+WARedBear Posted March 8, 2003 Share Posted March 8, 2003 I don't want to upset any Yellow owners but wow!! I just used my new Meridian GPS to find nine out of nine caches today. The GPS pointed me right to every single one of them to the point I did not have to search. I used a friends Yellow before and it got me to the general location but then I would have to search...and search. So my vote goes to Magellan Meridian GPS (it is yellow in color). Quote Link to comment
+nincehelser Posted March 8, 2003 Share Posted March 8, 2003 ...with my eTrex. No problems at all, except for one that was 80-100 feet from where it supposed to be, and all recent finders have been seeing that problem. I've found nearly 200 with an eTrex yellow. No major problems to speak of. George Quote Link to comment
+nincehelser Posted March 8, 2003 Share Posted March 8, 2003 If you don't ocasionally have to search, you aren't doing it right. A good challenging cache won't be betrayed by even the best GPS. I had one where the GPS took me right to the cache, but it was camoed so well, it was impossible to find without a search. George Quote Link to comment
+Renegade Knight Posted March 8, 2003 Share Posted March 8, 2003 quote:Originally posted by WARedBear:I don't want to upset any Yellow owners but wow!! I just used my new Meridian GPS to find nine out of nine caches today. The GPS pointed me right to every single one of them to the point I did not have to search. I used a friends Yellow before and it got me to the general location but then I would have to search...and search. So my vote goes to Magellan Meridian GPS (it is yellow in color). That's luck and has nothing to do with the GPS. But your lucky streak will end and your GPs will still serve you well, even if it is a Magellan! Wherever you go there you are. Quote Link to comment
+WARedBear Posted March 8, 2003 Author Share Posted March 8, 2003 I understand totally. Of the nine caches I found today five of them were what I would consider easy. Two were a little harder and two were hard. One was a return visit but thanks to my learning curve (I found a few since then) I walked right up to it. The last one took three of us an hour to find because it was "hidden" so well. My GPS put me right on top of it but I did not see it because it was environmental friendly. I know there will be days that my GPS might fail me and I might feel like throwing it off the nearest mountain but not today. It made me proud....even if it is a Magellan Meridian..... Quote Link to comment
+Siberian Cacher Posted March 20, 2003 Share Posted March 20, 2003 My lil' yellow etrex has always gotten me w/i 6-9 feet of the cache. When I'm within 15ft, I ususally try and find it w/o the unit: I try to find tracks and other "clues" as to where it might be. The only thing I wish my e-trex did was to input street maps and download various other maps. I will upgrade to another unit, but I will probably always use the e-trex for geocaching. With man, it is impossible, but with God, all things are possible! Quote Link to comment
3fros Posted March 20, 2003 Share Posted March 20, 2003 I wouldn't be shocked if reception were playing a part in it. A person from the Pacific NW where forests are dense had problems with the Etrex. No shock here. I bet that the other posters that have no problems don't live in the dense forest areas where it makes a difference. Just testing out the frog. Quote Link to comment
+nincehelser Posted March 20, 2003 Share Posted March 20, 2003 ...its just the Magellen's software filters more. I'd rather have the sensitivity of the eTrex than the Magellen's not telling you what's really going on. George Quote Link to comment
+JohnnyVegas Posted March 20, 2003 Share Posted March 20, 2003 quote:Originally posted by WARedBear:I don't want to upset any Yellow owners but wow!! I just used my new Meridian GPS to find nine out of nine caches today. The GPS pointed me right to every single one of them to the point I did not have to search. I used a friends Yellow before and it got me to the general location but then I would have to search...and search. So my vote goes to Magellan Meridian GPS (it is yellow in color). I have used both the Yellow E-trex and now the meridian gold. While I never had a problem with the Garmin, I do find the Meridian much better under tree cover. I am also using the Topo software-I do not find my self on the wrong side of rever anymore. Quote Link to comment
