Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 12
g-o-cashers

Colorado location errors

Recommended Posts

After using my CO 400t for the last two weeks I've been very pleased with the GPSr itself. I've seen no issues with grabbing and holding lock, EPE has always been sub 20', normally in the teens with a minimum of 5-6 satellites at good strength. I've been walking the same trail over and over since getting the CO and the track logs for each of these are right on top of each other (within 10-20'). So far so good, until this morning.

 

On the walk out everything looked fine. I went off onto some new trails and starting marking waypoints until I came back to the original trail. I noticed at that point my position didn't seem to match earlier walks but I went a little further to an intersection and I could see that my position on the map was way off based on the old tracks.

 

When I looked at the satellite page I was surprised to see the EPE in the 70-80' range. Based on my previous tracks I would estimate my position error was off by more than 300' ! At that point I stopped for a few minutes to see if things would settle out but there was no change. I had good strong lock on 7 satellites with one directly above, 3 at ~45 degrees and 2-3 closer to the horizon. I put the GPS in demo mode several times to see if that would bring it out of its funk but I got exactly the same results. Finally I power cycled the GPS and when it came back on I had EPE of 18 and the constellation/strength readings looked identical to me. My position on the map relative to previous tracks was exactly where I thought I should have been.

 

These issues will drive you nuts searching for a cache.

 

GO$Rs

Share this post


Link to post

Maybe Hillary was flying into your town for some stumping and they scrambled GPS for a spell!?

 

Just kidding, sorry to hear of this. I've been using my 300 for a week now doing similar things, both on road and walking some trails nearby. This weekend we're heading to Lake George to really test it out hiking, or snowshoeing hopefully. Mine has not shown this behavior at all and has been rock solid in positioning. I'm pleasantly surprised to see very even and consistent tracks, unlike my 60Cx at times that would show my tracks with 20-30 feet separation going up and back the same trail. My 300 has not shown this...yet.

 

Hopefully it just hiccuped and lost good signal for a bit even though it indicated a good SV configuration. I noticed my 300 held an indicated WAAS correction after losing the WAAS birds entirely for several minutes. I know the 60Cx will continue to apply corrections after losing a WAAS bird but this seemed quite a bit longer. Keep us posted if you see this again.

Share this post


Link to post

Hmmmmm.....I had a similar experience while caching with my Vista HCx about 9 months ago. I was reading 300 feet to the cache when it suddenly jumped to 1.4 miles from the cache and the "magic arrow" wanted me to change course from west to south-south-west. I was not able to resolve the issue with a restart, so I had to line of sight it and pace count to find the cache. Then again, the cache was in a lonely tree with nothing else within 150 feet.

 

When I got home, I pulled up the NOAA website and discovered my problem occured at the same time as a fairly large solar flare. I've not seen the problem since and I hope the problem you experienced is not widespread and does not pop up again.

Share this post


Link to post

you didn't have a second gps on walking, did you? That would be a great help solving this phenomen.

Maybe you have "luck" tomorow by doing the same again (but with a second one)

Edited by freeday

Share this post


Link to post
When I looked at the satellite page I was surprised to see the EPE in the 70-80' range.

Although unexplained, at least it was telling you something was up. When I'm hunting for a geocache, I always have the EPE as one of the display fields.

 

--Marky

Share this post


Link to post

Although unexplained, at least it was telling you something was up. When I'm hunting for a geocache, I always have the EPE as one of the display fields.

 

Yeah, I used to use the accuracy rings on my 60cs to help with this (so I didn't have to burn a data field on the map page), but the Colorado doesn't seem to support those either.

 

When I got home, I pulled up the NOAA website and discovered my problem occured at the same time as a fairly large solar flare. I've not seen the problem since and I hope the problem you experienced is not widespread and does not pop up again.

 

I could check but given that power cycling the CO seemed to fix the issue I'm assuming it was something with the GPS not the environment.

 

GO$Rs

Share this post


Link to post

 

I could check but given that power cycling the CO seemed to fix the issue I'm assuming it was something with the GPS not the environment.

 

GO$Rs

 

I checked the NOAA reports and there were no solar flares yesterday. There was only nominal sun spot activity but no alerts were issued. Proton and electron flux was not a factor and no major magnetic disturbances were reported. In summary, it was a clear "space weather" day.

