Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 18
g-o-cashers

Garmin Oregon Wiki

Recommended Posts

What I don't like is that I can't seem to select a geocache that's on the screen and "go to" it. I need to select the Geocache button and find the cache that I want to find. Plus the geocache name doesn't show on the screen ( I'm sure that this will be fixed tho ).

 

Are you using the 2.2 software? Geocache names/GCIDs not showing up on the map page is a bug but at least in 2.2 I can select a geocache from the map using the red pin, select the cache by pressing the button up top and then hit Go.

 

GO$Rs

Share this post


Link to post

When I first saw the Oregon I just about soiled my pants. Now, my B-day was about two days after the Oregon was set loose on the public and the next occasion for me to receive a gift will be in December. I cannot wait, so I'm just going to buy me one, but my dilemma is between the 300 and 400T. I checked the Wiki and other comparisons charts, and the only real difference I see is the Topo chart. I own the '08 Garmin Topo maps DVD. So, it is better to save 100 smackers and get the 300 (plus I like the orange color) and just upload my current Topo maps or is there some advantage worth 100 smackers that the 400T has that I am unaware. Thanks in advance for your opinions!

 

Even though this FAQ is for the Colorado, the decision you making will be the same for the Oregon.

 

GO$Rs

Share this post


Link to post

What I don't like is that I can't seem to select a geocache that's on the screen and "go to" it. I need to select the Geocache button and find the cache that I want to find. Plus the geocache name doesn't show on the screen ( I'm sure that this will be fixed tho ).

 

Are you using the 2.2 software? Geocache names/GCIDs not showing up on the map page is a bug but at least in 2.2 I can select a geocache from the map using the red pin, select the cache by pressing the button up top and then hit Go.

 

GO$Rs

Ahhh, thank you VERY much for that hint. Yes, just press on the cache name, duh!

 

Yup, on 2.2, thanks again for the hint.

Share this post


Link to post

I only saw this happen a few times on Sunday, so it was reproducible yesterday! I'll see if it happens again.

Did you upgrade to 2.2 after Sunday? I remember seeing more problems like this on 2.1.

 

I upgarded to the 2.2 software on Friday afternoon. I saw all of the problems on Sunday using the 2.2 software (using freshly charged PowerEx 2700 mAh batteries).

 

I'll email Garmin a list of problems I've seen so far.

 

Thanks

Share this post


Link to post

Given the issues with the CO, have any of the new OR owners been game to test the OR in water?

 

I've seen the comments about the seals looking better but was wondering if anyone has put their OR in water to test it.

Share this post


Link to post

Given the issues with the CO, have any of the new OR owners been game to test the OR in water?

 

I've seen the comments about the seals looking better but was wondering if anyone has put their OR in water to test it.

 

New OR owners should have full confidence and not hesitate to take the plunge!

Share this post


Link to post

Given the issues with the CO, have any of the new OR owners been game to test the OR in water?

 

I've seen the comments about the seals looking better but was wondering if anyone has put their OR in water to test it.

 

Yes, the warranty is still valid.

Share this post


Link to post

Given the issues with the CO, have any of the new OR owners been game to test the OR in water?

 

I've seen the comments about the seals looking better but was wondering if anyone has put their OR in water to test it.

 

New OR owners should have full confidence and not hesitate to take the plunge!

 

Colorado leaks, so why wouldn't the Oregon too with a similar form factor?

Edited by ryguyMN

Share this post


Link to post

Colorado leaks, so why wouldn't the Oregon too with a similar form factor?

 

1) The Colorados don't leak... There was a bad batch of O-rings in some early units....

 

2) The Oregon battery compartment design is completely different. They have nothing in common.

Share this post


Link to post

When selecting custom POIs I notice that I cannot select a custom database ... is this correct?

 

I had just copied my several POI files from my Colorado to my Oregon. They show up on the PIO list but I can't seem to be able to select a particular POI database.

