Jump to content

Disappointed in Accuracy of Oregon 650t


Recommended Posts

I've been using my new Garmin Oregon 650t for about two weeks. In general, I have really liked it. Today, however, it seems to have failed a big test. I own a multicache (GCVDPE)on the Oregon Coast. It involves finding three stages in VERY heavy tree cover. I have hiked to the three stages many times, and the cache has been found 60 times with very few problems, so I am extremely confident in the coordinates.

 

On my past hikes, I have used a variety of Garmin units, most recently a GPSMap 62S. With that unit, I consistently get readings of about 50 feet upon arrival at a stage, and then a reading of about 20 feet after waiting a few seconds. I have had that experience many times.

 

Today, I used the Oregon 650t for the first time. I knew I was getting close to a stage, so kept an eye on the compass. It was jumping erratically. It also indicated the stage was over 200 feet off the trail, which is not the case. In fact, I was unable to find it at all using the receiver, and only finally found it by memory.

 

At the first stage, I had a reading of 200 feet, bouncing around considerably. I waited, and couldn't get any better reading. So, I switched from "GPS + GLONASS" to just "GPS". The reading almost immediately jumped from the 200s to 100 feet. But, I still couldn't get any better than that. I switched back to "GPS + GLONASS" and waited for about five minutes. Finally, the reading narrowed down to around 50 feet.

 

I had almost exactly the same experience quite some time later at another stage.

 

If I were relying on the receiver and didn't know where the stages were, I wouldn't have found them.

 

I wish I had had the 62 along for comparison, but on many previous visits, the 62 has done MUCH better than the Oregon.

 

On all my units, including the new Oregon, I have WAAS/EGNOS "On".

 

This is very disappointing after reading how spectacular the accuracy is supposed to be on the new Oregons.

 

What have other users experienced? I plan to do some more testing, directly comparing the two units under heavy tree cover.

 

Any comments or suggestions much appreciated!

Link to comment

High end gpsr is terrible under trees.

 

You're bummed, understandably.

 

I'm happy. Why? Because my high-end smartphone works as good or better, so now I know I don't have to shell out a penny for a gpsr. Breakage? It won't cost me a penny either. My phone's insured, so if it's lost or stolen, they hand me a new one free.

 

I'll sleep very well tonight! :)

Link to comment

Make sure if you haven't used the gps for a while that you have a good signal for an hour before using it. It will take up to 45 min to get all the data it needs to be on the money. The data comes in a few different levels from the satellites. Even though you have a lock on doesn't mean it's got all the data. Some data comes fast other slower. This is what I've found reading about the system since 1995.

I'm interested in this new combo glonass/gps and have been reading some about it. I read some posts from the larger commercial farmers out west who use it laying crops. I can't remember but I thought they said you get better accuracy one way vs another if things are right. So be careful on how you set it up. All else fails return it to Garmin. You may have a antenna issue or weakness.

Also this is why I use a external antenna for my hand helds when hiking in the woods and mountains. I wouldn't buy a hand held without external antenna jack. It will keep the gps locked on good with an amplified antenna and all data will be up to date as it wouldn't be dropping the signal at all.

Link to comment

I've also been disappointed by the accuracy of my Oregon 650t so far. Below is a screenshot of the tracks from my Oregon 650t (blue) and fenix (green) from a ride this past weekend. They are overlaid on Northwest Topos which shows the trail I was on as a red dashed line, and is fairly accurate (averaged from a number of tracks from various people using various devices over the years). The fenix is a watch GPS and was worn on my wrist, while the Oregon 650t was mounted on my handlebars.

 

The area is heavily forested second growth with a reasonably steep side slope and so signal is usually challenging. The 650t was giving me 100'+ EPE at times. However, the response from it even in these conditions was what I would consider substandard and didn't match the accuracy of the fenix.

 

There were similar issues with the Colorado when it first came out and I believe with the earlier Oregons. I'm hoping that some firmware tweaks will correct this issue soon.

 

vmu.png

Link to comment

Same poor GPS performance with my Oregon 600 even after being turned on a couple of hours. I don't know whether to keep it or return it. I don't like being treated as a beta tester on a full retail purchase. I also grow tired of the crashes / freezes.

 

I understand previous Oregon models were even more buggy than the 6xx series when they were first released, so we have less to complain about than early G400 or G500 buyers. Garmin must figure the price of unit returns into their corporate profit projections and they come out ahead by not paying engineers to test the firmware. If we return our G6xx models we can certainly repurchase them at a lower price in 1-2 years, assuming Garmin ever fixes the bugs. Meanwhile the 62S sounds like a pretty reliable unit. Maybe I'll start looking for one on eBay.