3fros Posted March 21, 2003 Share Posted March 21, 2003 I can't believe you bought that "filters more" stuff. I'm sure you heard it from another Etrex user. I'm from Washington, WARedBear is from Washington, I don't see any locations for the rest of the posters except for New Mexico. If you haven't been in the heavy trees that I've been in, then you won't know what I'm talking about. I think it's hilarious when people say something like "The antenna thing is a all hype, I've never had any problems with my Etrex..." and I read that they're from some state with few trees or not dense trees, like Utah, Arizona, New Mexico... to name a few. The dense woods I'm talking about are in Western Washington, and I would bet Western Oregon and Northern California. Remember, Seattle is noted for it's rain and we haven't gotten any snow all Winter. We usually only get snow for about 1 week per year. The cedar trees in my yard try to get every bit of sun that they can (that was until I got sick of the shade and had some of them cut down recently). Besides being a great place to hide a cache, one of the reasons I hid this cache where I did is to mess with the Etrex users. I can pick out an Etrex user when I get a log about how they wandered around and their GPS had problems in the trees. My Mag 315 that I placed it with didn't have problems. Then others say they didn't have any problems I know they at least have a Quad antenna (Garmin or Magellan). One of the geocachers that was complaining about the reception uses a Vista because I hear all the time on this board how wonderful he thinks it is. Which proves to me that most Etrex users that have a hard time in the woods just don't know any better because they haven't tried anything else. So how do I know most of them were using an Etrex? Because before I ever owned a GPS I wanted a Vista and so I used a friends Etrex yellow and went looking for a couple of caches. The GPS did fine with the ones that were not in the woods, but then I did a cache that was in the dense woods. The squirrels must have been laughing at me going off the trail holding the GPS in the air just looking for a spot between the trees to try to get a signal. That killed the Etrex experience for me. After buying a 315 I saw an incredible difference. Here's a picture one of the geocachers took. This little woods is not as dense as it can get around here either. [This message was edited by 3fros on March 21, 2003 at 12:26 AM.] Quote Link to comment
NuclearWinter Posted March 21, 2003 Share Posted March 21, 2003 Well, I'm using the baby brother of the eTrex (Geko 101) and even with the skies being full of storm clouds recently, and me trekking through a forest beside a building, it still kept great accuracy. I'm waiting for a clear day to see how much quicker I can find some caches -NuclearWinter William Barnhill "NuclearWinter" http://www.friedsilicon.net Quote Link to comment
+phantom4099 Posted March 21, 2003 Share Posted March 21, 2003 Weather is not a big factor in accuracy (it almost has no effect, but in really, really, really, end of the earth storms). Wyatt W. The probability of someone watching you is directly proportional to the stupidity of your actions. Quote Link to comment
Blackfoot Posted March 21, 2003 Share Posted March 21, 2003 Now I have a little yellow E-Trex and it works just great! I have never used a Magellan, and probably never will.Not because of their accuracy or how fancy their gagets might be But simply for the fact they are a French owned Co. and as everyone now knows. The French don't support The United States in this war with iraq. Just my opinion, but that's what freedom is all about. Enjoy your Magellans , and I'll stick with my Garmen E-Trex Now let's all have fun out there!! Blackfoot Life is a gift, unwrap it and use it to the fullest! Quote Link to comment
NuclearWinter Posted March 21, 2003 Share Posted March 21, 2003 Just checked up on that, you're right. I think my instructor got his data wrong. Oh well. William Barnhill "NuclearWinter" http://www.friedsilicon.net Quote Link to comment
Blackfoot Posted March 21, 2003 Share Posted March 21, 2003 Sorry about that. Blackfoot Life is a gift, unwrap it and use it to the fullest! Quote Link to comment
+nincehelser Posted March 22, 2003 Share Posted March 22, 2003 ...I've been in much denser canopy than that...I see lots of daylight in that picture. Whatever floats your boat, I guess, but since you say you're only going by your experience, you really don't know what GPS people were using. My eTrex seem to get pretty darn good lock in most places, yet I read cache logs where people complain about getting poor reception at the same cache under similar conditions. Now, since I have the lowly patch, how bad must their antennas be? I know some of those folks have a quad helix, but yet they still get poor reception at times. I guess what I'm saying is that I don't see any hard evidence here. There are so many variables involved (skill of cacher, sat constellation, time of day, cacher persistence, etc.) that I doubt any conclusions could ever be drawn this way. George Quote Link to comment