 

Is this correct ( and if it's already in the Wiki I'm gonna scream )?

Share this post


Link to post

Not on the Oregon but I saw this on the Colorado. I believe it happens the first time the unit needs to create an archived tracklog (i.e. [drive]:\Garmin\GPX\Archive). I'm guessing if you look the Archive folder will have been created and you'll have a file called 1.gpx inside.

 

I've never seen the message again and I've wrapped around (20 file max limit) on my Colorado.

 

GO$Rs

Hmmm, I am getting this message ( "Memory Full" ) a bit more, seemingly every time that I boot up my unit.

 

A also got it driving home yesterday, no routing occurring.

 

Anyone else getting this?

 

edit : seems to occur with the microSD card out as well

Edited by nicolo

Share this post


Link to post

There's a guy over at gpsinformation.net who is seeing the same thing. It might be good to compare notes.

 

http://www.gpsinformation.biz/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=6214

 

BTW, if you look at your Oregon in explorer how big is the disk and the free space?

 

GO$Rs

I think that it was some kind of re-seating issue. Once I put my microSD card back in, the error no longer appeared. That doesn't explain why the error showed up when the microSD card was out of the unit.

Share this post


Link to post

The last of my first impressions :anitongue:

 

http://garminoregon.wikispaces.com/First+Impressions

 

GO$Rs

 

After reading your last first impressions, I've decided that my Oregon may be going back to the store for a refund. I too have seen the same issue with the odometer. One thing I can not tolerate is an inaccurate Odometer. I realize that an odometer is not critical to most of the Geocachers out there, but I value it highly. I guess I just got used to my 60scx. maybe I shouldn't even be venting on this forum because what i really need is a an accurate GPS for my biking escapades and an accurate odometer is paramount.

 

My experiences with the Colorado (same issue) and now the Oregon have really soured my respect for Garmin.

 

I guess I just expected every new unit from them to be perfect. This has been three disappointments in a row for me. (I salivated over the Forerunner 405 , went to buy one and realized the thing wouldn't even fit on my wrist.) Then the issues with the Colorado. I feel that the most accurate handheld GPS out there is one that I just sold - the 60scx.

 

Sorry to be so negative tonight, but these are my honest opinions.

 

Could someone please try to cheer me up and suggest that the odometer issue might be able to be fixed with a firmware upgrade? Please!!!

Edited by schmidtbaby

Share this post


Link to post

Some logics

 

If the odometer is not fixed on the CO by now, it might look somewhat bad for any improvement in the future, including the OR.

If the odometer is fixed on the CO, that's a good sign for the OR.

 

If they're not able to fix it in firmware, it has to be a hardware, hardwired, problem, in my opinion.

 

They can fix everything with av combination of new hardware and firmware, in new revisions of the models.

 

There was a odometer problem in my new eTrex Vista HCx. They fixed in firmware, but the Vista HCx has a different hardware than the CO and OR.

Edited by OttoLund

Share this post


Link to post

Some logics

 

If the odometer is not fixed on the CO by now, it might look somewhat bad for any improvement in the future, including the OR.

If the odometer is fixed on the CO, that's a good sign for the OR.

 

If they're not able to fix it in firmware, it has to be a hardware, hardwired, problem, in my opinion.

 

They could fix anything with av combination of new hardware and firmware, in new revisions of the models.

 

Not to derail the OR discussion but I find that my 60csx and CO odometers are almost identical -- off by <2% except when the CO has a drift.

 

GO$Rs

Share this post


Link to post

You guys are crazy... The 60Csx odometer sucks just as badly. Such is the life of high sensitivity GPSrs. If you are on a bike, use a cycle computer. No need for satellites.

Share this post


Link to post

You guys are crazy... The 60Csx odometer sucks just as badly. Such is the life of high sensitivity GPSrs. If you are on a bike, use a cycle computer. No need for satellites.