Share this post


Link to post

Hey 3 Hawks......remember our conversation in another post the other day concerning Satellite avaibility programs? Trimble & Leica both have programs.

 

This above described occurrence is precisely the type of "mystery" that quite often can be logically explained. Conditions can change drastically within a 15 min period.

 

Perfect learning experience..........

Edited by Grasscatcher

Share this post


Link to post

Hey 3 Hawks......remember our conversation in another post the other day concerning Satellite avaibility programs? Trimble & Leica both have programs.

 

This above described occurrence is precisely the type of "mystery" that quite often can be logically explained. Conditions can change drastically within a 15 min period.

 

Perfect learning experience..........

 

I doubt the problem experienced by g-o-cachers had anything to do with satellite configuration. Therefore, the Trimble and Leica satellite tracking programs would not have helped. A 300-foot variation is extreme after ruling out naturally occurring "space weather." I'm thinking the Colorado just forgot where it was for a while and the restart sorted out the mess.

 

In my case, I experienced a Category 4, highly localized and intense, disturbance. I don't know what that means, but I know it is worse than Category 3. NOAA did not have any advisories out ahead of time and it was only noted after the fact. Once again, satellite configuration had nothing to do with the "space weather" incident.

 

I have a feeling that since the Colorado is a very sensitive piece of equipment, it will need to be recalibrated often so it doesn't forget where it is. I recalibrate my Vista HCx at the start of a caching day and after every battery change to avoid odd behavior. The more sensitive the receiver, the more critical the need for accurate and frequent calibration.

 

I wonder if g-o-cachers noted if the internal clock on the Colorado was off a bit when the symptoms presented?? Could a clock error result in a positional error??

Share this post


Link to post

 

I doubt the problem experienced by g-o-cachers had anything to do with satellite configuration. Therefore, the Trimble and Leica satellite tracking programs would not have helped. A 300-foot variation is extreme after ruling out naturally occurring "space weather." I'm thinking the Colorado just forgot where it was for a while and the restart sorted out the mess.

 

I wonder if g-o-cachers noted if the internal clock on the Colorado was off a bit when the symptoms presented?? Could a clock error result in a positional error??

 

I checked the Leica software for the time and location I was in yesterday and it was actually pretty good. I'll have to check the trackpoints to see if anything was up with the time, but I haven't seen this problem on my 400t.

 

GO$Rs

Share this post


Link to post

G-O-C

Can you post the time & location coordinates (also time zone) when the error occurred? I'll also check it with the Trimble planning and also with GPS Pathfinder.

 

Looking for high PDOP /GDOP

Share this post


Link to post

This issue is quickly becoming least favorite aspect of the Colorado. I'm RMA'ing my unit for other reasons but I'll be curious to see if a new unit behaves the same way. I've heard from other people on this board and the wiki that they are seeing similar problems -- especially once they start paying attention to it.

 

Here's a link to an album that has screen shots of a failure sequence.

 

At around 9:10a I turned on the unit and walked into the woods. Signal conditions were challenging however the CO never lost signal. At some point I came out from under the pines into a very open hardwood forest to a waypoint ("Red Red" on the screen shots). As I arrived at the waypoint around 9:20a I noticed my position was off by >430' with 6 satellites. I waited for 18 minutes for things to settle out and the best I got was still around 80' off with 11 satellites. At around the 18 minute mark I restarted the Colorado and my distance to the waypoint was immediately 16' when I restarted.

 

I'm pretty confident of my test waypoints since I mark them with multiple units and average them over multiple visits. I've walked by this waypoint many times and normally I'm within a few feet.

 

The same thing happened to me geocaching the other day and it is frustrating because GPS accuracy can be in the 30-60' range and the GPS strength meter is at 5 bars. In an unfamiliar place I have no idea how far off I really am so I search, find nothing, reset the unit and find out I'm 100'-200' away from where I should be.

 

GO$Rs

Share this post


Link to post

This is scary! If these problems keep up, I think I'll return my unit and go with a 60CSx. I haven't had a chance yet to field test my exchanged 300, going on vacation and will have to wait until I return!