3fros Posted March 22, 2003 Share Posted March 22, 2003 quote:Originally posted by nincehelser:...I've been in much denser canopy than that...I see lots of daylight in that picture. I have too. Unfortunately this picture is more in a semi clear area and does not give a good representation of the rest of the area, but it's the only picture of the woods I could find in on the page. Remember the aperture of the camera will also adjust to make it the right exposure. quote:Whatever floats your boat, I guess, but since you say you're only going by your experience, you really don't know what GPS people were using. True, I don't know what they were ALL using, but I did say "One of the geocachers that was complaining about the reception uses a Vista because I hear all the time on this board how wonderful he thinks it is." I could point out exactly which post, and how he complains about his GPS having him all over the place, but I don't feel like dragging him into this. You might be able to figure it out if you read the posts, but this is not about that geocacher. If he loves his GPS that's his business. quote:My eTrex seem to get pretty darn good lock in most places, yet I read cache logs where people complain about getting poor reception at the same cache under similar conditions. Now, since I have the lowly patch, how bad must their antennas be? I know some of those folks have a quad helix, but yet they still get poor reception at times. I guess what I'm saying is that I don't see any hard evidence here. There are so many variables involved (skill of cacher, sat constellation, time of day, cacher persistence, etc.) that I doubt any conclusions could ever be drawn this way. If you think the patch is superior, then that's great. I agree with Garmin when they claim on their web site that quad helix antenna has superior reception . By the way, your avatar sure has a lot of sky in the picture. You never did say what state you were from. Quote Link to comment
+Searching_ut Posted March 23, 2003 Share Posted March 23, 2003 I don't know what the photo shows regarding tree cover, but I love the way the dog appears to be posing in front of a very interesting tree base. Great shot. As for forest density, I haven’t found it particularly hard to find forests where no GPS receiver by garmin or Magellan will work, even in the winter. As for which works better, the more I use multiple units, the more I don’t see a clear enough advantage overall to consider there to be a winner when it comes to geocaching. (For recording tracks there is a fairly big difference) That’s why I take both with me most of the time having used a Sportrak and a legend on 89 caches so far. In some areas one receiver does somewhat better, in other areas it’s the other unit with the edge. In the area where I’ve placed my only cache, Quad antenna receivers seem to have more problems because of the canyons, and mountain side you’re on. (Based on personal experience in the area) This will only be a factor on the way up the side of the hill however, as I deliberately picked a spot for the cache where the snow would melt off early in the season, and people would be able to get good readings with any type receiver. Quote Link to comment
+nincehelser Posted March 23, 2003 Share Posted March 23, 2003 I'm an Electrical Engineer and HAM. I know full well the pros and cons of different antennas. What I did say is that the difference is minimal given the DSP, electronics, and software. It's no big deal anymore. The state that I live in is Texas. That doesn't mean we don't have dense trees, nor does it mean I don't travel to other parts of the US. George Quote Link to comment
+smillersmiller Posted March 23, 2003 Share Posted March 23, 2003 quote:Originally posted by nincehelser:I'm an Electrical Engineer and HAM. I know full well the pros and cons of different antennas. What I did say is that the difference is minimal given the DSP, electronics, and software. It's no big deal anymore. The state that I live in is Texas. That doesn't mean we don't have dense trees, nor does it mean I don't travel to other parts of the US. George This argument is just ridiculous. So are you saying the DSPs, electronics, and software available today are so amazingly good that no one ever loses reception with dense overhead foliage? Not even close. Since overhead foliage is a huge problem when using a GPS receiver, it's easy to see how even a slightly improved antenna design could improve the user experience under marginal reception conditions. George, in all your posts, not once have you posted that you've actually used a Magellan 315 receiver side by side with your eTrex. Your conjecture about DSPs and etc is just that. You've managed to imagine that there can't be a difference without putting your theory to the test, while at the same time claiming those of us who have used different receivers side by side are just imagining things. Scott ICQ: 5563417 Quote Link to comment
