Jump to content

Oregon 7xx Series - Tracklog and Position Tests


yogazoo
Followers 6

Recommended Posts

I was able to get out and perform some comparative tracklog and position tests. My parameters were that all units only have GPS + WAAS enabled, units were carried out in front of my body with arms extended, and the recording interval was 1 second. I also allowed each unit to obtain satellite data for 20 minutes before starting the tests. Granted this is just one set of comparative testing under similar satellite array, but hopefully it sheds some light on how the new Oregon 7xx series performs. For comparison I used a Montana 610, GPSMap 64s, Oregon 7xx, and Motorola Droid Razr.

 

The Oregon 7xx unit firmware version was 2.43. The GPS version is unavailable (only dashes "----" listed after GPS version in test mode).

 

Test 1: My hope for this test was to gauge multipath processing as I walked down the center of the sidewalk that ran adjacent to a 50ft tall building. Typically, the tracklog gets drawn to the building or source of multipath signals.

 

Red: Oregon 7xx

Dark Blue: 64s

Light Blue: Montana 610

Yellow: Motorola Droid Razr

 

As you can see here, the Montana has some difficulty on the first pass but recovered on the return pass. The Oregon 7xx performs rather well with only minor draw toward the building. Motorola Razr does nicely as well but has some trouble being consistent.

1469083267.jpg

 

Test 2: I was looking for more intermittent GPS signal interference so I walked down the alley behind my house. The alley has tall, broad-leaf tree cover in certain areas, single level garages, and other intermittent obstructions common in a neighborhood setting.

 

Red: Oregon 7xx

Dark Blue: 64s

Yellow: Motorola Droid Razr

 

I forgot to hit the record button on the Montana so we only have three samples here. The Oregon 7xx and the 64s performed similarly with smooth, accurate tracklogs. The Motorola Razr shows some trouble in cover and was a bit off a reasonable mark in my opinion. I did two out-n-backs walking down the center of the alley in this test, so there are four lines for each unit.

1469084028.jpg

 

Test 3: I was looking for positional accuracy and consistency in all orientations so I walked around a running track twice. I stayed on the extreme inside lane of the running track.

 

Red: Oregon 7xx

Dark Blue: 64s

Light Blue: Montana 610

Yellow: Motorola Droid Razr

 

The 64s performed as the best of the bunch in this test with no noticeable veering and a solid tracklog. I'd give the Oregon 7xx a close second with a good, smooth, and accurate tracklog.

1469084368.jpg

 

Test 4: The Garmin's were placed on the ground 10 meters apart and left to record a tracklog for 20 minutes. I wish I could have let them run longer but a guy's gotta sleep sometime. The point of this test was to see how much drift was experienced in a stationary location. The Motorola wasn't tested here because my GPX app would shut off if the phone wasn't moving. There was a clear view of the sky with no obstructions.

 

Red: Oregon 7xx

Dark Blue: 64s

Light Blue: Montana 610

 

As you can see, the Oregon 7xx has less than a foot or two of drift. The 64s performed as the best of the bunch here. Impressive results overall. The 64s track is barely visible from under the direction symbol

1469084767.jpg

 

Test 5: The point here was to find some hindering obstruction to see how the units held up. I went to the courtyard of a school with 50 to 80 foot brick walls surrounding the yard. There was enough of a view of the sky to get decent reception but the multipath environment was dreadful. No GPS unit of any flavor could be expected to behave reasonably in this signal environment, so take it for what it's worth. Again, no cell phone as the app simply wouldn't work.

 

Red: Oregon 7xx

Dark Blue: 64s

Light Blue: Montana 610

 

As you can see here, drift is considerable. Despite the unfair environment, the Oregon 7xx appears to have drifted less and was more rounded when it did.