Share this post


Link to post

My 300 seems to be working great with the new update. I haven't read every post on the Colorado, but I am wondering if most of the Colorado users that are having problems with things like boot up and location errors are using a 300 or 400???? I am not sure why or if it should matter, but perhaps there is something different in the original firmware...

Edited by Evshro & son

Share this post


Link to post

After using my CO 400t for the last two weeks I've been very pleased with the GPSr itself. I've seen no issues with grabbing and holding lock, EPE has always been sub 20', normally in the teens with a minimum of 5-6 satellites at good strength. I've been walking the same trail over and over since getting the CO and the track logs for each of these are right on top of each other (within 10-20'). So far so good, until this morning.

 

On the walk out everything looked fine. I went off onto some new trails and starting marking waypoints until I came back to the original trail. I noticed at that point my position didn't seem to match earlier walks but I went a little further to an intersection and I could see that my position on the map was way off based on the old tracks.

 

When I looked at the satellite page I was surprised to see the EPE in the 70-80' range. Based on my previous tracks I would estimate my position error was off by more than 300' ! At that point I stopped for a few minutes to see if things would settle out but there was no change. I had good strong lock on 7 satellites with one directly above, 3 at ~45 degrees and 2-3 closer to the horizon. I put the GPS in demo mode several times to see if that would bring it out of its funk but I got exactly the same results. Finally I power cycled the GPS and when it came back on I had EPE of 18 and the constellation/strength readings looked identical to me. My position on the map relative to previous tracks was exactly where I thought I should have been.

 

These issues will drive you nuts searching for a cache.

 

GO$Rs

 

That same thing happened to me looking for a cache. But it happened only that one time. It really made me mad with the unit, but so far it hasn't reoccured. My EPE was at 49 for no apparent reason. Normally its about 15-18. I thought it might be due to sunspot activity but I think its the unit.

Share this post


Link to post

Hi all,

 

I've been following this thread (and most of the other Colorado ones, too), and have noticed the complaints about large position errors/offsets, and how often it requires a reset to get the reported position to "snap back" to the correct position.

 

I haven't heard it mentioned, yet, but usually this sort of issue is a symptom of the software in the GPS chipset itself, not the "application" software that Garmin writes. From personal experience working in the GPS industry (including with the company from which SiRF was an offshoot from, and later a company that used SiRF products in its own GPS-enabled devices), I know that this is the way functionality is usually implemented.

 

Therefore, I suspect that these problems are a result of the GPS chipset that Garmin is now using instead of the SiRF Star III. It seems like the SiRF Star III seems to be the chipset of choice for many (maybe most?) commercial GPS-enabled devices. Indeed, Garmin used to (and still does) use it for many or most of their devices.

 

I'm guessing that the new GPS chipset was chosen partially because it was cheaper than the SiRF offering.

 

Does anyone else think that Garmin choosing a less capable or perhaps just more error-prone GPS chipset for the Colorado was a mistake? Is the choice of GPS chipset the root of these positional error problems that are being reported? Just a thought...

 

BTW, one of SiRF's claims to fame was its industry-leading acquisition times. At the time, this was due to the massive use of parallel hardware correlators. Some of this design was patented, so I'm wondering if the slower acquisition times of the Colorada might also be due to Garmin's choice of a different GPS chipset.

 

 

George

 

P.S. When I working with the company that was making GPS-enabled devices, we only had the SiRF Star II chipset available at the time. We evaluated a few different chipsets, and despite its somewhat higher price, ended up choosing SiRF due to its superior performance. Seems like the III version continues to be a leader in the industry. Also, I no longer work in the GPS industry, so have kind of lost track of SiRF's product line. Also, though I worked in GPS and GPS-related companies for a *long* time, I should also mention that I have no vested interest in SiRF or any other GPS companies. i.e. I'm not a SiRF shill or anything... :laughing:

Share this post


Link to post

I have had my 400t for about two months. Despite some of the same issues others on this board have had I have had no accuracy problems until yeaterday. On a return visit to a cache I had DNF'd on Tuesday, the 400t had GZ 350 feet from where it was the day before. My 60cs was dead on with the previous GZ. After turning the 400t off & on it registered the 'correct" location (the same as the 60CS).

