer accuracy issue. I am now running version 2.30 because the drift issue caused the first track point and the last track to differ by 400+ feet while hiking a loop. I haved hiked a "there and back" trail and the tracklog would seem to indicate that I hiked two different trails (100+ feet apart and worse at times). The Vista HCX has the potential to be an awesome unit with exceptional battery life and a small form factor. But I cannot recommend this unit for low speed activities (less than 3 MPH) until Garmin fixes the very serious "drift" issue.

I do remember turning the compass off to conserve battery power, so I was hoping that maybe I just forgot to turn it back on. From the sounds of it, when I perform a calibration the unit should automatically turn the compass on for me. That's bad news as the compass doesn't seem to react to changes in direction as quickly as would be expected. I will re-calibrate the compass, ensure it is turned on and test it again to see if I get better results. Thanks for all of the input.

but the units still navigate you to the location regardless of the accuracy which is just an estimate based on satellite geometry.\ How could it possibly navigate me to my location if the GPS thinks it is 400 feet from where it actually is. Anybody ever find a micro cache when they got within 400 feet? Sure, I'll find my campsite and I'll be able to get back to my car, but should I really have to put up with these inaccuracies that doesn't exist with three year old technology (i.e. 60 CSX)? I promise....I am not bitter. I just think that Garmin is trying to blame the chip manufacturer instead of owning up to the problem and devoting the resources to fix it. Besides, if accuracy is good using version 2.30 and becomes very unreliable using version 2.60, how can this be a hardware issue? Sounds to me like they need some better software engineers.

The reply: Thank you for contacting Garmin International. I am happy to help you with this. Garmin is aware of this issue and we are constantly working to improve this limitation of the new high sensitivity receivers but this is an issue with the technology rather then with the design. The new receivers have a tendency to jump around a bit more then the older models when stationary. If you were to compare the old and new you would find the old would loose reception under heavy canopy but the newer model would not. It is really a bit of a trade off but the units still navigate you to the location regardless of the accuracy which is just an estimate based on satellite geometry. With Best Regards, This reply brings up a question and a couple of comments: 1) When he says "stationary" does he actually mean not moving at all or the fact that the unit is not designed to detect movement slower than 3 MPH...because I experience this issue while hiking not while it is sitting on a table As for the comments: My guess is that a majority of these hand held units are used in activities that involve low speeds. Therefore, I find it completely unacceptable that the chip Garmin choose to use is not suited for these types of activities. These units are faulty by design because Garmin choose the wrong chip manufacturer. I can only imagine that this decision was a financially based decision which makes this situation even more intolerable. I would have gladly paid more for a SIRF chip that is proven to be reliable. Instead, Garmin is going to profit from selling a faulty product. This is my first experience with Garmin (former Magellan supporter) and may very well be my last. I may consider exchanging this unit for the 60csx, but other than that I doubt I will be supporting Garmin in the future. Let's all hope that Delorme will wake Garmin up when they introduce the PN-40 this fall! Similar features, better compass, better maps, better customer service...what's not to like? Ohh...did I mention that Delorme uses a different chip manufacturer? It isn't the SIRF but at least it isn't the same piece of $#@% that Garmin is using in the Vista HCX.

Well i measure altitude but look what happens; 1. If i hardware reset the unit and leave it to auto calibrate it works OK with average accuracy. 2. If i calibrate then to a known position during my hike then it works fine for the rest of the hike. 3. But if i stop the hike and then close the unit at a position lets say 1000 m and return to my town for example (or start another hike at a different altitude) and then power the unit again then it still shows 1000 m and it doesn't auto calibrate. I have to hardware reset again or recalibrate with the known altitude and so on.... It seems like a bug to me and i don't know if other users experience it. I recently hiked a route that climbed to just over 10,700 feet and the altitude calculated by the unit was within 5-10 feet of published figures. I then hiked back down to my car at 8,900 feet, turned the unit off and drove back to the house at 6,300 feet. Upon turning the unit back on at the house, the altitude remained at 8,900 feet and would not change until I recalibrated the unit. So yes, I have experienced the same thing as you have described.

Based upon the problems with the Vista HCX and the chip that is uses (significant drift issues that you can read about on this forum) I would personally go with the 60 CSX (it uses a different chip). The Vista could be an awesome unit (bright screen, small, excellent battery life), but Garmin refuses to acknowledge the issues with the chip and/or the software. Just my thoughts....good luck on the purchase!

