Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Guest gartho

Recommend gps unit

Recommended Posts

Guest gartho

Which gps (without mapping) would you guys recommend as the most durable,accurate, and precise unit available?

 

Thanks'

Gary

Share this post


Link to post
Guest ClayJar

Yeah, I'd definitely side with a Magellan 3xx series receiver, and yes, I am a Magellanophile (and will be upgrading from a MAP 330 to a Meridian Gold as close to October 15th as I can get my hands on one).

Share this post


Link to post
Guest Iron Chef

I own a Garmin and even I would recommend a Mag 3xx series if you don't want mapping (or even if you do want mapping for that matter).

 

------------------

-Iron Chef

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

agefive.com/geocache/ ~ Fe-26

Lets Drive Fast and Eat Cheese!

Share this post


Link to post
Guest mcb

If you are looking for a rugged GPS without mapping features then I would look at the eTrex (the original yellow one), or the GPS 12 from Garmin, or the Magellan 315. All three of these units are very rugged. You can read all type of horror stories of someone leaving theirs on top of their car and such and the unit surviving.

 

As long as you get a modern 12 channel GPS then they all have the same accuracy. You do have to watch with some of the low end Magellan units like the 300 and 310 they display less precision on their nav screens. The big think to think about here is not accuracy as much as the sensitivity of the receiver. All 12-channel GPS units use a similar algorithm to calculate their position. This position gets better when it can talk to more satellites. This is why many people claim that the Magellan 315 is more accurate then the Garmin eTrex. Its not more accurate but the 315 has a better antenna then the eTrex and thus in a some difficult situation like heavy tree cover it usually can use more satellite to calculate its position. Thus giving you a more accurate position. The greater accuracy here has nothing to do with the computer inside but the about of information it has to use

 

So if being very rugged and have a good antenna then the Magelland 315 is pretty good for the price. If you can sacrifice a little ruggedness then I would take a look and the Garmin II+(not the II). This unit has one of the best antenna receiver setups going in a handheld short of running and external amplified antenna. This is the Grandfather of the III, III+ and the just released V. Most users out there will tell you that in heavy tree cover and other adverse conditions you can?t bet the II+, III+ unit for there reception.

 

The only way that you will get more accurate is to go to a differential capable unit. There is two type of differential correction. The older technology used a separate receiver that receive a ground based signal that was then feed to a DGPS capable GPS unit. This is bulky and expensive but most hand held out there can do this. You just have to by the separate Differential receiver and hook it up. The other way is call WAAS (Wide Area Augmentation System). This uses a new satellite to broad cast the differential correction to the unit. WAAS is a new system and slightly more accurate then the older DGPS beacons but, the only non-mapping WAAS units I can think of are the Garmin GPS 76 and the Garmin eTrex Venture. The WAAS differential correction should take you from and estimated position error (EPE) of 15 meters down to about 3 meters. The problem with WAAS is that is usually the first signal you loose as you head into the woods. It is good in the open but gets real spotty when condition get difficult.

 

I am assuming that you want a non-mapping unit to keep the cost down so with that in mind I think I would recommend the Garmin eTrex basic, Garmin 12, or Magellan 315. Of these I would lean to the Garmin 12 but I am partial to Garmin. icon_smile.gif But if you can wing the money take a look at the II+ or III+ I don?t think you would be disappointed with the performance.

 

Sorry I got wordy.

mcb

Share this post


Link to post
Guest mcb

If you are looking for a rugged GPS without mapping features then I would look at the eTrex (the original yellow one), or the GPS 12 from Garmin, or the Magellan 315. All three of these units are very rugged. You can read all type of horror stories of someone leaving theirs on top of their car and such and the unit surviving.

 

As long as you get a modern 12 channel GPS then they all have the same accuracy. You do have to watch with some of the low end Magellan units like the 300 and 310 they display less precision on their nav screens. The big think to think about here is not accuracy as much as the sensitivity of the receiver. All 12-channel GPS units use a similar algorithm to calculate their position. This position gets better when it can talk to more satellites. This is why many people claim that the Magellan 315 is more accurate then the Garmin eTrex. Its not more accurate but the 315 has a better antenna then the eTrex and thus in a some difficult situation like heavy tree cover it usually can use more satellite to calculate its position. Thus giving you a more accurate position. The greater accuracy here has nothing to do with the computer inside but the about of information it has to use

 

So if being very rugged and have a good antenna then the Magelland 315 is pretty good for the price. If you can sacrifice a little ruggedness then I would take a look and the Garmin II+(not the II). This unit has one of the best antenna receiver setups going in a handheld short of running and external amplified antenna. This is the Grandfather of the III, III+ and the just released V. Most users out there will tell you that in heavy tree cover and other adverse conditions you can?t bet the II+, III+ unit for there reception.

 

The only way that you will get more accurate is to go to a differential capable unit. There is two type of differential correction. The older technology used a separate receiver that receive a ground based signal that was then feed to a DGPS capable GPS unit. This is bulky and expensive but most hand held out there can do this. You just have to by the separate Differential receiver and hook it up. The other way is call WAAS (Wide Area Augmentation System). This uses a new satellite to broad cast the differential correction to the unit. WAAS is a new system and slightly more accurate then the older DGPS beacons but, the only non-mapping WAAS units I can think of are the Garmin GPS 76 and the Garmin eTrex Venture. The WAAS differential correction should take you from and estimated position error (EPE) of 15 meters down to about 3 meters. The problem with WAAS is that is usually the first signal you loose as you head into the woods. It is good in the open but gets real spotty when condition get difficult.

 

I am assuming that you want a non-mapping unit to keep the cost down so with that in mind I think I would recommend the Garmin eTrex basic, Garmin 12, or Magellan 315. Of these I would lean to the Garmin 12 but I am partial to Garmin. icon_smile.gif But if you can wing the money take a look at the II+ or III+ I don?t think you would be disappointed with the performance.

 

Sorry I got wordy.

mcb

Share this post


Link to post
Guest found

does anyone know anything about the magellan Tracker? I have 2.. and can't find anyone else that has one.

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 0

×
×
  • Create New...