Link to comment

Sorry if I came across cynical sounding, but my thoughts about returning the G600 seem a logical response to lousy corporate policy. If we tolerate incompletely developed products we will surely get more of them. I hate to reward poor corporate policies. I remember an era when products were tested before being marketed. It really wasn't that long ago -- 1980s to early 2000s. Garmin certainly isn't the only company that forgot how to do product testing. Debugging used to be taught in every engineering school and computer science department. The era of rapid product model replacement has come at the expense of pre-release testing.

Link to comment

Thanks for all the great comments and suggestions. I conducted another test, directly comparing the 650t and 62S, and had much better results.

 

Gitchee-Gumee, I went to Setup/Routing. "Activity" was set to "Direct Routing", which sounded logical, so I left it there. I left "Route Transitions" on "Auto". But, "Lock On Road" was "Yes", so I switched it to "No".

 

Capt caper, I turned the unit on and let it set to soak in the data for over an hour.

 

I calibrated the compasses of both units and headed out on a hike to a geocache in very heavy tree cover. Neither unit did a very good job of getting me right to the cache, which wasn't too surprising. However, when I did arrive, the Oregon 650t had a reading of 25 feet and the 62S had a reading of 60 feet.

 

I then spent about 45 minutes doing various approaches to the cache from distances up to 300 feet away. The readings of both units jumped around quite a lot. However, on average, the Oregon did a BETTER job than the 62S. Not a lot better, but noticeably so.

 

This was very encouraging. I don't know if either of the above steps was the solution or not. Also, I plan to try the original hike again and compare both units. The trees are perhaps even thicker at that site.

 

Right now, anyway, I am very encouraged.

Link to comment

Update: I repeated the hike described in my original post today, using both the Garmin Oregon 650t and my old 62S. At the first waypoint, the 62S had a reading about 30 feet better than the Oregon. However, at the second waypoint, the Oregon was better by about 25 feet.

 

I stopped at a few other heavy-cover waypoints on the way back, and the Oregon did great.

 

I now feel much better about the Oregon's accuracy. These are hard tests! I still don't know for sure if turning off "Lock on Road" did the trick or not, but making that setting change seems to be a good bet for hikers.

 

Thanks again for all the input!

Link to comment

I left all the default settings on my G600 except for turning off WAAS/EGNOS to save battery life and turning on GPS + GLONASS for improved satellite reception. Hiking the famous John Muir Trail today out of Tuoulumne Meadows, Yosemite N.P., the G600 was up to 150 yards different from the California topo map and My Trails overlay I downloaded from GPSFileDepot.com. I re-hiked the problematic trail section twice with Lock On Road on and with it off, and I see negligible difference in my recorded route. At the point of greatest variance from the My Trails maps my G600 had twelve satellites locked on and six satellites with six or more bars signal strength. I am unsure which is correct -- the G600 or My Trails recording of the John Muir Trail to Elizabeth Lake. Hiking out from pine forests, both My Trails and the G600 were mostly in close agreement.

 

If My Trails is correct, 150 yards variance is pretty bad. I wish I had a scientific reference GPS to determine which data set is correct.

Link to comment

@Wildmidwest,

Did your unit repeat "with itself" on the multiple trips? If so, why would you doubt that it is accurate?

Be sure that your tracks don't have any long straight gaps or "zig/zags" in them like where the unit might have lost sat connection then regained signal, or may have been affected by multipath error, etc.

If not, believe your unit's data until it is proven incorrect otherwise.

 

Sometimes trails get moved, sometimes maps are incorrect. USGS topo map making tolerance is +/- 40ft.

 

I've got as high as 13-20 "copies" of tracks on a specific trail and, when displayed together they overlay each other very favorably.However, in places, none are "on the trail" as shown on the official map or topo map. My data is correct....the maps are wrong.

Link to comment

I left all the default settings on my G600 except for turning off WAAS/EGNOS to save battery life and turning on GPS + GLONASS for improved satellite reception. Hiking the famous John Muir Trail today out of Tuoulumne Meadows, Yosemite N.P., the G600 was up to 150 yards different from the California topo map and My Trails overlay I downloaded from GPSFileDepot.com. I re-hiked the problematic trail section twice with Lock On Road on and with it off, and I see negligible difference in my recorded route. At the point of greatest variance from the My Trails maps my G600 had twelve satellites locked on and six satellites with six or more bars signal strength. I am unsure which is correct -- the G600 or My Trails recording of the John Muir Trail to Elizabeth Lake. Hiking out from pine forests, both My Trails and the G600 were mostly in close agreement.