 

Red90,

 

I hate to admit it, but You have a good point with the cycle computer. My Cat-eye computer is simple and always works fine. Maybe I'm expecting too much with these purported do-it-all GPSs. (Even though I do think at times at times you're a little fervent with the defense of the CO :anitongue: I do appreciate your advice on these forums.

 

Aside from the Odometer issue, I like the the Oregon so far. Maybe i should just start enjoying it as a Geocacher device and quit being so picky.

 

Thanks for the advice.

Edited by schmidtbaby

Share this post


Link to post

If the feature is there, then it should work properly, or what's the purpose of having it???

Share this post


Link to post

If the feature is there, then it should work properly, or what's the purpose of having it???

 

It "does" work properly. The problem is that if you stop in an area with a lot of multipath, the unit keeps trying to find where you are and this results in movement on the GPS that is not real. It has no way to know if you really are moving or not. You "could" design it to only change position with large moevement, but then it would be useless for its intended purpose as a GPS.

Share this post


Link to post

You guys are crazy... The 60Csx odometer sucks just as badly. Such is the life of high sensitivity GPSrs. If you are on a bike, use a cycle computer. No need for satellites.

 

I guess I don't follow why the high sensitivity receiver would make the odometer worse?

 

Over the test loop I use I record the distance of the tracklogs and the odometer, I compare that to a hand averaged track over that course. The 60csx tracklog and odometer are almost identical and they are about 3% longer than my hand created track on average. That sort of made sense to me because the GPS bounces around a little when I stop 4 times for 30 seconds to take waypoints. I'm guessing if I didn't stop it would be almost exact. The Colorado behaves the same way when the GPS isn't drifting. It isn't quite as dependable as the 60csx but well within the margin of error. Like I mentioned above the OR is always short on both the track and odometer, around 15% on the odometer.

 

GO$Rs

Share this post


Link to post

I guess I don't follow why the high sensitivity receiver would make the odometer worse?

 

They USE the reflected signals and crazy math to determine position. In bad reception areas, this results is a lot of drift since the reflections vary a lot, which the unit shows as movement. "Traditional" receivers did not use weak signals as they assumed the weak signals were multipath. Drift was less, but accuracy in position was lower.

 

They can dumb down the odometer to ignore small movements, but then accuracy is lost on paths where there are lots of twists and turns. It is all a big trade off, and in the end, regardless of what they do, someone will come on here and complain. There are endless threads on odometer accuracy. GPSrs are not the best thing to use as odometers in poor reception areas. That bike wheel is much better.

Share this post


Link to post

If the drift results in a walking speed increase from 2.5 km/h to 43 km/h, the GPSr firmware should be able to detect the error. Is the drift constant, ie forms a continous path with no big speed changes, or does it give sudden big changes in position?

Edited by OttoLund

Share this post


Link to post

If the drift results in a walking speed increase from 2.5 km/h to 43 km/h, the GPSr firmware should be able to detect the error. Is the drift constant, ie forms a continous path with no big speed changes, or does it give sudden big changes in position?

No one has reported wide speed variation during the drift. This problem is characterized by a gradually increasing error between your reported position and your actual position as you walk. For example, in walking a few tenths of a mile, the unit may build up as much as 600 or 700 feet of error. During the drift, the unit reports much higher than normal EPE (as much as 100 feet or more). The only way to clear the situation appears to be to power-cycle the unit.

Share this post


Link to post

No one has reported wide speed variation during the drift. This problem is characterized by a gradually increasing error between your reported position and your actual position as you walk. For example, in walking a few tenths of a mile, the unit may build up as much as 600 or 700 feet of error. During the drift, the unit reports much higher than normal EPE (as much as 100 feet or more). The only way to clear the situation appears to be to power-cycle the unit.

