Garmin F For Inovation

[GeoidPS]

The new x series uses the architechture of the old C/CS series and existing navigation units.

Problem:

You can have a gazillion maps, but peder pidaliance waypoints, routes, and tracks because you can't save to SD card.

Problem:

X series continues to short fall on profiles for routes using 24K maps. NO PROFILES OF 24K ROUTES AS PROMISED. Just profiles of point a to b.

Problem:

SIRF wipes out batteries. You can't go anywhere for the weekend without wiping out 2 or 3 sets of batteries.

Can't have alarm clock anymore.

Can't save pressure vs. time variations when turned off.

Problem:

The x series just doesn't cut it.

Any opinions?????

[+JohnnyVegas]

The new x series uses the architechture of the old C/CS series and existing navigation units.

Problem:

You can have a gazillion maps, but peder pidaliance waypoints, routes, and tracks because you can't save to SD card.

Problem:

X series continues to short fall on profiles for routes using 24K maps. NO PROFILES OF 24K ROUTES AS PROMISED. Just profiles of point a to b.

Problem:

SIRF wipes out batteries. You can't go anywhere for the weekend without wiping out 2 or 3 sets of batteries.

Can't have alarm clock anymore.

Can't save pressure vs. time variations when turned off.

Problem:

The x series just doesn't cut it.

Any opinions?????

You forget to mention that with the S versions you have to hold the GPS level for the compass to be accurate.

WIth a Magellan Explorist 600, you do not have to hold the compass level. By the Way, with a Magellan you can store an unlimted number of waypoints on the SD card, you can even have them in a PC style of file structure, This is a feature you will not fine on any Garmin GPS. ALso Magellan does not require the SIRF III chipset, Magellan has always had a better reciever than Garmin.

 

But Garmin does not care, they have plenty of market share as it is so they have very little reason to upgade

Magellan has used an SD card for many years with the ablity to store map and waypoints. With the exception of the Explorist 300, Magellan uses a triaxial compass in there models that have a magnetic compass so that your compass will always be accurate.

[GeoidPS]

Also, "Sight and Go" navigation. Why is the default distance 34.2 miles? This is ridiculous, at least you should enter an estimated distance!

[+GOT GPS?]

Here are all the features if I had both the Explorist XL and Map60Cx:

 

* 10,000 trackpoints in active log

* Storage of multiple Tracks, waypoints, maps, routes

* Excellent, and accurate Trip computer page

* 240x320 pixel large screen

* Ability to view multiple saved tracklogs, with different colors.

* Use of PC or Laptop to store converted garmin tracklogs, and waypoints to Explorist mem card.

 

Neither Garmin or Magellan use an open architecture, and they are big companies with problems.

 

- - - - -

 

We could have been still in the dark ages with GPS units with only 2 lines of text for the Latitude and Longitude, like with the Trimble Scoutmaster TOPO GPS, with no graphics, and a tiny screen.

 

-

geoff

Edited February 15, 2006 by GOT GPS?

[Neo_Geo]

The new x series uses the architechture of the old C/CS series and existing navigation units.

Problem:

You can have a gazillion maps, but peder pidaliance waypoints, routes, and tracks because you can't save to SD card.

Problem:

X series continues to short fall on profiles for routes using 24K maps. NO PROFILES OF 24K ROUTES AS PROMISED. Just profiles of point a to b.

Problem:

SIRF wipes out batteries. You can't go anywhere for the weekend without wiping out 2 or 3 sets of batteries.

Can't have alarm clock anymore.

Can't save pressure vs. time variations when turned off.

Problem:

The x series just doesn't cut it.

Any opinions?????

 

SOLUTION:

Give the freakin' thing to me!

[+Mastifflover]

Solution? Go find some geocaches so that we can think you are something other than a sock puppet or troll.

[+Renegade Knight]

Here are all the features if I had both the Explorist XL and Map60Cx:

 

* 10,000 trackpoints in active log

* Storage of multiple Tracks, waypoints, maps, routes

* Excellent, and accurate Trip computer page

* 240x320 pixel large screen

* Ability to view multiple saved tracklogs, with different colors.

