Garmin Dakota Good and Bad So Far

[+The Yinnies]

I am trying to find out about the accuracy with this. I have 2 PN-40's and am really trying to decide if I want to sell one and get a DAkota 20. I already have the 100k Topo loaded and I have a Nuvi 500 for auto routing.

Thanks

[+radak9]

I am trying to find out about the accuracy with this. I have 2 PN-40's and am really trying to decide if I want to sell one and get a DAkota 20. I already have the 100k Topo loaded and I have a Nuvi 500 for auto routing.

Thanks

Have you seen this thread in the forum? Some good info there regarding this:

 

Dakota 20 compared to PN-40

 

[+The Yinnies]

Thanks.

I have been watching it but I just need to know if it is as accurate as the -40. I use it mainly for caching. I do not want to spend a lot of money on something thatis not as good as I got. Also, do you have to buy a Garmin car cord or will any cord work?

[+Searching_ut]

Thanks.

I have been watching it but I just need to know if it is as accurate as the -40. I use it mainly for caching. I do not want to spend a lot of money on something thatis not as good as I got. Also, do you have to buy a Garmin car cord or will any cord work?

 

To be honest, I haven't noticed any significant difference in accuracy with most modern units. The PN-40 seems to filter it's position data a fair amount, making it quite steady. One thing I have noticed is that the PN-40 I can‘t say it‘s any more accurate though, just that it's pretty optimistic in it's guesses. I haven’t seen any consumer grade units so far that I’d say were any better accuracy wise than the PN-40, and I can’t really say I’ve seen anything other than the filtering that make it stand out as more accurate either. Tomorrow morning I intend to head out on a short 6 mile hike in an area that drives GPS receivers nuts. I’ll post if I notice anything significant there. Straight up if your primary GPS use is geocaching, the PN-40 is about as good as it gets right now. For some other outdoor types of adventure, I think there are better choices.

[+The Yinnies]

Thanks.

I have been watching it but I just need to know if it is as accurate as the -40. I use it mainly for caching. I do not want to spend a lot of money on something thatis not as good as I got. Also, do you have to buy a Garmin car cord or will any cord work?

 

To be honest, I haven't noticed any significant difference in accuracy with most modern units. The PN-40 seems to filter it's position data a fair amount, making it quite steady. One thing I have noticed is that the PN-40 I can‘t say it‘s any more accurate though, just that it's pretty optimistic in it's guesses. I haven’t seen any consumer grade units so far that I’d say were any better accuracy wise than the PN-40, and I can’t really say I’ve seen anything other than the filtering that make it stand out as more accurate either. Tomorrow morning I intend to head out on a short 6 mile hike in an area that drives GPS receivers nuts. I’ll post if I notice anything significant there. Straight up if your primary GPS use is geocaching, the PN-40 is about as good as it gets right now. For some other outdoor types of adventure, I think there are better choices.

You have used both for caching and do take you there? does the Dakota float more than the -40? I have heard that it is as good but when you get close it seams to start floating around where the -40 is pretty much straight to it.

[+Searching_ut]

Thanks.

I have been watching it but I just need to know if it is as accurate as the -40. I use it mainly for caching. I do not want to spend a lot of money on something thatis not as good as I got. Also, do you have to buy a Garmin car cord or will any cord work?

 

To be honest, I haven't noticed any significant difference in accuracy with most modern units. The PN-40 seems to filter it's position data a fair amount, making it quite steady. One thing I have noticed is that the PN-40 I can‘t say it‘s any more accurate though, just that it's pretty optimistic in it's guesses. I haven’t seen any consumer grade units so far that I’d say were any better accuracy wise than the PN-40, and I can’t really say I’ve seen anything other than the filtering that make it stand out as more accurate either. Tomorrow morning I intend to head out on a short 6 mile hike in an area that drives GPS receivers nuts. I’ll post if I notice anything significant there. Straight up if your primary GPS use is geocaching, the PN-40 is about as good as it gets right now. For some other outdoor types of adventure, I think there are better choices.

You have used both for caching and do take you there? does the Dakota float more than the -40? I have heard that it is as good but when you get close it seams to start floating around where the -40 is pretty much straight to it.

 

In my other posting, the drift, or dancing is what I tried to show with the boardwalk tracks. The Dakota does dance around a little more in somewhere around a 10 foot or so circle. As a result, the closer you get to ground zero while navigating with the compass, the more you’ll notice a bit of dancing, as a result of the Dakota changing it's estimation of where it is by a few feet. It generally starts in the last 50 feet or so, and is more noticeable the closer you get. With the PN-40, the indication you get is more stable, but not necessarily more accurate which you’ll find if you back out from what it says is ground zero, circle around about 100 feet out, then come in from a different direction it will give you a nice steady ground zero reading, but the ground zero will be noticeably different than what you were at the first time. With either unit I find I end up in pretty much the same spot, and with either unit, the accuracy/repeatability varies significantly with terrain, tree cover etc.