If it's possible to clear the situation by a power-cycle, it's possible to fix this drift error in the firmware. If that's the case, the only way for us customers to clear this situation permanently is to wait for a new firmware release :laughing: What is Garmin waiting for?, until they're back from their summer vacation? :laughing:

Edited by OttoLund

Share this post


Link to post

If it's possible to clear the situation by a power-cycle, it's possible to fix this drift error in the firmware. If that's the case, the only way for us customers to clear this situation permanently is to wait for a new firmware release :laughing: What is Garmin waiting for?, until they're back from their summer vacation? :laughing:

Apparently Garmin is waiting to realize that it IS a problem. Not everyone experiences the problem. Those who do see it can repeat it fairly often (but not, as I understand it, on demand) in certain locations. The problem has apparently existed since 2.40 and was not fixed in 2.51b, 2.54b or 2.60. I would not hold my breath waiting for a fix.

 

There is speculation that it is related to the chipset firmware. All of the above Colorado firmware releases use the 2.60 chipset firmware. Only the original 2.30 release used the 2.30 (I think it was) chipset firmware, and there does not seem to be anybody left with a unit that old which has not been updated. HCx units use the same chipset and (we think) the same chipset firmware -- and saw the same drift problem. Users who successfully downgraded an HCx claim that the problem disappeared with the older chipset firmware. As far as I know nobody has successfully downgraded a Colorado. And you couldn't live the 2.30 Colorado firmware anyhow.

Share this post


Link to post

Apparently Garmin is waiting to realize that it IS a problem. Not everyone experiences the problem. Those who do see it can repeat it fairly often (but not, as I understand it, on demand) in certain locations. The problem has apparently existed since 2.40 and was not fixed in 2.51b, 2.54b or 2.60. I would not hold my breath waiting for a fix.

 

There is speculation that it is related to the chipset firmware. All of the above Colorado firmware releases use the 2.60 chipset firmware. Only the original 2.30 release used the 2.30 (I think it was) chipset firmware, and there does not seem to be anybody left with a unit that old which has not been updated. HCx units use the same chipset and (we think) the same chipset firmware -- and saw the same drift problem. Users who successfully downgraded an HCx claim that the problem disappeared with the older chipset firmware. As far as I know nobody has successfully downgraded a Colorado. And you couldn't live the 2.30 Colorado firmware anyhow.

I use a Vista HCx with latest firmware 2.60 and have not experienced drift, as far I can see, compared with old tracks from my 60CS. I had the common odometer problem with the previous firmware release 2.50. On one or two occations the Vista HCx had one log point drift far away from the location I were, both with firmware 2.60. I deleted the log points in MapSource.

Share this post


Link to post

I use a Vista HCx with latest firmware 2.60 and have not experienced drift ... On one or two occations the Vista HCx had one log point drift far away from the location I were, both with firmware 2.60.

 

It appears that you meant to write that you "have experienced drift" (instead of "have not")?

 

You are lucky that the drift problem is not very common for you. I don't know if this is because of your GPS unit, or because of the terrain you live in, or because the Garmin Angels are overhead and protect your unit from gross deviations.

 

Regards

Share this post


Link to post

Am I imagining things or is there no "Delete All Waypoints" in Waypoint Manager for the Oregon as there is for the Colorado ...???!!!

 

edit : Never mind! It's in "Reset" a la the 60 series GPSrs.

Edited by nicolo

Share this post


Link to post

It appears that you meant to write that you "have experienced drift" (instead of "have not")?

 

You are lucky that the drift problem is not very common for you. I don't know if this is because of your GPS unit, or because of the terrain you live in, or because the Garmin Angels are overhead and protect your unit from gross deviations.

 

Regards

In the areas I had visibility to at least 50% of the hemisphere, probably with only quite good direct signals from the satellites, few multipath signals from the topography. No, I've never seen any angels and I don't think I will, in fact, I'm sure. As someone stated earlier, I think multipath, false signals, from satellites, maybe also other noice signals, have introduced a problem when using such highsensitivity chipsets as from MTK. Do the data from the satellites have a CRC attachment? If not, they can be an error source under some topographical and atmospheric conditions.