1469085114.jpg

 

So that was the first, quick and dirty testing of my Oregon 700. You can draw your own conclusions but in my opinion, the 7xx performs remarkably well for being a new unit with updated antenna components and presumably immature GPS firmware. I'll do more this weekend when I hope to actually get out in the forest and do some hiking. I also plan to average several waypoints at Geodetic Control Points (known horizontal positions). I'd also like to go for a bike and compare distances etc. I would also enjoy eating, sleeping, and hanging out with my family a bit too so be patient. :)

 

Again, as another data point, the commonly noted Geocache GZ overshoot has not yet been experienced after visiting quite a number of caches.

 

Cheers!

Edited by yogazoo
Link to comment

I was able to get out and perform some comparative tracklog and position tests. My parameters were that all units only have GPS + WAAS enabled, units were carried out in front of my body with arms extended, and the recording interval was 1 second. I also allowed each unit to obtain satellite data for 20 minutes before starting the tests. Granted this is just one set of comparative testing under similar satellite array, but hopefully it sheds some light on how the new Oregon 7xx series performs. For comparison I used a Montana 610, GPSMap 64s, Oregon 7xx, and Motorola Droid Razr.

 

The Oregon 7xx unit firmware version was 2.43. The GPS version is unavailable (only dashes "----" listed after GPS version in test mode).

 

Test 1: My hope for this test was to gauge multipath processing as I walked down the center of the sidewalk that ran adjacent to a 50ft tall building. Typically, the tracklog gets drawn to the building or source of multipath signals.

 

Red: Oregon 7xx

Dark Blue: 64s

Light Blue: Montana 610

Yellow: Motorola Droid Razr

 

As you can see here, the Montana has some difficulty on the first pass but recovered on the return pass. The Oregon 7xx performs rather well with only minor draw toward the building. Motorola Razr does nicely as well but has some trouble being consistent.

1469083267.jpg

 

Test 2: I was looking for more intermittent GPS signal interference so I walked down the alley behind my house. The alley has tall, broad-leaf tree cover in certain areas, single level garages, and other intermittent obstructions common in a neighborhood setting.

 

Red: Oregon 7xx

Dark Blue: 64s

Yellow: Motorola Droid Razr

 

I forgot to hit the record button on the Montana so we only have three samples here. The Oregon 7xx and the 64s performed similarly with smooth, accurate tracklogs. The Motorola Razr shows some trouble in cover and was a bit off a reasonable mark in my opinion. I did two out-n-backs walking down the center of the alley in this test, so there are four lines for each unit.

1469084028.jpg

 

Test 3: I was looking for positional accuracy and consistency in all orientations so I walked around a running track twice. I stayed on the extreme inside lane of the running track.

 

Red: Oregon 7xx

Dark Blue: 64s

Light Blue: Montana 610

Yellow: Motorola Droid Razr

 

The 64s performed as the best of the bunch in this test with no noticeable veering and a solid tracklog. I'd give the Oregon 7xx a close second with a good, smooth, and accurate tracklog.

1469084368.jpg

 

Test 4: The Garmin's were placed on the ground 10 meters apart and left to record a tracklog for 20 minutes. I wish I could have let them run longer but a guy's gotta sleep sometime. The point of this test was to see how much drift was experienced in a stationary location. The Motorola wasn't tested here because my GPX app would shut off if the phone wasn't moving. There was a clear view of the sky with no obstructions.

 

Red: Oregon 7xx

Dark Blue: 64s

Light Blue: Montana 610

 

As you can see, the Oregon 7xx has less than a foot or two of drift. The 64s performed as the best of the bunch here. Impressive results overall. The 64s track is barely visible from under the direction symbol

1469084767.jpg

 

Test 5: The point here was to find some hindering obstruction to see how the units held up. I went to the courtyard of a school with 50 to 80 foot brick walls surrounding the yard. There was enough of a view of the sky to get decent reception but the multipath environment was dreadful. No GPS unit of any flavor could be expected to behave reasonably in this signal environment so take it for what it's worth. Again, no cell phone as the app simply wouldn't work.