 

Myself, I somewhat prefer the dancing around sort of behavior because I’ve learned to read that over the years as a much more accurate EPE indication than the worthless EPE figures the GPS receivers provide. That said, most of my reception issues are terrain related, meaning Multipath is my most likely position accuracy problem. If you’re in flatter terrain, where trees are your only real concern, you’re probably not going to have to worry about anywhere near the same possibility of accuracy issues, and would probably find the dancing to be nothing but an annoyance.

 

As for my canyon hike this morning, thanks to lots of rain, I’m goofing off on the computer instead of getting some much needed exercise. Track log comparisons for the tough stuff are still on hold.

[+rlyindra]

Thanks.

I have been watching it but I just need to know if it is as accurate as the -40. I use it mainly for caching. I do not want to spend a lot of money on something thatis not as good as I got. Also, do you have to buy a Garmin car cord or will any cord work?

 

To be honest, I haven't noticed any significant difference in accuracy with most modern units. The PN-40 seems to filter it's position data a fair amount, making it quite steady. One thing I have noticed is that the PN-40 I can‘t say it‘s any more accurate though, just that it's pretty optimistic in it's guesses. I haven’t seen any consumer grade units so far that I’d say were any better accuracy wise than the PN-40, and I can’t really say I’ve seen anything other than the filtering that make it stand out as more accurate either. Tomorrow morning I intend to head out on a short 6 mile hike in an area that drives GPS receivers nuts. I’ll post if I notice anything significant there. Straight up if your primary GPS use is geocaching, the PN-40 is about as good as it gets right now. For some other outdoor types of adventure, I think there are better choices.

You have used both for caching and do take you there? does the Dakota float more than the -40? I have heard that it is as good but when you get close it seams to start floating around where the -40 is pretty much straight to it.

 

In my other posting, the drift, or dancing is what I tried to show with the boardwalk tracks. The Dakota does dance around a little more in somewhere around a 10 foot or so circle. As a result, the closer you get to ground zero while navigating with the compass, the more you’ll notice a bit of dancing, as a result of the Dakota changing it's estimation of where it is by a few feet. It generally starts in the last 50 feet or so, and is more noticeable the closer you get. With the PN-40, the indication you get is more stable, but not necessarily more accurate which you’ll find if you back out from what it says is ground zero, circle around about 100 feet out, then come in from a different direction it will give you a nice steady ground zero reading, but the ground zero will be noticeably different than what you were at the first time. With either unit I find I end up in pretty much the same spot, and with either unit, the accuracy/repeatability varies significantly with terrain, tree cover etc.

 

Myself, I somewhat prefer the dancing around sort of behavior because I’ve learned to read that over the years as a much more accurate EPE indication than the worthless EPE figures the GPS receivers provide. That said, most of my reception issues are terrain related, meaning Multipath is my most likely position accuracy problem. If you’re in flatter terrain, where trees are your only real concern, you’re probably not going to have to worry about anywhere near the same possibility of accuracy issues, and would probably find the dancing to be nothing but an annoyance.

 

As for my canyon hike this morning, thanks to lots of rain, I’m goofing off on the computer instead of getting some much needed exercise. Track log comparisons for the tough stuff are still on hold.

I am looking to get a new GPS and am stuck between the -40 and the Dakota. I too will be using it for caching as the main use. Which then would you go for? I have an old Vista CX and have Topo loaded on my computer already so it would not be an exrta expense for mapping. I think the Areals are neat but not needed.

Thanks

[+g-o-cashers]

I have made a number of comparisons between the DK 20 (GPS 3.4) and the Oregon 400t w/latest GPS firmware (3.7) and the Oregon 550t (3.4). Prior to the new 3.7 firmware the 400t and 550t behaved exactly the same and the Dakota was similar but I have noticed the same 10-15' jitter that Searching_ut sees in his tracklogs. Even though the Dakota is the same chipset as the Oregon (and the PN-40) the antenna design is probably different and/or Garmin hasn't had a chance to tune the chipset for this new platform yet. I've also seen the Dakota drop satellite reception outdoors under heavy cover, something I don't think I've ever seen the Oregon do, again this might be related to different antenna design.

 

On a positive note I'm hoping all of the Oregons and Dakotas will eventually pick up the new 3.7 GPS firmware which in my tests has performed very well.

 

My initial review of the Dakota is here.

 

http://www.gpsfix.net/gamin-dakota-20-first-impressions/

[+Searching_ut]

.............. I've also seen the Dakota drop satellite reception outdoors under heavy cover, something I don't think I've ever seen the Oregon do, again this might be related to different antenna design.