* Use of PC or Laptop to store converted garmin tracklogs, and waypoints to Explorist mem card.

 

Neither Garmin or Magellan use an open architecture, and they are big companies with problems.

 

- - - - -

 

We could have been still in the dark ages with GPS units with only 2 lines of text for the Latitude and Longitude, like with the Trimble Scoutmaster TOPO GPS, with no graphics, and a tiny screen.

 

-

geoff

 

Neither has hit things exaclty right. Between them they have some great ideas and some stupid things.

[Moun10Bike]

Wow, and here I was thinking that my new 60CSx rocked, with the awesome POI feature, a MicroSD card that allows me to load up essentially all of the western US and Canada, outstanding autorouting, and signal under cover that has put all others receivers I've owned to shame. What was I thinking?

[+vaetanone]

I had a Explorist 600 for a couple of days until it died and Magellan jerked me around, so it went back to the seller exchanged for a 60CSx. It was nice till it died, but I like the user interface on my Vista c better. the Sirf chipset may eat batteries (users here are showing around 18 hours for a set of 2500 mah rechargables), but you get less from the 600, Either one can be plugged into 12 volts while navigating in the car, BUT I can find AA's in any local store in West Va. while I'm camping if I really get hard up.

 

The truth is that both companies with their closed architecture approach shortchange the consumer. Both have pluses and minuses, and neither one gets really high marks for innovation. Case in point consider Garmins use of USB, not USB II, and nonstandard driver requirements on top of that. Consider where we would be in mapping if the parties had sat down ahead of time and agreed "heres how we are going to store maps" like MP3 for music or CD and DVD formats with MPEG and JPEG standards.

[Hertzog]

Also, "Sight and Go" navigation. Why is the default distance 34.2 miles? This is ridiculous, at least you should enter an estimated distance!

 

The 34.2 (actually 34.52) miles is 30 nautical miles (don't ask me why Garmin used round nautical miles for this, they just did). It was entended as a quick way to project a direction to travel without having to enter a distance; if you need a specific distance you just use the "project waypoint" option instead.

[+PhntmArcher]

I agree Mastifflover. Looking over GeoidPS's recent posts, I wonder why he purchased it at all. I don't make it a habit to purchase items that I inherently hate, especially something in the $400.00 range.

 

PS. GeoidPS F for spelling: Innovation.

[GeoBobC]

Easy solution: sell your horrible Garmin and go both something you like. Many of us would be glad to take it off your hands since there are easy solutions to all the gripes.

[GeoidPS]

Easy solution: sell your horrible Garmin and go both something you like. Many of us would be glad to take it off your hands since there are easy solutions to all the gripes.

O.K. Bob, give me this solution. I'm in the middle of Shen. Nat. Park with my 24K topo. This is my third day with my 6olb. pack. The weather is getting nasty, and I'm running out of daylight. I'm in the trees so I don't really know what the elevations of 2 or 3 alternate trails are. I create routes of these trails to 2 or 3 possible destinations. Garmin promises me that I will be able to create a profile of my route. I create a profile and realize that I just get a profile of a straight line which would be impossible to traverse. What I really need because of my situation is a profile of the actual routes so that I can make a determination of which course to take.

The promised profile is completely useless, making me realize that Garmin has created toys for the bells, whistles and button junkies.

[+Team Trail Walker]

I saw the Op's post yesterday and wanted to reply but restrained myself as I had better things to do. But gee wiz, his Garmin bashing post are all over the board.

 

I have had my Map 60csx for over two weeks now and couldn't be more pleased with its performance. I am very happy with my purchase and have no complaints. Others have posted that their units have had problems but I have not.

 

Garmin is a very well respected company and will update any firmware glitches found. Any reasonable person would contact Garmin with any problems or criticisms and then post to this board any information others my be interested in.