 

Red: Oregon 7xx

Dark Blue: 64s

Light Blue: Montana 610

 

As you can see here, drift is considerable. Despite the unfair environment, the Oregon 7xx appears to have drifted less and was more rounded when it did.

1469085114.jpg

 

So that was the first, quick and dirty testing of my Oregon 700. You can draw your own conclusions but in my opinion, the 7xx performs remarkably well for being a new unit with updated antenna components and presumably immature GPS firmware. I'll do more this weekend when I hope to actually get out in the forest and do some hiking. I also plan to average several waypoints at Geodetic Control Points (known horizontal positions). I'd also like to go for a bike and compare distances etc. I would also enjoy eating, sleeping, and hanging out with my family a bit too so be patient. :)

 

Again, as another data point, the commonly noted Geocache GZ overshoot has not yet been experienced after visiting quite a number of caches.

 

Cheers!

 

hmm, what application were you using that would not keep the gps on and tracking during your testing ?

 

for reliable results with gps kept alive during all testing, try installing locus. you can set it's profile to highest for recording purposes, and actually get usable data in those circumstances where your current application failed.

Link to comment

hmm, what application were you using that would not keep the gps on and tracking during your testing ?

 

for reliable results with gps kept alive during all testing, try installing locus. you can set it's profile to highest for recording purposes, and actually get usable data in those circumstances where your current application failed.

 

My phone application is "Geo Tracker". It was recommended to me by several people of whom I trust. It only stops tracking when the phone isn't moving but the GPS circuitry remains ON. When moving, the application is simply reading and logging data from the GPS circuitry inside the phone. My application didn't cause the erratic tracking, my smart-phone did. Same conditions, same constellation, same everything. I also didn't intend this thread to be a smart-phone vs dedicated GPS debate. Only testing, data, and results regarding the Oregon 7xx.

 

As a courtesy, when replying, could you please avoid directly replying to large posts with photo's and such. It only serves to bloat the thread. Thanks :)

Edited by yogazoo
Link to comment

Thanks for the comprehensive tests, much effort, much time and well presented. Tip of the eHat.

 

Should you be looking for more test subjects? Do you have any trails with switchbacks close by? I've found my 450 did rather well at 4-sec interval and my camera poorly at 15-sec, its shortest interval.

 

Thanks again.

Link to comment

 

My phone application is "Geo Tracker". It was recommended to me by several people of whom I trust. It only stops tracking when the phone isn't moving but the GPS circuitry remains ON. When moving, the application is simply reading and logging data from the GPS circuitry inside the phone. My application didn't cause the erratic tracking, my smart-phone did. Same conditions, same constellation, same everything. I also didn't intend this thread to be a smart-phone vs dedicated GPS debate. Only testing, data, and results regarding the Oregon 7xx.

 

As a courtesy, when replying, could you please avoid directly replying to large posts with photo's and such. It only serves to bloat the thread. Thanks :)

 

I'm only trying to make sure you have reliable data to report, if there isn't a track, and other devices do have a track, its less than reliable data, that's all. :-)

 

the quotes do not show all the images or formatting when replying on mobile devices, so i have no way of knowing what is included. I'll try and pair down to the necessary content next time!

Link to comment

Thanks for the test, interesting but expected results.Especially that the drifts on all units lean in the same direction (NE to SW)

 

I guess the bottom line is any of those GPSr units (and other modern units) all are about the same for geocaching. It's just a matter of bells and whistles you want in a GPSr that makes the difference.

Edited by gpsblake
Link to comment

 

I'm only trying to make sure you have reliable data to report, if there isn't a track, and other devices do have a track, its less than reliable data, that's all. :-)

 

 

There's nothing "unreliable" about the data comparisons I posted. The only time I couldn't use the smart-phone data was when the units were stationary and the phone app stopped recording.

Link to comment

Thanks for this yogazoo. Now waiting (im)patiently for the 700's "official" release...