........

http://www.gpsfix.net/gamin-dakota-20-first-impressions/

 

Were you running both units side by side? I haven't got an Oregon to compare with, but so far my Dakota seems to hold a lock slightly better than my PN-40. They're pretty similar though, and because of different behaviors, it's hard to tell for sure. The Dakota doesn't get around to telling you it's lost lock right away. For instance, on the map page when the Dakota looses it's fix, you notice the position starting to drift, but it will take a couple minutes for the screen telling you it lost reception to pop up. When the Dakota does regain lock it tends to jump right back to where it should be right away. On the PN-40, the position triangle starts flashing red right away, as it too drifts off a few hundred feet from it's actual location. The track changes color though to let you know it was bad data. The PN-40 tends to be slower to get back on track so to speak when it does regain a good lock. With the different screens, it's different how you know lock was lost. Because of the very different behaviors, it's hard to say for sure if the Dakota is slightly more sensitive, or if the difference I see is just the difference in how the units handle a lost lock.

 

With the oregon and dakota having such similar software, it would be interesting to see the side by side both track wise, and in areas where track is lost and regained.

[+g-o-cashers]

I was carrying my Oregon 400t (or maybe the 550t) and it was having problems (EPE in the 60's) but it never lost lock. I don't think I've ever seen the Oregon's drop outside.

[+The Yinnies]

Any new updates?

Thanks

[+Searching_ut]

I’ve pretty much quit doing side by side tests, but the wife and I did head out Sunday for a days adventure that included about half a dozen geocaches, with her using the PN-40, me using the Dakota. The caches wer scattered over 20 miles or so, terrain was a combination, canyons, somewhat light treecover in areas, open skies in others. A large part of the day was working the top of a mountain range. Reception wise, both units again seem quite similar in performance. The PN-40 position indications seemed slightly more stable, with the Dakota jumping around just a hair more, but at least based on where we found the geocaches, it seemed to zero out slightly better on this day. As a general rule, the PN-40 seems to do somewhat better in flat terrain, the Dakota in Mountains, but the rule seems to get broken fairly often.

 

One thing that surprised me on this trip is that both units needed the compass to be recalibrated just about every time we got out of the truck. (The units remained on the whole time, both for the short hikes, and while driving the very rough trails/roads) I’ve had issues with the Dakota compass loosing calibration, and the unit needing re-booted before I could re-calibrate, so this didn’t surprise me, but normally the PN-40 only needs to be calibrated once per set of batteries. I don’t know if it was the extreme bouncing around on the 4 wheel drive tracks or what.

 

The other issue I ran into is that the PN-40 wasn’t able to make it through the whole trip on a single set of batteries, and we let it go until it shut itself down. When initially re-booted after changing the batteries, it didn’t even try to lock on to any satellites (Zero bars for over 5 minutes) I had to re-boot one more time and it worked fine.

 

As a final observation, I carried the Dakota in a small camera bag on my belt this trip, and found that when I do so it’s important to lock the screen or strange things can happen with my data fields, configuration etc. Evidently I was pushing buttons so to speak as I blasted through the brush in areas.

[+The Yinnies]

I’ve pretty much quit doing side by side tests, but the wife and I did head out Sunday for a days adventure that included about half a dozen geocaches, with her using the PN-40, me using the Dakota. The caches wer scattered over 20 miles or so, terrain was a combination, canyons, somewhat light treecover in areas, open skies in others. A large part of the day was working the top of a mountain range. Reception wise, both units again seem quite similar in performance. The PN-40 position indications seemed slightly more stable, with the Dakota jumping around just a hair more, but at least based on where we found the geocaches, it seemed to zero out slightly better on this day. As a general rule, the PN-40 seems to do somewhat better in flat terrain, the Dakota in Mountains, but the rule seems to get broken fairly often.

 

One thing that surprised me on this trip is that both units needed the compass to be recalibrated just about every time we got out of the truck. (The units remained on the whole time, both for the short hikes, and while driving the very rough trails/roads) I’ve had issues with the Dakota compass loosing calibration, and the unit needing re-booted before I could re-calibrate, so this didn’t surprise me, but normally the PN-40 only needs to be calibrated once per set of batteries. I don’t know if it was the extreme bouncing around on the 4 wheel drive tracks or what.

 

The other issue I ran into is that the PN-40 wasn’t able to make it through the whole trip on a single set of batteries, and we let it go until it shut itself down. When initially re-booted after changing the batteries, it didn’t even try to lock on to any satellites (Zero bars for over 5 minutes) I had to re-boot one more time and it worked fine.

 

As a final observation, I carried the Dakota in a small camera bag on my belt this trip, and found that when I do so it’s important to lock the screen or strange things can happen with my data fields, configuration etc. Evidently I was pushing buttons so to speak as I blasted through the brush in areas.

Thanks again. I just wanted to make sure they were about the same. We use them for caching and a little mountain biking and hiking. I like the size for hiking.