 

Today my wife and I were out for a day of caching and a similar thing happened; three times out of thirteen caches the 400t was off by more that 300 feet while the two 60CS's we have were 17 feet from GZ with a 14' epe. Powering off did the same thing as it did yesterday, it corrected the GZ to a similar reading of the 60CS.

 

How can we be sure the distance is correct if it is right sometimes and wrong at others? Will I have to use the 60cs when I approach gz? This is beginning to become very frustrating.

 

Anniebananie

Share this post


Link to post

Happened to me again today, except this morning I was off by .14 miles!!! Quick power cycle and I was back to within 30'. I'm going to call Garmin with this one, because I can almost reproduce it at will. To me it feels like this got worse in 2.51 but I would agree with george_k, this is probably a function of the GPS firmware and chipset, probably not the Garmin software.

 

We'll see what Garmin has to say.

 

GO$Rs

Share this post


Link to post

Although I only had one for about two weeks back in Feb, just after 2.4 was released, I had the same accuracy issue occur twice and my 60CSx was dead on. At the time, I didn't power-cycle to try an reset it. I just turned it off after checking to see if I had done something wrong. The second time it happened, it was the final issue that pushed me to return it.

Share this post


Link to post

I have had this issue as well for me it appears to only happen when the battery level is less than 25% (~2 bars). Power cycling always corrects the problem as does calibrating the internal compas. I have had the same issue with my Vista HCx in that case using the "Recalculate" function corrected it. I suspect that if the 400t had something like that the problem would be a mere anoyance. Perhaps switching profiles would correct it, not sure I will try the next time it happens.

Share this post


Link to post

I submitted this issue to Garmin today over the phone but unfortunately we didn't make much progress. Tech support agreed it was a problem and they are "sending it to engineering". We'll see if there is any follow up.

 

GO$Rs

Share this post


Link to post

I submitted this issue to Garmin today over the phone but unfortunately we didn't make much progress. Tech support agreed it was a problem and they are "sending it to engineering". We'll see if there is any follow up.

 

GO$Rs

 

If you read this thread:

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=186593

You will see since the last update HCx users are experiencing almost identical problems. This update included a frimware change to the GPS chip (which unfortunately seems difficult to reverse) I believe the Colorado and the

HCx have the same GPS chip- correct?

My guess is another firmware update is needed.

Share this post


Link to post

I submitted this issue to Garmin today over the phone but unfortunately we didn't make much progress. Tech support agreed it was a problem and they are "sending it to engineering". We'll see if there is any follow up.

 

GO$Rs

 

Has anyone noticed if this problem still occurs with the new beta update? I also had this same problem last weekend, which was my first time really using the Colorado, and I have since updated to the beta but have not attempted to use the Colorado since the update. Is it still a problem with the latest update?

Share this post


Link to post

I submitted this issue to Garmin today over the phone but unfortunately we didn't make much progress. Tech support agreed it was a problem and they are "sending it to engineering". We'll see if there is any follow up.

 

GO$Rs

 

Has anyone noticed if this problem still occurs with the new beta update? I also had this same problem last weekend, which was my first time really using the Colorado, and I have since updated to the beta but have not attempted to use the Colorado since the update. Is it still a problem with the latest update?

 

Yes, I saw it this morning and I'm running 2.51.

 

Interesting comments about the HCx. I'll have to look into it a little bit more, the Colorado uses a MediaTek MTK 3318, I think I remember reading the HCx uses the same.

 

GO$Rs

Share this post


Link to post

The latest gps software is 2.60 that was released with firmware 2.4. Beta 2.51 didn't come with updated gps software. Hopefully the next release will be fully released and will contain both... Probably no news, but I thought worth the mention.

 

I get frustrated by the "wandering around" that I see with my 400t. Zoom in to 20ft and observe the track that accumulates over time. I've seen spikes out at least 100 ft. It gets to be frustrating as well when near a cache where one second you are zero'd out and the next second you're 15 ft. away in an arbitrary direction. A second later you're 10 ft. away in a different direction. GRRRRR!

Edited by geokitebuggy

Share this post


Link to post

The latest gps software is 2.60 that was released with firmware 2.4.