 

My 750t (from Amazon) is on the way! 8^)

Interesting. The most expensive 750t is available (16 left) but the 750 and 700 say 1 to 2 month wait. I guess if manufacturing is limited build the most expensive first. Good marketing but a little tacky.

Link to comment

 

I'm only trying to make sure you have reliable data to report, if there isn't a track, and other devices do have a track, its less than reliable data, that's all. :-)

 

 

There's nothing "unreliable" about the data comparisons I posted. The only time I couldn't use the smart-phone data was when the units were stationary and the phone app stopped recording.

 

in posts 4 and 5 you said lack of movement was a problem for the recording of tracks (or points maybe?) so i was only hoping to suggest an application that will continue to record with or without movement of the device. if you don't get a track, it's just not a track, i'm not implying your results are bad or unreliable, only that using an application that will continue to record will be more reliable. :)

Link to comment

Thanks for the test, interesting but expected results.Especially that the drifts on all units lean in the same direction (NE to SW)

 

I guess the bottom line is any of those GPSr units (and other modern units) all are about the same for geocaching. It's just a matter of bells and whistles you want in a GPSr that makes the difference.

 

Just so others know if the Oregon was in Glonass/GPS/WAAS mode it would be much more accurate in all aspects then the others. I've compared these settings to non Glonass/GPS/WAAS tracks I've saved since 1998...

 

You mentioned the drifts..with Glonass/GPS/WAAS on the drifts are minimal to say the least.

Link to comment

Thanks for the test, interesting but expected results.Especially that the drifts on all units lean in the same direction (NE to SW)

 

I guess the bottom line is any of those GPSr units (and other modern units) all are about the same for geocaching. It's just a matter of bells and whistles you want in a GPSr that makes the difference.

 

Just so others know if the Oregon was in Glonass/GPS/WAAS mode it would be much more accurate in all aspects then the others. I've compared these settings to non Glonass/GPS/WAAS tracks I've saved since 1998...

 

You mentioned the drifts..with Glonass/GPS/WAAS on the drifts are minimal to say the least.

 

have you tried recording that same trail with only gps vs glonass vs waas , on the same device, or are you referring to "new" devices each time?

 

i compare the same trail each time i get a new device and see very little difference between them, going back a decade or so.

Link to comment

Thanks for the test, interesting but expected results.Especially that the drifts on all units lean in the same direction (NE to SW)

 

I guess the bottom line is any of those GPSr units (and other modern units) all are about the same for geocaching. It's just a matter of bells and whistles you want in a GPSr that makes the difference.

 

Just so others know if the Oregon was in Glonass/GPS/WAAS mode it would be much more accurate in all aspects then the others. I've compared these settings to non Glonass/GPS/WAAS tracks I've saved since 1998...

 

You mentioned the drifts..with Glonass/GPS/WAAS on the drifts are minimal to say the least.

 

have you tried recording that same trail with only gps vs glonass vs waas , on the same device, or are you referring to "new" devices each time?

 

i compare the same trail each time i get a new device and see very little difference between them, going back a decade or so.

 

New devices on same trail I think you mean...I recorded with a Montana 600 60CX 72s over the years on same trails. I have many tracks going back in time saved. All had external antennas on top of a hiking pack. With this Monterra I use it seems no external antenna is needed for a excellant track...it sits in the same pouch on the chest strap. Amazing. I have a glonass/gps combo antenna I tried on top of the pack and found no difference really so I took it off. Amazing.

I didn't mean to side track this topic..it is interesting ..I just wanted to point out to newbee's that if you use Glonass in these newer units you can expect better data then non Glonass. If he ran the tests above with one of them in the Glonass/GPS/WAAS you'll find the results would be in favor of the Glonass/gps/waas settings.

Being Glonass is new I wanted to share my tests showing how the tracks data etc are far better all around with Glonass/GPS/Waas. Set the gps to record ever 2 seconds and wow...so right on in Canyons and when stationary.