 

 

In bashing Garmin and and the Map 60csx in the way you have on this board you have not supplied us with any useful information, only that your a hot head with an axe to grind with Garmin. I discount everything you have written, it's unreliable and of no use to me or others.

 

Solution: Sell your x unit and give us a break.

[CenTexDodger]

Easy solution: sell your horrible Garmin and go both something you like. Many of us would be glad to take it off your hands since there are easy solutions to all the gripes.

O.K. Bob, give me this solution. I'm in the middle of Shen. Nat. Park with my 24K topo. This is my third day with my 6olb. pack. The weather is getting nasty, and I'm running out of daylight. I'm in the trees so I don't really know what the elevations of 2 or 3 alternate trails are. I create routes of these trails to 2 or 3 possible destinations. Garmin promises me that I will be able to create a profile of my route. I create a profile and realize that I just get a profile of a straight line which would be impossible to traverse. What I really need because of my situation is a profile of the actual routes so that I can make a determination of which course to take.

The promised profile is completely useless, making me realize that Garmin has created toys for the bells, whistles and button junkies.

 

And is there a unit out there that will do what you want, or for that matter that will do anything remotely similar to what you are asking it to do? You could drop some waypoints along a trail and and build a route using those waypoints. Your elevation profile will be relatively close to what you would get from an active route. That will get you very close to what you are trying to to accomplish. If you are running out of daylight in declining weather, perhaps the best course of action is to stop where you are at, make camp, and get out of the weather.

Edited February 15, 2006 by CenTexDodger

[Neo_Geo]

Whenever Garmin comes out with units having the latest and greatest innovation in technology, there's one or two new members come to the forum to bash Garmin and talk about what garbage the units are. I recall a few new members like that when the 60 series was introduced a couple of years ago. They just can't seem to run out of bad things to say about what everybody else is raving about.

 

They're probably employees or stockholders of competing manufacturers lashing-out in a desperate attempt to save what's left of their job or life savings. Eventually they commit suicide or otherwise disappear from the forums. I'm sure GeoidPS will suffer the same fate.

 

Give it up - it's useless dude. I'm told that sleeping pills are the preferred method. It's quiet, painless and doesn't leave a mess for loved ones to clean up!

[GeoidPS]

Not a good solution. By the time I put in all those waypoints, there's a storm and its dark. I have to do that for 3 or 4 trails. Noooo wayyyyyy. Baaaaaaaaaddddddddddddddd.

Hey, I'm not on a sunny lawn chair in the Bahamas sipping my Margarita!!!

[yeeoldcacher]

Not a good solution. By the time I put in all those waypoints, there's a storm and its dark. I have to do that for 3 or 4 trails. Noooo wayyyyyy. Baaaaaaaaaddddddddddddddd.

Hey, I'm not on a sunny lawn chair in the Bahamas sipping my Margarita!!!

 

Well, the problem here is PPPPPPP(or possibly PPPPD).

Edited February 15, 2006 by yeeoldcacher

[+synergicity]

Let's see:

 

10000 points in active track - check

Storage of multible tracks, waypoints, maps, routes - check (on SD or MMC)

Excellent and accurate trip computer page - not sure what this means

240x320 large screen - check (256 colors TFT)

View multiple saved tracks with different colors - check (and patterns)

Use of PC or Laptop to store converted garmin tracklogs, and waypoints to Explorist mem card - huh? why?

 

Lowrance Expedition or H2O C meet these specs.

 

No auto-routing though.

 

Here are all the features if I had both the Explorist XL and Map60Cx:

 

* 10,000 trackpoints in active log

* Storage of multiple Tracks, waypoints, maps, routes

* Excellent, and accurate Trip computer page

* 240x320 pixel large screen

* Ability to view multiple saved tracklogs, with different colors.

* Use of PC or Laptop to store converted garmin tracklogs, and waypoints to Explorist mem card.

 

Neither Garmin or Magellan use an open architecture, and they are big companies with problems.

