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

Colorado location errors

Recommended Posts

Why would it matter? GPS receivers, are just that, radio receivers . . . passive devices. Their CPU's might radiate some EMI, but given their low power, not much.

People that have done testing have seen an affect on performance when units are close together. No idea why or if it happens with these units, but that is what others have found, so it is important to note when testing in case it changes the results.

Based on your reply, you fall into the Expert Opinion Class.

 

Modern receivers are designed not to generate energy in the frequencies they are trying to receive, for the obvious reason that it would interfere with the incoming signals. I would suspect the problem is that they physically block or attenuate signals from each other as much as causing RFI. The amount of electromagnetic energy from the transmitters that surround you ( commercial radio, cell phones, etc ) is probably much higher than that from the adjacent GPS unit.

Share this post


Link to post

I recorded another good round of tests this morning with the Colorado on the 2.8 GPS firmware. I also added the 60csx and Oregon to the mix. All three did pretty well although the 60csx had some 40'-50' drift. Probably because it was stuck in my back pocket whereas the other two were in my hands. PDOP was lower this morning with 7 satellites visible in the woods. I'm also losing foliage fast around here so the conditions aren't quite as challenging as they might have been several weeks ago.

 

Green = OR

Blue = CO

Red = 60csx

Yellow = Reference

 

http://garminoregon.wikispaces.com/file/de...CO_OR_60csx.png

 

GO$Rs

Share this post


Link to post

I just installed the 2.8 update and the unit seems to do things (menu pages, map draws)

 

One new problem I've been having for a month or so is that my field-notes will no longer upload, the GC page kept telling me 0 records found. I finally figured it out this past Sunday, it's leaving the GC off the beginning of the cache ID. When I put it there and saved the file it worked exactly how it's supposed to. Anyone else having this issue?

 

This is probably happening because you are using GSAK to load your files and you are stripping off the GC when you export to your Colorado. If you use the default GSAK export settings, or better yet, the very cool GSAK export macro you can avoid this issue.

Thanks! ;)

I figured it was something like that.

 

Yup.

Loaded up the new PQs last night and I had it set to %drop2 :)

Thanks G!

 

And as an update to the rest...Since 2.8 I've not had a single location error happen, even under dense tree cover. I've also noticed that I will now get a good sat. lock if I turn it on sitting here at my desk whereas before even if I'd had it on all day and walked in the door with a 9' EPE, if I put it down on the desk it would quickly lose the signals and beep at me that it's lost 'em.

Also, I'm 100% sure the boot up is happening a little more quickly than it used to. It had me conditioned to turn it on and then put it down and walk away for a minute while it loaded everything up. Since the update I've noticed that it's already at the map page by the time I'm reaching to put it down. The difference is substantial.

 

I don't think that newspaper is paper G...looks like it's an LCD ;)

Edited by SimbaJamey

Share this post


Link to post

Holy cow, 5 months after I bought it, the Colorado 400T is actually usable.

 

I went out Geocaching with my son. We brought the 400T and 60CSX along. In the past, the 400T was essentually useless for anything other than an electronic notepad. It was invariably way, way off.

 

Today, it nailed the four caches we found every time, and was pretty much completely in sync with the 60CSX.

 

So maybe I won't be selling it on ebay, after all... The latest update is a definite improvement.

Share this post


Link to post

Add my voice to the Colorado 400T owners that are happy with that 2.8 GPS software. It's like I just got a brand new GPS. Maybe I'll call this one the Garmin Denver.

 

Tracking is bang on and no more little spiders drawn on my display if I stop moving.

Share this post


Link to post

Three more tests from this weekend. Same key: Oregon (green), Colorado (blue) and 60csx (red).

 

http://garminoregon.wikispaces.com/file/de...CO_OR_60csx.png

http://garminoregon.wikispaces.com/file/de...CO_OR_60csx.png

http://garminoregon.wikispaces.com/file/de..._westford_1.png

 

The first two are on my normal test route. On 10/18 none of the GPS's did very well. I had good reception with 7 satellites most of the time but it seems like the constellation wasn't favorable. Lots of drift in the 50-70' range from all three units including the CO. Its hard for me to conclude much from this test since they all had problems.