Link to comment

Thanks for the test, interesting but expected results.Especially that the drifts on all units lean in the same direction (NE to SW)

 

I guess the bottom line is any of those GPSr units (and other modern units) all are about the same for geocaching. It's just a matter of bells and whistles you want in a GPSr that makes the difference.

 

Just so others know if the Oregon was in Glonass/GPS/WAAS mode it would be much more accurate in all aspects then the others. I've compared these settings to non Glonass/GPS/WAAS tracks I've saved since 1998...

 

You mentioned the drifts..with Glonass/GPS/WAAS on the drifts are minimal to say the least.

 

have you tried recording that same trail with only gps vs glonass vs waas , on the same device, or are you referring to "new" devices each time?

 

i compare the same trail each time i get a new device and see very little difference between them, going back a decade or so.

 

New devices on same trail I think you mean...I recorded with a Montana 600 60CX 72s over the years on same trails. I have many tracks going back in time saved. All had external antennas on top of a hiking pack. With this Monterra I use it seems no external antenna is needed for a excellant track...it sits in the same pouch on the chest strap. Amazing. I have a glonass/gps combo antenna I tried on top of the pack and found no difference really so I took it off. Amazing.

I didn't mean to side track this topic..it is interesting ..I just wanted to point out to newbee's that if you use Glonass in these newer units you can expect better data then non Glonass. If he ran the tests above with one of them in the Glonass/GPS/WAAS you'll find the results would be in favor of the Glonass/gps/waas settings.

Being Glonass is new I wanted to share my tests showing how the tracks data etc are far better all around with Glonass/GPS/Waas. Set the gps to record ever 2 seconds and wow...so right on in Canyons and when stationary.

 

yup, I've seen similar results with devices that are new enough to have glonass. this weekend i walked right into a cave and had 10ft accuracy until the sky was gone, exactly the same on exiting the other end

Link to comment

Thanks for the test, interesting but expected results.Especially that the drifts on all units lean in the same direction (NE to SW)

 

I guess the bottom line is any of those GPSr units (and other modern units) all are about the same for geocaching. It's just a matter of bells and whistles you want in a GPSr that makes the difference.

 

Just so others know if the Oregon was in Glonass/GPS/WAAS mode it would be much more accurate in all aspects then the others. I've compared these settings to non Glonass/GPS/WAAS tracks I've saved since 1998...

 

You mentioned the drifts..with Glonass/GPS/WAAS on the drifts are minimal to say the least.

 

GLONASS on is not always more accurate. The improvements in accuracy since 1998 are rooted more in GPS chip advancements.

 

See this comparison and analysis done to test the accuracy of GLONASS. It confirms my anecdotes with regards to GLONASS but I have yet to formally test them. Like most things, the Russians like to copy the rest of the worlds technologies. But they seem to lack a desire to perfect them. In GPS as in airplanes. If it weren't for the tariffs, there may not be any devices with GLONASS implementation on the market today.

 

GLONASS TEST LINK TO PDF

Edited by yogazoo
Link to comment

Thanks for the test, interesting but expected results.Especially that the drifts on all units lean in the same direction (NE to SW)

 

I guess the bottom line is any of those GPSr units (and other modern units) all are about the same for geocaching. It's just a matter of bells and whistles you want in a GPSr that makes the difference.

 

Just so others know if the Oregon was in Glonass/GPS/WAAS mode it would be much more accurate in all aspects then the others. I've compared these settings to non Glonass/GPS/WAAS tracks I've saved since 1998...

 

You mentioned the drifts..with Glonass/GPS/WAAS on the drifts are minimal to say the least.

 

GLONASS on is not always more accurate. The improvements in accuracy since 1998 are rooted more in GPS chip advancements.