 

If My Trails is correct, 150 yards variance is pretty bad. I wish I had a scientific reference GPS to determine which data set is correct.

 

So you turned off WAAS whichj significantly increases the Satellite accuracy and went for the generic uncorrected Russain system while in the US. I am guessing you are getting what would be expected. Why don't you try it with WAAS back on.

Link to comment

I left all the default settings on my G600 except for turning off WAAS/EGNOS to save battery life and turning on GPS + GLONASS for improved satellite reception. Hiking the famous John Muir Trail today out of Tuoulumne Meadows, Yosemite N.P., the G600 was up to 150 yards different from the California topo map and My Trails overlay I downloaded from GPSFileDepot.com. I re-hiked the problematic trail section twice with Lock On Road on and with it off, and I see negligible difference in my recorded route. At the point of greatest variance from the My Trails maps my G600 had twelve satellites locked on and six satellites with six or more bars signal strength. I am unsure which is correct -- the G600 or My Trails recording of the John Muir Trail to Elizabeth Lake. Hiking out from pine forests, both My Trails and the G600 were mostly in close agreement.

 

If My Trails is correct, 150 yards variance is pretty bad. I wish I had a scientific reference GPS to determine which data set is correct.

 

I got the Yosemite data from the NPS. This is what the NPS says about the data I used for My Trails:

 

abstract>This is the master file shapefile for the hiking/stock trails for Yosemite National Park. The trail network was derived from the USGS 7.5 minute digital line graphs and supplemented by GPS data collection where the DLG data is incorrect, or where there are new trails or trail alignments. The data were originally digitized in GRASS in 1995 from the DLGs. It has undergone edits in 2006, 2007, and 2008 to correct for inaccuracies using the LIDAR data where available or the NAIP imagery where trails can be recognized.</abstract><purpose>To reflect the current state of the trail system of Yosemite National Park</purpose>

Link to comment

So you turned off WAAS whichj significantly increases the Satellite accuracy and went for the generic uncorrected Russain system while in the US. I am guessing you are getting what would be expected. Why don't you try it with WAAS back on.

Isn't WAAS is in geosynchronous equatorial orbit? Isn't that too far away from Yosemite N.P. at 37.83 degrees north to have any bearing on Yosemite hikes? It seems to be beyond the satellite horizon.

 

I will turn WAAS back on and see if that will make a difference for future hikes.

Link to comment

Thanks for the link. Satellite positioning technology is difficult to understand at times... too many acronyms and competing systems. I received poor advice regarding WAAS in another Groundspeak thread but I am becoming better informed here and I hold no grudge. We are all on a learning curve. I wish the Garmin Owner's Manual contained better information on how to set up the device properly for different geographic areas and latitudes.

 

I am not sure if WAAS would have helped with our Yosemite hikes since we had tall mountains to our south, but WAAS probably wouldn't have hurt the accuracy any. WAAS definitely got us close to several geocaches in the high desert of UFO Alley in Central Nevada today. We will see how it works in Utah canyons the next two days.

Link to comment

I have been using my 650T for about 3 weeks... I have noticed when looking at my tracks I am off the road/trail for the most part...

 

The compass becomes unruly in even light cover.... Re-Calibrating it does not make too much a of a difference...

 

I keep ending up using common sense and Kentucky windage to get to my GZ's

Link to comment

Paul, I haven't seen particularly erratic behavior with the compass, but I typically use a standard magnetic compass when I am backcountry rather than the Oregon's compass. Old habits die hard.

 

I found an excellent WAAS article at Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WAAS

 

I wish I would have understood the technology better before hiking... though there was not much chance of getting lost on the famous John Muir trail.

Link to comment

I am a real newb, so obviously not an expert, but I have had much better luck with my 650T. I have not found all that many caches yet, but the ones I've found, I walked right up to caches, and the GPS arrow was right on top of the cache on the map.

 

I just got my unit recently, maybe I have newer firmware? I'm running firmware number 2.80...

 

I have GPS and WAAS enabled, and GLONASS, for my routing activity I have "Hiking" selected, and I have Lock to road turned off.

Link to comment

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...
×
×
  • Create New...