CRC: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyclic_redundancy_check

Edited by OttoLund

Share this post


Link to post

I emailed Garmin Tech Support and provided them a link to this post:

 

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php...780&st=222#

 

Their reply:

 

Thank you for contacting Garmin International.

 

I will be happy to answer your question. Engineering is aware of the reported problem and is researching ways to correct the situation.

 

Unfortunately, I am not able to provide and dates for the potential fix.

 

Sorry for any difficulty this may cause.

 

Deja vu. I think I've read this response somewhere before.

Share this post


Link to post

I emailed Garmin Tech Support and provided them a link to this post:

 

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php...780&st=222#

 

Their reply:

 

Thank you for contacting Garmin International.

 

I will be happy to answer your question. Engineering is aware of the reported problem and is researching ways to correct the situation.

 

Unfortunately, I am not able to provide and dates for the potential fix.

 

Sorry for any difficulty this may cause.

 

Deja vu. I think I've read this response somewhere before.

That response is actually a big improvement... based on all of the other threads about the drift problem with the CO and HCx, it seems that for the first few hundred times the problem was reported to them, the reponse from Garmin tech support was generally something like "I've never heard of that problem before."

 

At least they've moved to the "Workin' on it" phase :D

Share this post


Link to post

I emailed Garmin Tech Support and provided them a link to this post:

 

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php...780&st=222#

 

Their reply:

 

Thank you for contacting Garmin International.

 

I will be happy to answer your question. Engineering is aware of the reported problem and is researching ways to correct the situation.

 

Unfortunately, I am not able to provide and dates for the potential fix.

 

Sorry for any difficulty this may cause.

 

Deja vu. I think I've read this response somewhere before.

That response is actually a big improvement... based on all of the other threads about the drift problem with the CO and HCx, it seems that for the first few hundred times the problem was reported to them, the reponse from Garmin tech support was generally something like "I've never heard of that problem before."

 

At least they've moved to the "Workin' on it" phase :D

Now, the question is whether they are "workin' on it" only for the Oregon, or for the Oregon, Colorado and HCx... One can only hope.

Share this post


Link to post

I called Garmin tech support this morning to switch maps from the CO to the OR. While on the phone I also asked about the car adapter issue, being that the 90 degree fitting does not work with the OR. The tech person was very helpful and took the time to go and get one of the adapters to see what I was talking about. It does connect and work but it does not lock in like it should. This was recognized as a problem and has been given to the engineers. The tech support guy even called me back later to tell me that he had checked the car kit and found that it is different than the one for the CO. Unknown at this point if it is the cable that is different or the mount but we will see as I went ahead and ordered one. If anyone has the car kit perhaps you could shed some light on the subject.

I tried to get information about the chipset and found that this has been a common question being asked. For some reason the chipset appears to be a closely guarded secret now just as it has been for the CO. It is beyond me why what chipset is being used in a product already released to the public has to be a trade secret?? Other GPS companies rlease this information even before public release (Delorme PN40 for one). Still have not had the opportunity to really put the OR through it's paces and am trying to get used to the new way that it does things. Hopefully I will have something to add to the discussion soon.

Question about drift verses accuracy. The problem I always had with the CO was that it was consistantly 30 to 50 feet off of gz of a cache. When you have drift is it more of an issue of losing contact with sats for whatever reason such as cover or poor reception? It just appears to me to be apples and oranges so I wanted to throw it out there to see what folks think. :D

 

I received the Oregon car kit today and they have changed the fitting to plug in rock solid in the Oregon. Here are a couple of photos I took. :D

 

8f0fdc52-3e2e-4f53-8ba0-b0baba1440fe.jpg

 

26336d5b-1e29-403b-bb75-062c49be7456.jpg

Share this post


Link to post

So I got the Oregon 400t today...