 

- - - - -

 

[toddm]

While some of the comments do seem overly negative, there really is a lot lacking in the "x" series, and I would bet that it would not be long till garmin would bring out a fresh new unit from the ground up, not just a updated old model. I would take the other position and bash those people that defend garmin to the death, insulting and just generally being rude to another poster who finds fault with the product. Just slamming a poster by saying "well if you don't like it give it to us" is just a useless waste of bandwidth.

 

As for the battery life, I'm fine with that; I'll take better reception and give up a little battery life any day.

 

While I may not care much that the garmin does not give an elevation profile along a route, I can see where that would be very useful in some situations, if they say it calculates elevation for a route, it should do it, not just run a strait line from A to B and show that elevation.

 

Usb 1.0 is pathetic, usb 2.0 has been out for 5 years. You are going to see a lot more complaints on this as people get 1-2gig microSD cards and it takes them a couple hours to download maps to it.

 

The electric compass they charge $50 more for is a joke, it's way way way too sensitive to tilt. Sure I always have a sighting compass with me, but if you are going to charge extra for it and make a whole model just on it as a feature (and the altimeter)......it should work better than it does.

 

The alarm clock I could care less about, same with the pressure plotting, but I'm sure some people do, it's obvious that because of the new chipset the unit is not able to do anything while it's off, so any plotting or alarm/time features are not going to work.

 

Not being able to change the color of routes should be a given, esp. since they have the feature for tracks. Also using spare card memory to use for tracks/routes/waypoints should be a given.

 

The option of having a couple user customizable screens that are just data similar to the trip computer page should be a no brainer. Along with allowing smaller data fields as the older units did.

 

The wandering problem is an issue for sure.

 

And for the record I've never owned any GPS units but garmin. It was a worthwhile overall upgrade for me in my situation, because I gained, autorouting, the memory card function, a color screen, and most importantly the amazing upgrade in reception, and some other stuff, for a reasonable price. If I was coming from a 60cs or a 76cs I would have waited for the next generation.

 

The unit is still great overall, and I am pleased with my purchase, but it seems garmin might have pushed them out the door too fast. I wouldn't give them an F, but I wouldn't give them an A either. I'm sure some of these things will be fixed with firmware updates and new generations of product, after all if they gave us everything at once, they couldn't get us to buy a new unit every year.

Edited February 15, 2006 by toddm

[+team fuzzybunny]

Sounds to me like GeoidPS has a bigger problem than just his gps. I would like to know who in their right mind goes hiking with a 60lb pack? I've been hiking for many many years most hikes lasted 3 to 5 days and some longer and I have never, nor do I know anyone that has ever, hiked with a 60lb pack. My pack for a typical 5 day hike, including food, at most weighs in at 37lbs. A lot of the hikers I hike with have much lower weights in their pack but I like some comforts they do without. Oh by the way he said he was on his third day and his pack weighed 60lbs so it started off at what weight?

[+bones10]

When backpacking, you should plan your route before you get on the trail. Use a topo map so you can determine which trail will be easiest. Get familiar with the lay of the land before you get there. If you get to a place where there are multiple paths, you should already know which ones you'll want to take.

 

As far as I know, no GPS unit (yet) will do what you ask. People have been backpacking before there were any GPS units. When backpacking, do not plan to depend on your GPS unit.

 

When backpacking, afternoon thunderstorms are great. A regular weather system when backpacking really sucks.

 

- bones

[GeoidPS]

Good man, my brother!!!!

[GeoidPS]

Well, anyway, after walking through the problem with 3 Garmin support specialists, the final conclusion was that they do not know if Engineering will be able to solve the problem, but they forward e-mails to the department, so now it's official. I'm at peace.

I wrote a letter to Garmin and this is what I said:

 

Dear Corporate Officer:

 

There is a severe problem with the advertising of Garmin Mapsource 24K National Parks Topo (DEM - Digital Elevation Model Maps).

 

It is clearly stated in the owner’s manuals (GPSMAP 60/76/C/CS ,etc) that with the use of the DEM map, a verticle profile of the route can be created and displayed in the unit. This is clearly not the case.