 

On 10/20 the CO and 60csx were back to normal results, things looked pretty good with 8 satellites. The OR was located in the water bottle holder of my hip pack and I think this test points out the fact that the OR starts to degrade quickly if you aren't careful where/how you hold it. Both the 60csx and CO do pretty well located in the same open pocket but the OR gets a little sloppy. You can also see how much "track lag" the OR has, note the green waypoints are behind all of the red and blue points (I walk in counter-clockwise direction and drop these waypoints on all three units at the same time as I'm moving). Also note how the OR cuts the inside corner on most of the turns.

 

The last image is just a comparison of the three from a geocache I did this weekend. I thought it was interesting to see the reaction of all three units when searching for the two cache stages (WP1 and Final). The 60csx (red) is very jumpy -- lots of "spiders". The OR (green) doesn't move at all, it actually is almost too sluggish at low speeds, not updating frequently enough. The CO is a little jumpy although it seems to be a good compromise. Both the 60csx and CO had some small drift during the walk.

 

Nothing earth shattering here, but the CO continues to behave well with 2.8.

 

GO$Rs

Share this post


Link to post

You can also see how much "track lag" the OR has, note the green waypoints are behind all of the red and blue points (I walk in counter-clockwise direction and drop these waypoints on all three units at the same time as I'm moving). Also note how the OR cuts the inside corner on most of the turns.

 

I've noticed my Colorado and 76CSx both do this in the past. I think it's an averaging thing - the GPS doesn't just start averaging when you stop, it averages all the time. I'm not sure if it increases the number of points it averages when the EPE goes up.

 

When I'm out mapping on foot (my other GPS hobby), I've taken to stopping for a few seconds if I turn a sharp corner or if I mark a waypoint. This allows the average to "catch up". Before I realised what was going on, I had a few instances of walking the same track in both directions and wondering why waypoints marked on the way out (for gates, bridges, etc) didn't match up on the return journey - especially when under forest canopy.

 

I also had quite a few instances of walking past caches because the averaging made it look like I hadn't quite reached GZ yet. Again, mostly when under forest canopy. I've now taken to walking slower as I get close to GZ.

Share this post


Link to post
When I'm out mapping on foot (my other GPS hobby), I've taken to stopping for a few seconds if I turn a sharp corner or if I mark a waypoint. This allows the average to "catch up". Before I realised what was going on, I had a few instances of walking the same track in both directions and wondering why waypoints marked on the way out (for gates, bridges, etc) didn't match up on the return journey - especially when under forest canopy.

 

I also had quite a few instances of walking past caches because the averaging made it look like I hadn't quite reached GZ yet. Again, mostly when under forest canopy. I've now taken to walking slower as I get close to GZ.

 

I've found similar things mostly through hiding my first few caches. It's gotten me into the practice of taking types of 3 readings to average out coordinates to post.

First way, I stand at GZ holding the CO up over my head for a minute letting the EPE drop as low as it's going to and mark the point.

I also do walk-by waypoints, marking it as I walk slowly past the cache having started ~75' away in as straight a line as possible from different directions.

Then I do exactly what Crid was saying and walk up from ~75' out but stop and let it catch up for a couple of seconds before marking the waypoint. These three are almost always the closest to the 'average' I come up with. One of them is usually dead on but all have at least one of the 2 coordinates right and the other usually one off.

Share this post


Link to post

Speaking of averaging waypoints, (which Garmin has dropped the ball by omitting this feature from our Colorado!) I love this Wherigo cartridge called "Build your own GPSr" created by Geofellas.

 

Perhaps this is not the proper thread but felt it worthwhile to mention again. I've used this cartridge when placing caches with my 300 and the results are awesome and spot-on reliable.

Edited by Timpat

Share this post


Link to post

I was getting ready to call GPS Firmware 2.8 a complete success on the Colorado, and while it probably is still an improvement over 2.6, I'm still seeing drifts on the Colorado. Time will tell how frequently they occur.

 

http://www.gpsfix.net/?p=39

 

At least one other user on the Colorado wiki forums continues to see them as well, search down for posts by centocolli5526.