 

Interesting- 2.60 is the latest gps firmware for the legend and vista HCx series and they are complaining of the same issues.

Share this post


Link to post

Agreed. I spent some time yesterday reading the eTrex H series thread linked above and there are definitely people complaining about similar issues as we are seeing on the CO. The chipsets (MediaTek MTK MT3318) seem to be the same in the CO, eTrex H and some of the Nuvi line. I'm guessing the GPS software (currently 2.6) is exactly the same binary. Searching through the binary image on the Colorado I see text strings like "Nuvi" which leads me to believe that they are probably interchangeable. I'm guessing only Vista and Colorado owners are seeing the issues related to stationary or walking-speed navigation since my on road experience with the Colorado has been very good, probably similar to a Nuvi using the same GPS chipset.

 

GpsPasSion also has a lot of interesting data about the eTrex H series Vista which I haven't waded through yet.

 

There is also a long thread on GpsPasSion about the MTK chipset here. Most of it is around the MTK chipset (not sure if it is the MT3318) in bluetooth "pucks" but some if the discussion in that thread around the "static navigation" or "low speed bug" sounds like it could be the same thing that is showing up on the Colorado and eTrex H's.

 

GO$Rs

Share this post


Link to post

Here's another data point on the Colorado location error issue.

 

I've been seeing this problem since day one but it definitely started happening more recently. I assumed it might either the upgrade to 2.51 or the fact that foliage is coming out in this area making reception more challenging.

 

This week I was running some comparisons with my 60cs and I had the backlight turned off because I wanted to see if my original impression of the CO screen as compared to the 60cs was still the same (it was, but that's not the point here).

 

However, I did notice that I didn't see any position errors, my GPS accuracy was much tighter and my tracks are much more consistent over the same route. I've now used it on the same hike for three more days with the backlight off and I still haven't seen position errors and I don't think I've seen GPS accuracy jump over 20' the entire time. My map screen shows a nice well defined track plot where I walked this week whereas in past weeks it started to look like a giant hairball.

 

While this certainly isn't conclusive I do feel like the CO is acting more like it did when I first bought it -- and back then I wasn't using backlight either and if I did it was turned way down. It would explain the change in behavior.

 

I'm going to keep playing with it but I would be curious if anyone else sees similar results based on your backlight settings?

 

GO$Rs

Share this post


Link to post
This post reports a similar issue, with a purely speculative explanation, in situations where power management and automatic backlight dimming come into play. The poster is using alkaline batteries, which I'm sure you are not. It's something of a rant, but there is just enough of a rationale to make it worth considering the possibility that backlight use disrupts the power supply, which causes problems.

Share this post


Link to post

Thanks twolpert, I missed that one. It does sound like a similar issue. I am using 2700mAh NiMH's.

 

GO$Rs

Share this post


Link to post

Had exactly the same issues today as outlined by g-o-casher. Have to recalibrate the compass every outing or it just sticks on the approach to a cache and then jumps. Will try tomorrow on the trail with no backlight and report back.

Couple of quick questions which I will ask here rather than a new post as they are linked:

1) How do you download tracks? I cant get mapsource, GPS trackmaker or memorymap to recognise the CO to download them

2) How do you download the screenshots as posted in a previous reply to this thread?

 

Thanks in advance.

Share this post


Link to post

2) How do you download the screenshots as posted in a previous reply to this thread?

 

Thanks in advance.

 

 

I can do the screenshots one, just hold in the right soft key, for a few seconds and it takes a screen shot. I use it for trig points (similar to the US benchmarks.) The navigate into your CO when connected to your pc, and there is a folder with them inside, not sure of its name from memory.

Share this post


Link to post

I have successfully downloaded tracks from the Colorado to MapSource without any issues. When you plug in the Colorado, you may (depending on how long it takes) see a message which indicates that the Colorado is exporting track data (don't remember the exact wording of this message). When you receive from the device, MapSource gives you separate options for downloading waypoints, tracks and routes. Be sure to check the box for tracks. That has always worked for me.

 

Internally, I THINK (have not actually verified) that the export process adds the tracks to the current.gpx file.