 

I spoke with 3 different Garmin Technical Support Specialists about this problem. After lengthy discussions, the support specialist and myself concurred that route profiles created with the DEM elevations were not reflective of the actual route, but were an approximation via a straight line between points A and B. The actual route is shown only in the navigation mode, and when not, the route is displayed only as a line between point A and B. Although the route may have been created in Mapsource and transferred to the unit, and is reassembled as the route in the unit during navigation; transferring this route back to Mapsource transfers only as a straight line from point A to B.

 

Therefore, fragmented routing capacity is clearly apparent with DEM mapping. The route does not display properly when not in the navigation mode, the unit cannot create a true representation of the route profile, and the unit cannot transfer the original route back to Mapsource. But most importantly, stating in the unit manuals and literature that DEM routing profiles can be produced in the unit is clearly incorrect.

 

I believe that the internal memory of future units should be dedicated to programming to serve better functionality, allowing the use of SD cards for storage of all data, ie maps, routes, normal waypoints, custom waypoints, tracks, and possibly settings, and to correct problems such as are described above. Also, there is a clear deficiency when a bike rider can have the entire maps of North America, but is unable to store a complete track of a 20-30 mile bike trip.

 

I hope to see that the above deficiencies corrected so that I and others will continue to enjoy future Garmin products.

 

That's it, I'm not posting anymore on this subject!

[BHP1]

Easy solution: sell your horrible Garmin and go both something you like. Many of us would be glad to take it off your hands since there are easy solutions to all the gripes.

O.K. Bob, give me this solution. I'm in the middle of Shen. Nat. Park with my 24K topo. This is my third day with my 6olb. pack. The weather is getting nasty, and I'm running out of daylight. I'm in the trees so I don't really know what the elevations of 2 or 3 alternate trails are. I create routes of these trails to 2 or 3 possible destinations. Garmin promises me that I will be able to create a profile of my route. I create a profile and realize that I just get a profile of a straight line which would be impossible to traverse. What I really need because of my situation is a profile of the actual routes so that I can make a determination of which course to take.

The promised profile is completely useless, making me realize that Garmin has created toys for the bells, whistles and button junkies.

 

Since you have Topo 24K loaded on your GPS, how about reading the topo contours off of the map and getting an idea of the elevations of the trails. This, of course, assumes that one knows how to read a topo map.

Edited February 16, 2006 by BHP1

[GeoBobC]

Come on. Reading a map is way too hard.

[Neo_Geo]

That's it, I'm not posting anymore on this subject!

 

Good!

[+Sputnik 57]

Actually, I think Geoid's letter is very good. Professional, objective, articulates his concern well. Garmin's ad copy really is misleading on this point.

 

Geoid took a lot of flaming in this thread because he let his emotions get carried away and maybe overreacted in a pack of Garmin lovers, but you have to admit that his letter is good.

[Suscrofa]

Actually, I think Geoid's letter is very good. Professional, objective, articulates his concern well. Garmin's ad copy really is misleading on this point.

 

Geoid took a lot of flaming in this thread because he let his emotions get carried away and maybe overreacted in a pack of Garmin lovers, but you have to admit that his letter is good.

 

By the way on these US 24K Topo maps does the units displayed on the Garmin change to standard metric if the Garmin is set to metric ?

How come these maps do not come with standard scales, 1/100000, 1/25000 etc... like everywhere else ?

[GeoBobC]

Professional, objective? - "SIRF wipes out batteries" - what does that mean? Does it wipe them out in two hours or 24 hours? What is normal? What is expected?

 

If we have some details like how long the batteries actually lasted, and under what conditions perhaps we can all learn something.

[+team fuzzybunny]

Maybe this thread will help you out Geobob http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=123375 it talks about how long batteries last in the 60csx. IMO its pretty accurate I typically get about 17 hours with my 15 minute rechargeable NiMH.