Blackfoot Posted March 23, 2003 Share Posted March 23, 2003 I think you all have too much time on your hands, and are full of crap. Just my opinion again. You guys make me laugh. Having a spat about better reception. You do know there are people dieing in the Middle East Right? Life is a gift, unwrap it and use it to the fullest! Quote Link to comment
+nincehelser Posted March 23, 2003 Share Posted March 23, 2003 The electronics have minimized the necessity for extreme antenna sensitivity. I'm sorry you don't like that fact. People are still finding and placing caches easily with these "inferior" patch antennas. People are still going around in circles with quad-helix. The difference is so minimal its hardly worth arguing about. As far as using them side by side, yes. Nothing led me to bow to the "superiority" of quad-helix. Yes, in certain sat configurations, one may do better than the other. However, the sat configurations are always changing. So the advantages/disadvantages come and go. Some people claim the quad-helix is poor in canyons, or where there is a lot of multi-path. Can't say I disagree with them, since quad-helix gives preference to the horizon, and too much gain with multi-path can be a bad thing. I've used several brands of GPS systems. Each has their own "feel" and characteristics, but they've all done the job. There are several other factors involved that wash out the antenna issue. But, hey, I guess if you feel so strongly about the antenna issue to put it in your profile, then I doubt you're going to consider any other position. George [This message was edited by nincehelser on March 23, 2003 at 02:10 PM.] Quote Link to comment
scuzzlebutt Posted March 23, 2003 Share Posted March 23, 2003 Meridian is French! I vow a medidian boycott! All my avian water is gone and so is my meridian. Hello etrex! "we surrender" -France www.francesucks.com Quote Link to comment
+nincehelser Posted March 23, 2003 Share Posted March 23, 2003 ...and the reason they don't have a small patch antenna model is they don't have the smarts to make one! George Quote Link to comment
Blackfoot Posted March 23, 2003 Share Posted March 23, 2003 LOL Got to Love those people who boycott France products Blackfoot Life is a gift, unwrap it and use it to the fullest! Quote Link to comment
+lostinjersey Posted March 23, 2003 Share Posted March 23, 2003 quote:Originally posted by Blackfoot:LOL Got to Love those people who boycott France products yeah, cause the french never did nothing for us. Except for training our military leaders in strategy during the revolutioanry war. that, and oh yea, providing us with supplies during the same war. www.gpswnj.com Quote Link to comment
Blackfoot Posted March 24, 2003 Share Posted March 24, 2003 Yeah, like we still fight that way today, and the French ain't supplyin sh@! now!! Blackfoot Life is a gift, unwrap it and use it to the fullest! Quote Link to comment
+fishin'fool Posted March 24, 2003 Share Posted March 24, 2003 Hey 3fros,I live in a place where we have little trees and my legend works great.That's a littletree,right.Oh,and buy the way it's not just trees that grow big around here.ha ha fishin'fool was here! [This message was edited by fishin'fool on March 24, 2003 at 10:40 PM.] [This message was edited by fishin'fool on March 24, 2003 at 10:43 PM.] Quote Link to comment
3fros Posted March 24, 2003 Share Posted March 24, 2003 Fishin'fool Sorry, it's the only picture I could find. I wasn't trying to show the size of the trees, but the density (which isn't a good picture for that I admit). BTW, It looks like you must really like that thing. Quote Link to comment
+Searching_ut Posted March 25, 2003 Share Posted March 25, 2003 Hmmm. I must have lost my sense of adventure over the years. My tired old mind thinks maybe standing at that end of a large animal isn't a good idea. Bad things could happen. Think I'll leave the comments at that Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
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.