Compact Flash GPSr's

[sli22sli]

I have read a few posts in the forum where members with PDA's were going to get or had gotten compact flash GPSr's to use with their PDA's. I'm interested in these types of GPSR's primarily to see if the accuracy is as good as a the Bluetooth versions and how much power do they use. From a compact unit point of view they seem to make sense. I have been able to find only one (Holux GM271 Sirf III) but I'm sure there are others out there. If you've got one or used one I'd like your experience and opinions compared to a similar quality Blutooth version. I currently have an Earthmate Blue Logger GPS which I'm using with a Dell Axim 51v. The blue logger works but it does not hold signal well in wooded area's, so I'd like to replace with a Sirf III chipset unit. Thanks Sims Roy

[+hurley_108]

I have read a few posts in the forum where members with PDA's were going to get or had gotten compact flash GPSr's to use with their PDA's. I'm interested in these types of GPSR's primarily to see if the accuracy is as good as a the Bluetooth versions and how much power do they use. From a compact unit point of view they seem to make sense. I have been able to find only one (Holux GM271 Sirf III) but I'm sure there are others out there. If you've got one or used one I'd like your experience and opinions compared to a similar quality Blutooth version. I currently have an Earthmate Blue Logger GPS which I'm using with a Dell Axim 51v. The blue logger works but it does not hold signal well in wooded area's, so I'd like to replace with a Sirf III chipset unit. Thanks Sims Roy

 

I've read in a number of places that CF GPSrs just don't work right with Windows Mobile 5, which the X51v runs. There are a few SD GPSrs out there that might work that are Sirf III, but there are also a number of Sirf III bluetooth units too. Check out Semsons, they've got a lot of units.

[+Steel City Seekers]

I've owned a CF Haicom HI-303S (Sirf II) and CF Haicom HI-303III (SirfIII) for some time now. I also have the bluetooth slipper for these receivers so they can be used as either CF or bluetooth by either using the CF alone inserted into the device or by inserting the CF into the slipper and pairing it with the device.

 

Some thoughts and opinions follow.

 

From my experience, accuracy, signal strength, etc. is exactly the same whether using it as CF or BT.

 

My experience with these are only with a WM2003 device, so I can't speak about compatability with WM2005 at all.

 

The 303III is worlds better than the 303S. Signal acquisition time alone would be enough to justify the 303III. Also, the 303III does not jump around as much. The 303S is good on the road, but had me in circles in the woods. Both hold fixes very well under cover.

 

Using a CF receiver will significantly decrease your battery life and usage time. The PDA running only itself (mapping program, etc.) and bluetooth would get a good four hours or so. The BT receiver in its separate battery-powered slipper is good for at least eight. The PDA running itself and a CF card would be good for probably half the normal four hour run time. This is not based on actually timing these. It is based on what I'm guessing having unscientifically monitored the battery in both situations.

 

I never use the PDA to navigate to the cache anymore. I use a stand-alone only and the Haicom is relegated strictly to auto duties. I might take the PDA for cache details in GPXSonar only. If I used it as a CF in the PDA, then I couldn't put the PDA in a case. This meant I had to have it in my hand the whole time. This meant I had to do everything one-handed. This also meant I had to worry and take extra care that I didn't drop the device. This was not fun for me. Using a separate BT receiver was better because I could put the reciever in a pocket or backpack and use the PDA case for the PDA. Then, I got caught in the rain . . .

 

I thought having the option of CF or bluetooth that the Haicom offers was a wise idea. I regret this now, however, because the CF receiver + the bluetooth slipper are much larger than the tiny bluetooth only receivers they're making nowadays. I wish I had bought one of those instead. Maybe someday I will, but since the Haicom stays in the truck, it isn't that big of a deal.

[+DocDiTTo]

I have a Sirf III CF GPSr made by Holux. I don't remember the exact model at the moment. I use it in my iPaq which run WM 2005, and it works fine. A friend at work has a Dell Axim (also running WM 2005) and the same GPSr - his works fine too. Just for kicks I let mine on one day to see how long the Ipaq battery would last with the GPSr running - it was almost 4 hours to the minute. Not bad for an ipaq with a battery that's over a year old. Of course, in the car I just plug the thing in. I use the GPSr with TomTom Navigator version 6 on my iPaq, and it works very well. It's great to have the PDA and GPSr all together with no extra batteries or cords to worry about. I also bought a CF to PCMCIA adapter on Ebay so I can use the GPSr in my laptop with my mapping software if I so choose. The Holux cost about $50 on sale, not a bad price for a Sirf III reciever. I think it's a little slower than hooking my 60CSx up to my PDA, but not enough to make any practical difference.

[+Team MayCooper]

I have a Haicom 303 too, it is strictly limited to in-car duties, as it decreases my PocketPCs batterylife significantly, which is not a problem with 12V available in the car, but sucks in the field...

 

I have a Bluetooth GPSr too (Nemerix chipset) which has great batterylife, but bluetooth on my PocketPC isn't very batteryfriendly either, but it is less powerconsuming than the CF GPSr.

 

Another setup I regularly use is my Garmin Vista hooked up to my PocketPC. Biggest advantage of this setup is that both devices have their own powersupply, so batterylife on both devices is maximised.

[+rlridgeway]

I have seen fairly heated debates about which is better, a CF GPS receiver or a Bluetooth receiver.

 

GPS signal is not a part of the debate as reception is not a function whether its CF or Bluetooth.

 

The main argrument the CF crowd makes is that with a CF receiver connected to the PDA you are only dealing with one unit. With a bluetooth receiver there are two units to charge and keep track of.

The Bluetooth crowd agrues that the CF receivers drain the PDA's battery. But again, the Bluetooth drains its own juice and must be charged.

 

I have had both kinds, and I prefer the Bluetooth. My CF unit broke at the connecting plate and I believe the CF units are physically more fragile. The Bluetooth ones are pretty rugged. As far as battery life, the Bluetooth GPS lasts much longer than the PDA. The PDA is the weak link in this area.

With the reception of todays GPS units I am able to to have hands free GPSing by clipping my Bluetooth receiver on my belt and the PDA in my pocket while its running (hands free use can be done with the CF card also but it is a little more cumbersome).

 

No matter which one you get, I would suggest a receiver that has a Sirf III chipset. You can find several models of both Bluetooth and CF receivers at www.buygpsnow.com.

[+zacksba]

I have a Holux gr271 (sirf III) for my Axim X5. Works great for geocaching and on the road. I can go for a couple hours oin the 2200 mah battery and it gets me to 50% power on my pda. I nver used a BT one so I cannot compare to that, but I like what I am using for my needs.