[GeoBobC]

Thanks for the link. 17 hours seems reasonable to me, given that the "S" has a compass and altimeter. I have a 60c which lasts longer, but I remember the days of 8 hour battery life in the early units as well. Is 17 hours a serious issue?

[+team fuzzybunny]

I don't think it is an issue at all considering Garmin's website says that the 60csx will get up to 18 hours of battery life! I knew that before I bought it if people have a problem with it maybe they should have done some more research on the topic!

Edited February 16, 2006 by team fuzzybunny

[+Team Trail Walker]

I just upgraded from a etrex yellow to the Map60CSx and it looks like the standard alkaline batteries I use last the same amount of time. For me that's a great deal!

 

More Bells and Whistles per mAh=

[vagabond]

Maybe someone should start a bug/gripe list, like dot com did on the explorists.

Never can tell it might help things along

[Hertzog]

I just upgraded from a etrex yellow to the Map60CSx and it looks like the standard alkaline batteries I use last the same amount of time. For me that's a great deal!

 

More Bells and Whistles per mAh=

 

The "problem" with the "X" models is that when the 60/76 models came out a couple of years ago their battery life was greatly improved over the earlier models. The X models (at least the 60C/CS models) have lost some of that lifetime, which is a little disappointing, but something I can certainly live with given the basic performance we are seeing with the X models.

Edited February 17, 2006 by John Tyson

[+PhntmArcher]

I saw this is another topic...

... new owners are the beta testers and get to find all the new bugs in the product. Just saw that within 6 months a new chip set will be avaliable that uses 50% less power. ImpalaBob

[+JohnnyVegas]

Maybe someone should start a bug/gripe list, like dot com did on the explorists.

Never can tell it might help things along

They did but they called it Garmin 60CSx Observations so that it would not look like Garmin was getting bashed.

[+Alan2]

Garmin made a basic decision that people will be willing to trade the better reception of SirfIII against its higher power/shorter battery requirements. Since Garmin does not make the chipset, there's not much they can do about that. Hwoeever, someone mentioned that the SirfIII mfr is coming out with a lower drain chip. So once that's in place the batteries will last longer again on future models. Relax. Enjoy the the better reception in the meanwhile.

Edited February 20, 2006 by Alan2

[+LostNfound]

Questions:

 

Does the "x" series really draw that much more power than the non "x" series? If it does, then does anybody know if the power drain is because of the new sirf chip or is it a combination of the chip and the fact that the unit now has to power two sets of memory (internal and transflash card)? No other Garmin unit(or any other current manufacturer's unit) combines a sifr chip, internal memory and removeable memory. I'm no engineer but seems to me that reducing the power consumption of any one of the above mentioned will have a positive effect; but how much effect?

 

I purchased the 60csx with full knowledge that the magnetic compass and the altimeter would drain the battery even more. If I were hiking in the woods at an average pace of 3 mph would I have any need of keeping the compass turned on? Could I not turn it on and off as needed? Wouldn't that prolong my battery life? Couldn't the same could be said about the altimeter. My point is that to go out and use the 60csx I don't need to always run every possible feature.

 

Hell I'm pretty sure that if the unit had an alarm clock that I would turn that off too? Thank goodness it doesn't. I love my gpsr . . . I hate my alarm clock. Maybe that is why Garmin doesn't need a snooze button on their gpsr's.

[peter]

Does the "x" series really draw that much more power than the non "x" series? If it does, then does anybody know if the power drain is because of the new sirf chip or is it a combination of the chip and the fact that the unit now has to power two sets of memory (internal and transflash card)?

 

It does seem to have dropped the operating time per battery set from around 26 hours to 18 hours. But note that's still very good battery life on a pair of cells compared to many competing units. I doubt the switch from having the map memory being internal to external has any significant impact on power usage. The 60c/cs models already had one memory device for firmware and user settings and a second device for the downloaded maps plus basemap. Now the downloaded maps go to the external memory card, but the total amount of memory needed hasn't changed much (at least for the included size card). Anyway, the power required for flash memory isn't much since it's rarely being accessed.