Alright.....I had to downgrade the software in my Vista HCX from 2.60 to 2.30 in order to eliminate the significant "drift" issue. Since the downgrade (works for hiking now), I decided to head out on a couple of easy geocaches to test the unit. I was navigating to the cache and found the unit to be completely unusable for this purpose. The compass indicated the cache was 40 feet behind me....I would turn around and start walking 5-10 paces but then the compass would indicate that the cache was behind me (back in the direction I came from). Yes...I calibrated the compass (multiple times in the park) I decided to go to the map page like I used to with my old GPS and this was even worse. The point of the triangle that indicates the direction of travel would not re-orient itself until I walked 5 to 10 paces. I also had problems with accuracy...within 10ft at one moment and then 40 feet. This is the first time that I tried to use this unit for geocaching so I am sure my experiences must be user error. Does anybody have any experiences with using the Vista HCX with version 2.30 because this unit appears to be less useful in geocaching than my very old Magellan Platinum. Any thoughts or recommendations would be appreciated. Thanks

This is not new information, but I wanted to also confirm the results of downgrading to version 2.30. I just finished a hike (a loop) and compared the tracks to the same hike I did earlier with version 2.60 and the track log proves the problem. Version 2.60 - Starting track and ending track were 427 feet different Version 2.30 - Starting track and ending track were 18 feet different Of course, according to the track log the hike was 7.5 miles while the odometer showed 6.0 (with version 2.30).....hmmm....I think I can live with version 2.30 more than I can live with 2.60. At least now I can tell where I am at! I agree with the others....Garmin is well on their way to take over Magellan's position after Magellan closes the doors.

As if this isn't a kick in the face...I finally got Garmin to e-mail me the prior GPS chipset (version 3.50) but I am unable to load it to the unit. Since receiving the file, I have spoke to Garmin reps a couple of times and nobody has been able to help me get the file loaded. I can't even get Garmin to answer the question of whether or not you can load only one RGN file (chipset without the firmware). It is pretty clear that Garmin has some major issues....not sure how much longer I will stick with them while they continue to think this problem is related to "drifting" (there words, not mine). If someone can instruct me on how to attach a file to a posting on this website then you guys can have at it (GPS Chipset version 2.50) to see if anybody has any better luck than I did.

If you are using a new Garmin unit with a high-sensitivity chip, there is a good chance that you are experiencing the same issue that many, many others have experienced. Do a search for Colorado inaccuracies or Vista inaccuracies and you can read about the problem. Unfortunately, I have spoke to Garmin customer service four times (many other have also) and so far Garmin refuses to acknowledge this bug. The standard reply is "I have never heard of this". I wonder how many customer service reps Garmin employs since eventually you think you would get connected to a rep who has at least heard of it. Since you are using it for geocahing, the solution is to power cycle the unit and the issue will be corrected (at least for a few minutes). I highly recommend that you contact Garmin as they need to get this fixed.

I know it may sound like I have nothing better to do (which isn't the case).....but I spoke with yet another Garmin rep just now. Earlier posts gave me an idea to try to get Garmin to provide the prior GPS chipset firmware so that we could downgrade. The customer service rep did try downgrading the firmware, but noticed that it didn't downgrade the chipset. He said that the chipset firmware can be downgraded on the 60csx and so he thought it would be possible to do the same with the Vista HCX. He contacted his boss who apparently sent an e-mail to engineering to see if they can get a hold of the prior chipset version. He has my name and number and I have his. We will just have to wait and see what comes of this.

I spoke to a Garmin rep again today about the accuracy issue and....you guessed it....he never heard of the issue. We talked for a while about the issue and he mentioned that he owned a Vista HCX and uses it regularly without ever running into the issue that we are seeing. This leads me to my question.....given the significant number of units that Garmin has sold that use the same GPS chip and the relatively small population of people that are complaining about this issue, isn't it possible that this could be a manufacturing defect (i.e. GPS chip) that does not effect all units? Has anybody exchanged their unit for another one and experienced the same problem? I find it hard to believe that everybody who owns one of these units (Colorado, Vista HCX, Legend HCX, Rino) is quietly living with this significant flaw. It just doesn't make any sense. I'm returning the unit because it is virtually useless as is and I am thinking about having REI send me another one to see if it is unit specific. I would rather just buy the 60csx, but I can't justify rewarding a company (costs more even though the technology is 2-3 years old) for failing to manufacture quality products or at least stand behind their products.

I spoke with Garmin technical support again today and asked if he was familiar with the Groundspeak forum (which he was). I explained the issue and urged him to read through the postings related to the Hcx accuracy issues. He said he was not aware of this issue but that he would make his supervisor aware of this. He mentioned that the customer support managers meet with the engineers twice a week to go over potential issues. Hopefully this will make it's way to the engineers. They have to know about this, so I am a little skeptical about any sort of quick response. I plan on nagging customer support at least once or twice a week for the next few weeks and after that the unit will probably have to go back (I have my fingers crossed as I actually like the Vista). Garmin needs to be a little more up front with recognizing and addressing these issues because it's a lot easier to attract a new customer than it is to regain the confidence of one that has had a bad experience.

I am also having problems with my Vista HCX. I Hiked a 9 mile loop over the weekend and my starting and ending point are off by .2 miles. I contacted customer support this morning and it was like talking to someone in denial (Garmin is the best...we never have problems...I would be shocked, etc, etc.). He insisted that he was not aware of this problem. He asked if I had run webupdater and I told him I was running version 2.60/2.60. He claimed that version 2.60 was not the most recent and said I should run webupdater. I tried to corner him to give me the latest version number or at least the date it was released and he wouldn't. Sounds like the stall tactic has been implemented. Has anybody recently run webupdater and noticed a new version number?