 

See this comparison and analysis done to test the accuracy of GLONASS. It confirms my anecdotes with regards to GLONASS but I have yet to formally test them. Like most things, the Russians like to copy the rest of the worlds technologies. But they seem to lack a desire to perfect them. In GPS as in airplanes. If it weren't for the tariffs, there may not be any devices with GLONASS implementation on the market today.

 

GLONASS TEST LINK TO PDF

 

I read that report along time ago. And many others as well. But I can assure you that in comparing my tracks over the years Glonass/GPS/WAAS at least in my Monterra is much more accurate.. Why did Oregon change antennas? They used a inferiour gps for that article? Also my tracks are in tree cover and in the mountains so that may make the differnce.. as well. So you can't go by one test done by some guys in a football field with an inferiour gps. My wifes oregon 600T records so bad now after a few months I'm trading it in for her to a 700 and hope it works better. I'm still amazed at my Monterra and how it performs over the many gpsr's I've owned including the Montana 600 and 610.

I would like to see that test with the Oregon 700 in Glonass/GPS/WAAS mode..compared with the others in non glonass,gps,waas mode.

Edited by capt caper
Link to comment
My wifes oregon 600T records so bad now after a few months I'm trading it in for her to a 700 and hope it works better.

 

My Oregon 7x0 performs significantly better than my Oregon 6x0 when not under clear sky and perfect conditions.

 

I Her milage is always way off the written booked milage and my Monterras milage. Her trip computer keeps resetting to default screen as well. Even when we lock the data fields after customizing it. Odd. I reset it and will try it again.

Link to comment

Thanks for the test, interesting but expected results.Especially that the drifts on all units lean in the same direction (NE to SW)

 

I guess the bottom line is any of those GPSr units (and other modern units) all are about the same for geocaching. It's just a matter of bells and whistles you want in a GPSr that makes the difference.

 

Just so others know if the Oregon was in Glonass/GPS/WAAS mode it would be much more accurate in all aspects then the others. I've compared these settings to non Glonass/GPS/WAAS tracks I've saved since 1998...

 

You mentioned the drifts..with Glonass/GPS/WAAS on the drifts are minimal to say the least.

 

GLONASS on is not always more accurate. The improvements in accuracy since 1998 are rooted more in GPS chip advancements.

 

See this comparison and analysis done to test the accuracy of GLONASS. It confirms my anecdotes with regards to GLONASS but I have yet to formally test them. Like most things, the Russians like to copy the rest of the worlds technologies. But they seem to lack a desire to perfect them. In GPS as in airplanes. If it weren't for the tariffs, there may not be any devices with GLONASS implementation on the market today.

 

GLONASS TEST LINK TO PDF

 

I read that report along time ago. And many others as well. But I can assure you that in comparing my tracks over the years Glonass/GPS/WAAS at least in my Monterra is much more accurate.. Why did Oregon change antennas? They used a inferiour gps for that article? Also my tracks are in tree cover and in the mountains so that may make the differnce.. as well. So you can't go by one test done by some guys in a football field with an inferiour gps. My wifes oregon 600T records so bad now after a few months I'm trading it in for her to a 700 and hope it works better. I'm still amazed at my Monterra and how it performs over the many gpsr's I've owned including the Montana 600 and 610.

I would like to see that test with the Oregon 700 in Glonass/GPS/WAAS mode..compared with the others in non glonass,gps,waas mode.

 

Yup, this !!

 

I would also like to see a decent app used next time, so there will be data from all the tested devices.

Link to comment

YZ

In the sidewalk & track test, were all 4 units carried simultaneously or singularly (or pairs) on separate trips?

If simultaneously, in what relationship to each other were they?

 

What was the exact track "length" comparison between units on the "track" test?

 

What is the explanation for so few of the tracks actually recording that you traveled down the center of the sidewalk and on the inside lane of the track? Seems like most of them thought you were trampling on the grass a significant amount of the time. Was it GPS error or image geo-referencing error?

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...
Followers 6
×
×
  • Create New...