 

I purchased the 60csx with full knowledge that the magnetic compass and the altimeter would drain the battery even more. If I were hiking in the woods at an average pace of 3 mph would I have any need of keeping the compass turned on? Could I not turn it on and off as needed?

Yes, and you could even set a threshold speed of say 2mph so the unit would automatically turn it off above that point. But indications are that you won't improve battery life much on the 60 'x' models by turning off the compass. So either Garmin goofed and the compass doesn't really turn off or they found a much more energy efficient magnetic fluxgate sensor (my guess is they wouldn't have goofed that badly).

Couldn't the same could be said about the altimeter.

No, the pressure sensor for the altimeter can't be turned off. But that type of sensor is generally very low power anyway. I had one in my watch that also couldn't be turned off and the watch still ran for three years on a little button cell.

 

Hell I'm pretty sure that if the unit had an alarm clock that I would turn that off too? Thank goodness it doesn't.

Off is generally the default state for alarm clocks.

[+LostNfound]

Thank you Peter. That was a very informative and well worded reply. I am glad to know that there are a people on these boards that actually hang around with the intention of engaging in informative discourse. Now would you please find my post on the 60csx observations section about EPE. Maybe you can explain that just because "my gpsr has a smaller EPE number than yours" it isn't more accurate. I'm sure that I am just opening myself for criticism but what the heck. Life isn't worth living unless people remember you. Hehehe.

[+synergicity]

Questions:

 

--Snip-- No other Garmin unit(or any other current manufacturer's unit) combines a sifr chip, internal memory and removeable memory. --Snip--

 

Except the Lowrance H20, Hunt, and Expedition. They use the SIRFIII chipset, have lots of internal memory, and accept MMC and SD memory cards. Right now I have a 1 gb card in my Expedition and it is full of topo maps and tracks and waypoints.

 

Also regarding your question why EPE might vary between different makes and models of GPS, the algorithms that each manufacturer use to calc EPE are different. Some are conservative and others are more agressive. My Lowrance tends to never get below 15 ft, but I am usually right on top of the caches I search (within 3 feet of the last 3 with repeated approaches and more than one day on each). So EPE is something you take with a grain or two of salt.

[+allory]

Except the Lowrance H20, Hunt, and Expedition. They use the SIRFIII chipset,

That would be great news, but I can't find any mention of it on the Lowrance website or in the owners manuals for those models. There was a press release a couple of years ago about using the SiRF IIe set in some models, but nothing about the III chipset. Where did you find your info?

[+synergicity]

It is from John Galvin, username rwcx183 at the yahoo group ifinder_gps. Here is the list he provided:

 

iFinder = SiRF IIe

iFinderPro = SiRF IIe/LP

iFinderH2O = SiRF IIe/LP

iFinderHunt = SiRF IIe/LP

iFinderM&M = SiRF IIe/LP

iFinderPHD = SiRF IIe/LP

iFinderExplorer = SiRF IIe/LP

iFinderHuntC = SiRF III

iFinderExpeditionC = SiRF III

iFinderH2OC = SiRF III

iFinderGO/GO2 = Antares or SiRF III (can't remember for certain)

 

As you can see I should have told you it was the H2OC and HuntC not the grayscale versions.

 

I think his email is lgalvin<at>yahoo<dot>com so you can ask him if you want more info. Easier might be to join the yahoo group and post the question. Either way, fill us in if you find that the info is not accurate.

 

Except the Lowrance H20, Hunt, and Expedition. They use the SIRFIII chipset,

That would be great news, but I can't find any mention of it on the Lowrance website or in the owners manuals for those models. There was a press release a couple of years ago about using the SiRF IIe set in some models, but nothing about the III chipset. Where did you find your info?

[+Renegade Knight]

... Maybe you can explain that just because "my gpsr has a smaller EPE number than yours" it isn't more accurate. I'm sure that I am just opening myself for criticism but what the heck. Life isn't worth living unless people remember you. Hehehe.