 

I really wanted the touch screen -- mostly for easy text entry. What held me back at first was Scott's report on the brightness/visibility of the screen without backlight. Then I got interested in the upcoming nuvi 500, but I realize that with the nuvi the need for backlight is a sure thing. I use a nuvi in my car, and would never consider using it without the backlight. So... I decided I'd rather have all the features of the Oregon over the simpler nuvi 500, and I would just treat it as if the backlight is always needed.

 

Now some comments after using it a couple of hours.

 

General feel: I like the feeling of the unit in my hand. It's all plastic, but it feels hefty and sturdy. The back comes right off to get to the batteries. Much easier than the CO. I like the lanyard attachment on the bottom, and put a strap on it right away. The OR is a good fit in my pocket, where it will live most of the time. I put one of my microSD copies of City Nav NA in it. It was easy to install the card under the batteries. The clip that locks down the card doesn't cover much, so you'll have to be careful when changing batteries out in the snow.

 

Backlight: The screen is almost invisible without the backlight. In fact, I was playing with it indoors and with the terrain turned on the screen is so dark that I didn't realize the Oregon was on. The screen looked _almost_ like it does when shut off. I'm keeping the backlight set to stay on 1 minute. This is so I can navigate without constantly having to touch the screen to turn on the backlight.

 

Touch-screen: I love it! It's like being let out of jail compared to the Colorado, and even my beloved 60CSx. It works very well. The interface feels complicated because it's so easy to get around that I tend to do more messing with the settings than I would ever do with the CO. I finally set up by different profiles with the settings I like, and now I don't have to touch the settings much. Panning on the screen is slow (mostly the re-drawing), but it's smooth and predictable. I'm very happy with the performance. One thing I'd been concerned about was the precision of setting a waypoint with the fingertip. But I just zoom way in and I get the spot as close as I'd get it with the other models I own. The touch screen is great!

 

GPS Performance: It starts up faster than the CO. It gets a fix quickly, but I found it took longer than the CO to get the precision down to its best. As others have said, it shows accuracy to be about a little less than the CO. In my back yard the OR got to 22 ft, while the CO got to 18 ft. Not a big deal. I walked around a while and didn't see any notable drift. It tracked about as well as my 60CSx, and better than the CO. This was just a brief test though, under open sky. I'm looking forward to doing comparison tests in the woods.

 

I haven't had time to play with most of the features that are important to me: Tracks, altitude measurement, and stuff like that. I don't know about the battery life yet. Considering the amount of time I need backlight (max brightness is generally needed), I'll be happy to get 8 hours on a pair of 2500 mAh batteries. (Need to get some 2700s, but I have so many older ones in the rotation already.)

 

Initial Conclusion: Accepting the need for full-time backlight, I like it better than the Colorado. The biggie is the touch screen. Only time will tell whether it will overtake my 60CSx as my "usual suspect" when grabbing a GPSr. Whatever I end up using most, when I'm out in the wild (relatively speaking), I'll continue to carry my Vista HCx as backup, with it's great battery life and small size.

Share this post


Link to post

Good writeup Manatee, I'm happy to see some more users on the Oregon to get some more viewpoints out there. I'll be curious to hear about your (and others) experiences with the GPS receiver. Still not major drifts like the Colorado for me.

 

I used it in the pouring rain today and found it to be very good. I actually think its harder to use in light rain because it feels sort of sticky. The screen is slippery in the rain but it performed very well.

 

Have any of you found a place where you can see seconds as part of time of day? On the CO you could see it on the trip computer, but the OR screen layout has changed so the long fields aren't available any longer.

 

GO$Rs

Share this post


Link to post

I just happened to have the batteries out of my Oregon and connected it to my PC. It started normally, dumped to current.gpx and then promptly reset. This works with the Colorado -- do other OR owners see this with 2.2?