 

http://garmincolorado.wikispaces.com/messa...ew/home/6147171

 

GO$Rs

Share this post


Link to post

I had never had a location error problem at all. Then I upgraded to Chipset type M firmware v2.80. Crud. This sucks big time. It seems to happen when I select "Next Closest" after finding a geocache. THe darn thing jumps as far as 15 miles away. I recognize it and quite often it takes a power down, power up cycle to get it back on track. This NEVER happened to me before I upgraded the chipset firmware. I backed up my old Colorado onto an external hard drive but not my new replacement one (cracked screen from faulty carabiner). Went caching on Halloween day before I had to go to work (4pm-midnight). Hit 11 caches. Had to reboot about 4 times. Guess I have to live with it until a new update comes along.

Share this post


Link to post

That sounds like a potentially new problem, not the drift or location error issue. I'll try this tomorrow but I'm pretty sure I've done "find nexts" through a series of caches and never seen it do this.

 

GO$Rs

Share this post


Link to post

I did 30 caches today. No strange problems at all. No drifting, no jumping, no locking, worked perfectly all day. Two other in the group had them as well, without any problems that I know of.

 

I would try a hard reset and see if it still happens.

Share this post


Link to post

I went caching with my 400t again yesterday. Hit about 6 more caches. Had to reboot about 8 times. A few times it would jump as far away as 154 miles and stay there. I stayed away from the "Find Next Closest" tab so that is not it. I tried a hard reboot. For 20 minutes it displayed that I was in the heart of Toledo, Ohio even tho I was about 80 miles (straight line) North near Rawsonville, Michigan...and that was with a full compliment of locked in satellites. Even the slightest amount of tree cover inspires it to immediately jump an an arbitrary direction. And it leaves cookie trail lines when it does so. When I got done caching my tracks looked like rays from the sun stabbing out in every direction from my epicenter.

 

Note that this has only happened since I used Webupdater to upgrade to chipset type M V2.80. Oh how I wish I could go back to the stable platform I had prior to this update. It sickens me.

Share this post


Link to post

Sorry...

 

I have hit a number of caches in the past 2 weeks and re-checked old ones. I haven't seen even 1 drift issue beyond 30 feet or so and I have seen an occasional one that big on every unit I have used.

 

I find my Colorado to be the most stable of the units I currently own.

Share this post


Link to post

Yes, I must say that 2.80 seems to be a major improvement for me too. I haven't seen any big drifts with it, and I have done a fair amount of mapping with the Colorado since upgrading. I've seen small drifts, but that's to be expected with any civilian GPS. It may still be too early to declare it "fixed", but at the very least it's improved.

Share this post


Link to post

Well I finally did it today!! After nine months I went cold turkey today and left my 60CS at home and went caching with only my 400t. I did this because I have had no issues since the update. Had a great day finding two new puzzle caches. I really think the drift problem has been solved. I find the accuracy to be very good since the upgrade.

 

Anniebananie

Share this post


Link to post

Ha haa, I liked that. I was close to going cold turkey Tue with my 300! After 10 months, in my case, I almost left my 60Cx in the truck. But, had second thoughts and took it along just in case. Never even turned it on. I have been lucky logging near perfect tracklogs for some time now as compared to my trusty 60Cx. So, I too am getting closer to going cold turkey! Happy caching!

Share this post


Link to post

I think that just about says it all doesn't it?

 

Although I'll take my Oregon standalone, I don't with the Colorado although I'll admit with the latest update the Colorado works very well now. I have seen one relatively small drift in about a month.

 

I'd call it fixed but I still wouldn't call it better than the 60CSx.

 

GO$Rs

Share this post


Link to post

Well I am back to two-timing again (60cs & 400t). Twice last Sunday while on an nine mile cache hike I had 60-80 foot drift with the 400t. The other four cachers with 60csx's were over there and I was over here with the 400t!! This was the first time I have noticed it in two months. Today on a pre-winter maintenance run of three caches I own, I had another drift of 60 feet. Both times it came into compliance after cycling it on and off. This cannot continue. What do we have to do to get Garmin's attention? Please disregard my optomistic post of November 13.

 

Anniebananie

Share this post


Link to post

Well I am back to two-timing again (60cs & 400t). Twice last Sunday while on an nine mile cache hike I had 60-80 foot drift with the 400t. The other four cachers with 60csx's were over there and I was over here with the 400t!! This was the first time I have noticed it in two months. Today on a pre-winter maintenance run of three caches I own, I had another drift of 60 feet. Both times it came into compliance after cycling it on and off. This cannot continue. What do we have to do to get Garmin's attention? Please disregard my optomistic post of November 13.

 

Anniebananie

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...