 

It depends on the GPS makers inherent accuracy of their EPE calcs. All other things being equil (and they are not) if a GPS repored less EPE it would be more accurate than another GPS that reported greater EPE.

 

However since the different makers calcualte their EPE differently and EPE calcs also have error...EPE is more of a guideline.

 

The EPE itself tends to be an estimate of the maximum probable error within a certain confidene interval and not the actual error. In other words an EPE of 18' means "I'm 95% sure that the error is 18' or less" It also means you can have an EPE of 328' and be dead on.

 

Peter can probably tell you what the confidene interval is, and which GPS makers EPE calcs are more accurate.

Edited February 22, 2006 by Renegade Knight

[peter]

Peter can probably tell you what the confidene interval is, and which GPS makers EPE calcs are more accurate.

 

Nope. As far as I know none of the GPS manufacturers have revealed how they calculate their EPE, Accuracy, and similar figures. And there isn't even any assurance that they'll always use the same algorithm for all their models and firmware releases. Lowrance seems to be more conservative in their estimates than most other makes.

 

The proper way to evaluate accuracy is to place the receiver at a carefully surveyed spot, such as a GPS-determined USGS benchmark, and take a series of measurements over time as the satellite positions change. Then you can analyze the data to get the standard deviation and see if there's also any significant systematic error. EPEs should only be viewed as rough guides to the relative quality of a given measurement.

[+Alan2]

Thank you Peter. That was a very informative and well worded reply. I am glad to know that there are a people on these boards that actually hang around with the intention of engaging in informative discourse. Now would you please find my post on the 60csx observations section about EPE. Maybe you can explain that just because "my gpsr has a smaller EPE number than yours" it isn't more accurate. I'm sure that I am just opening myself for criticism but what the heck. Life isn't worth living unless people remember you. Hehehe.

 

An analogy to EPE would be polling organixations that say people answered the question 61% vs 39% with an accuracy of + or - 3%. Another polling company says + or - 7%. Which polling service would you consider using? It's about marketing a product basically. The polling companies cannot and will not tell you how they arrive at the 3% or 7%. If they klnew exactly the variance, then they would not need it in the first place because their results would be exactly "on the money".

 

The same with GPS's. The mfr's make assumptions based on variables they do not publish. One can assume however certain variables are applied: number of satellites being received, signal strength, consistancy and time signals have been received, etc. They then apply their "majic formula" and EPE 18feet while another might say EPE 12 feet with the same signals received. And just like the polling firms, if they actual new how far off they were, there would be no need for EPE because they could tell you exactly where you are. Polling and GPS firms are guessing the error percent.

 

So, just understand EPE between mfr's prove little. However, EPE's that show smaller footage using the same GPS means you are getting better signals for that GPS at that time.

Edited February 23, 2006 by Alan2

[+allory]

It is from John Galvin, username rwcx183 at the yahoo group ifinder_gps. Here is the list he provided:

 

iFinder = SiRF IIe

iFinderPro = SiRF IIe/LP

iFinderH2O = SiRF IIe/LP

iFinderHunt = SiRF IIe/LP

iFinderM&M = SiRF IIe/LP

iFinderPHD = SiRF IIe/LP

iFinderExplorer = SiRF IIe/LP

iFinderHuntC = SiRF III

iFinderExpeditionC = SiRF III

iFinderH2OC = SiRF III

iFinderGO/GO2 = Antares or SiRF III (can't remember for certain)

 

As you can see I should have told you it was the H2OC and HuntC not the grayscale versions.

 

I think his email is lgalvin<at>yahoo<dot>com so you can ask him if you want more info. Easier might be to join the yahoo group and post the question. Either way, fill us in if you find that the info is not accurate.

Thanks for the additional info. I've just subscribed to the iFinder group with the hope of learning more, but when the manufacturer doesn't give details on their own products its a bit difficult. If I do learn anything I'll certainly pass it on.

[GeoBobC]

Check this out for Garmin EPE:

http://gpsinformation.net/main/epenew.txt