 

GO$Rs

Share this post


Link to post

I just happened to have the batteries out of my Oregon and connected it to my PC. It started normally, dumped to current.gpx and then promptly reset. This works with the Colorado -- do other OR owners see this with 2.2?

 

I have 2.2 and I did not see the same behavior without batteries: in my case, the Oregon dumps the GPX file and I can access the internal memory from my computer. The Oregon remains in storage mode (or whatever it is called) without resetting.

 

I'm not a GeoCacher, so I don't have any caches loaded on my Oregon. So I suppose that is one variable between your unit and my unit.

 

Regards

Share this post


Link to post

Everyone here is talking about poor screen visibily of the Oregon. I just pre-ordered one and I want to know if there is a big difference with my Etrex Legend Cx screen (not HCx) ? Also, many of you have previously owned a 60Cx which is very accurate. For me, do you think I will be happy with the new Oregon compared to my Legend Cx (both have similar internal antenna)? I always loved my unit for its compact size but I want a larger screen on a smallest unit as possible.

 

Thank you!

Share this post


Link to post

Regarding WAAS - I haven't seen this question raised yet.

 

When I had a Colorado 400t, I had WAAS enabled, and the unit would often indicate that it was receiving and utilizing WAAS correction data by displaying a "D" on various satellite bars.

 

I've had WAAS enabled on the Oregon 400t, and I have yet to see it indicate that it is utilizing WAAS (assuming it would also display a "D" on various satellite bars).

 

Has anyone seen their Oregon indicate it is utilizing WAAS data by displaying a "D"?

 

Regards

 

EDIT: Running 2.2/2.42 software.

Edited by jmedlock

Share this post


Link to post

Regarding WAAS - I haven't seen this question raised yet.

 

When I had a Colorado 400t, I had WAAS enabled, and the unit would often indicate that it was receiving and utilizing WAAS correction data by displaying a "D" on various satellite bars.

 

I've had WAAS enabled on the Oregon 400t, and I have yet to see it indicate that it is utilizing WAAS (assuming it would also display a "D" on various satellite bars).

 

Has anyone seen their Oregon indicate it is utilizing WAAS data by displaying a "D"?

 

Regards

I am testing now. My old Map60CS shows D's on all (5) sattelites, but the Oregon shows none. I have seen 3 D's on the Oregon earlier and that was max. Currently running on version 2.20.

Share this post


Link to post

The D indicates that a particular satellite is being corrected with WAAS information. So if you have at least one D, you can be sure that you have a lock on a WAAS satellite. If you have a lock on a WAAS satellite, it would be unusual (but not impossible) to have no satellites with a D (no satellites being corrected). But it would not be unusual to have Ds on some birds but not on others.

 

That said, if you have two different GPSrs and both have a lock on a WAAS satellite, I would expect both to show the same set of satellites being corrected.

 

Can't remember if (in generall -- I don't own an Oregon) the Garmin satellite display distinguishes WAAS satellites from others.

Share this post


Link to post

I tried WAAS the other day and never got a D either. I figured I just didn't have view to the WAAS satellite but maybe there is an issue here?

 

GO$Rs

Share this post


Link to post

I have had WAAS turned on since the first day i got my Oregon and have yet to get any D's. But when i brake out the Colorado and compare it with the Oregon is shows a lot of D's.

Edited by teamdw

Share this post


Link to post

I tried WAAS the other day and never got a D either. I figured I just didn't have view to the WAAS satellite but maybe there is an issue here?

 

GO$Rs

OK, now we're stretching my memory for trivia. Seems to me that the WAAS satellites are relatively low in the sky in most places in North America. I also seem to remember some discussion somewhere (which I can't, of course, find) speculating that the mask angle which the Oregon uses to exclude low satellites was somewhat larger than other models. Of course, I could be hallucinating the whole thing...

 

Edited to add: Of course, you wouldn't think the WAAS satellites would be subject to mask angle exclusion anyhow. But hey...

Edited by twolpert

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 18

×
×
  • Create New...