Share this post


Link to post

After noticing that some of my Colorado accuracy issues might be related to use of backlighting I ran a comparison with backlight on and backlight off. This album shows two images. One image is of the track logs (black) when I had backlight off and the other is of track logs (red) when I was using full backlight.

 

I'm still not 100% convinced, but if after another week I don't see any reception issues with the backlight off I think I'll be time for another chat with tech support.

 

If people are seeing accuracy problems with the Colorado I would recommend turning off the backlight to see if that fixes the issue.

 

GO$Rs

Edited by g-o-cashers

Share this post


Link to post

What's the topography like in this area? And I assume the tracks with and without backlight were taken at roughly the same time?

Share this post


Link to post

What's the topography like in this area? And I assume the tracks with and without backlight were taken at roughly the same time?

 

It is relatively flat terrain, the variation along the loop is probably not much more than 50'. Most of it is along the side of a gradual slope so the horizon to the west is pretty high esp for the east side of the track. The canopy is varied but it is all under some type of cover. There are several sections with large pines that make reception difficult, the balance is mostly hardwoods with leaves that are just coming out.

 

These tracks were not taken at the same time. In each image contains 6-8 tracks over the same route taken over 1 week. Granted the best thing to do would be to run this test with two COs at the same time (or compare with a 60csx) but I don't have either available right now, just a 60cs which I feel isn't a good baseline.

 

GO$Rs

Share this post


Link to post

OK, now I just have to try this. Since power supply might be an issue, please post your backlight duration, compass, WAAS, north up/track up, and map zoom settings. I don't have anything to test against other than an old GPS III+, which won't provide much of a comparison. But I can repeatedly try a large loop on flat ground with light cover -- just to see if we can eliminate any of the variables. Or see if it's a common problem or unit-specific.

 

BTW, do you also get larger than normal EPE? Or just location errors?

Share this post


Link to post

We are in a unique position as we have two Colorado 400t's. We cache everyday because we are keeping an active streak going. I can tell that our two GPS units are never in agreement, or for that matter even close to one another. They are normally at least 25' off from one another and a lot of the time this goes out to 100' or so.

I had written off the signal bouncing to the sats but the more I have read the forums on this issue I can tell you that I am seeing the same thing as others. I have taken my CO and my 60cs out for a cache and as others have stated the 60 held firm without bouncing and the CO bounced constantly. For those that will ask how many cell phones I was carrying etc. It does not matter, the results are the same.

Share this post


Link to post

Celtic Cacher,

 

Do you use the backlight on both of your CO's? If so, would be possible to run one with backlight and one without for a few days to see how they compare?

 

GO$Rs

Share this post


Link to post

BTW, do you also get larger than normal EPE? Or just location errors?

 

Both. Once I notice that my track is starting to wander from known good tracks/waypoints I'll see "GPS Accuracy" start to creep up above 35'-40'. If I see it in the 50-100' range I can almost guarantee I'm seeing the problem. My observed error in these cases is usually in the range of 200'-500' but I've seen it is high as 700' with GPS Accuracy of 100'.

 

I've been watching GPS Accuracy a lot this past week with the backlight off. I haven't seen it above 25' the entire week. Similar results again this morning. I had my 60cs along for the walk and it was losing signal all over the place (not uncommon in this type of cover) but the Colorado with backlight off never got above 20' and held a nice tight track relative to previous tracks and known good waypoints.

 

GO$Rs

Share this post


Link to post

BTW, do you also get larger than normal EPE? Or just location errors?

 

Both. Once I notice that my track is starting to wander from known good tracks/waypoints I'll see "GPS Accuracy" start to creep up above 35'-40'. If I see it in the 50-100' range I can almost guarantee I'm seeing the problem. My observed error in these cases is usually in the range of 200'-500' but I've seen it is high as 700' with GPS Accuracy of 100'.

 

I've been watching GPS Accuracy a lot this past week with the backlight off. I haven't seen it above 25' the entire week. Similar results again this morning. I had my 60cs along for the walk and it was losing signal all over the place (not uncommon in this type of cover) but the Colorado with backlight off never got above 20' and held a nice tight track relative to previous tracks and known good waypoints.

 

GO$Rs

 

I have to admit to being surprised that the Colorado was holding it's signal better than the 60cs! We constantly get the impression that the Colorado has location errors and the 60 series is always superior from the many postings that arise on this topic.

Share this post


Link to post

I have to admit to being surprised that the Colorado was holding it's signal better than the 60cs! We constantly get the impression that the Colorado has location errors and the 60 series is always superior from the many postings that arise on this topic.

 

I'm not sure if the 60cs (no "x") is better or worse, it is different. I've carried the CO and 60cs side-by-side over the last week and I will say that with the backlight off the Colorado has been much much better. With the backlight turned on it is a different story. The 60cs does drop signal much more easily than the CO and at times it will show me much larger EPE but I can trust what it tells me. My concerns with the CO behavior are really twofold:

 

1) The first, obviously, is the fact it gets into this mode where it gets "stuck" with a certain level of inaccuracy and the fact that returning to good signal conditions doesn't eliminate the error unless you are willing to wait 20-30 minutes or power cycle.

 

2) The second issue is the fact I can't rely on other indicators like loss of signal alerts or EPE to know when it is in this bad state. The only reason I'm aware of it is because I compare my location to "known good" waypoints. Obviously this isn't going to be the case 90% of the time and I might never be aware of it when I really care about it (ie. seeking a cache or searching for a trail or land feature).

 

GO$Rs

Share this post


Link to post

You might also want to take note of the battery type when testing is done. I have not seen these types of location errors when using lithium or alkaline batteries even when using the backlight. I don't currently have any rechargeables to test (my last set were lost with my trusty 60csx). The lower voltage of the rechargeables might contribute to this issue.

 

I plan to get some new rechargeables since its starting to warm up in the mountains and I wont need lithiums for the cold. I'll report back if I see any issues.

Share this post


Link to post

Given the issue might be power related NiMH batteries could be a necessary component to reproduce the problem. I haven't used anything other than NiMH in either case, 2700mAh Maha's.

 

GO$Rs

Share this post


Link to post

Given the issue might be power related NiMH batteries could be a necessary component to reproduce the problem. I haven't used anything other than NiMH in either case, 2700mAh Maha's.

I am also using 2700 mAh Maha NiMH. Gave up on alkaline because I could never get more than 2 or 3 hours out of a pair. Never got around to trying lithium.

 

How about other power-sucking options? Compass, WAAS, track up?

Share this post


Link to post

I generally try to conserve power as much as possible. No compass, WAAS, or track up, and i only use the backlight after dark (I don't have a problem seeing the screen in the day). I also leave it on the trip computer when I'm not looking at it so the processor doesn't have to work as hard updating the map, and there are less pixels changing on the screen. I use it mostly for mountaineering and hiking so I only check the map a couple times in an average day. I average 25-27 hours on lithiums and 18-20 hours with costco alkalines.

 

I'll try some tests with all the power hungry options enabled to see if this will cause the problem on my unit.

Share this post


Link to post

I had the following options set during my tests when I saw the problems:

 

- Backlight: on full (no auto shutoff)

- WAAS: off

- Compass: off

- Orientation: Track Up

- Tones: off

- Visible page: Map or Odometer

 

GO$Rs

Share this post


Link to post

Here's another image from the gallery.

 

It superimposes tracks from three different sources:

 

60cs: Green

Colorado w/o backlight: Blue

Colorado w/backlight: Red

 

The image shows about 7-9 different tracks from each source over as many days.

 

GO$Rs

 

colorado%20tracklog.jpg

Edited by g-o-cashers

Share this post


Link to post

What map are you using? If you are using TopoUSA 2008 that came with the Colorado, remember it is only a 1:100000 NOT the 1:24000 with NGM's. With the 1:100000 your accuracy looking on the map could be off by as much as 400 feet and nothing you can do about that. You will have to rely on the Lat/Long in this case. I've been using my Colorado since 15th of March and I love it for caching. I am having no problems in my finds or it's accuracy. Steve :huh:

Share this post


Link to post

The issues are don't have anything to do with Topo2008 inaccuracies. My references are waypoints that I've marked with multiple units and averaged over many days.

 

GO$Rs

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 12

×
×
  • Create New...