HikeArizona.COM

I'm wondering if anyone with a GPS knows why I had such a bad experience with one I borrowed yesterday. I'm in the market for buying one, and a friend allowed me to test his ... is was a Garmin eTrex.

I used it when hiking First Water to Battleship Mountain. The first 3.5 miles were fine, and then all of the sudden I looked down (maybe a minute later) and it said I had gone 17 miles, and that my max speed had jumped from 4mph to 47.1mph. I'm honestly not the Dash or Flash Gordon or anything. ;)

From that point on, the reliability of the data was spotty. It never developed a consistent trail from the hike, and on the way back some of the tracking back to the waypoints I created worked...and then others said weird things like 22 miles to the next waypoint that I knew was 1-3 miles away.

Was it just a defective device, or do just GPS's do that sometimes and I just had bad luck? I'm actually now looking into getting a Magellan Triton 500, but any help anyone could give me on this would be much appreciated!

In response to dshillis: where did you have the unit placed?

PageRob wrote:

Grasshopper wrote: ..but why then do we have a "fill in the blanks space" on triplogs and hike descriptions for AEG IF it is generally not
accurate?

You can get AEG from measuring on topo maps and/or using GoogleEarth's (admittedly not 100% perfect) elevation readout.

that's interesting...so you can upload a GPS route that you create on the trail into your computer, and then somehow link it with GoogleEarth to determine that route's AEG? how does that work?

joe bartels wrote:In response to dshillis: where did you have the unit placed?

it was either in my front pocket or in my hand the whole time...

dshillis wrote:in my front pocket

I think that's the issue

If you have a Camelbak or similar pack it'd be best to put it high in the back out most compartment (for signal purposes). Some have them clip on the shoulder strap. I'm not that much into it where I need to check it often.

If you don't have GoogleEarth you should download it from google, it's free after all. You can load routes into it. It's pretty amazing for visuals. Especially on a ten megabit connection that sucker flys seamless. However IMO it's a complete nuisance for routing compared to GPS specific programs. Then again, it's free!

Another reason to get Garmin is they come with software, some of the others you pay extra.

joe bartels wrote:

dshillis wrote:in my front pocket

I think that's the issue

If you have a Camelbak or similar pack it'd be best to put it high in the back out most compartment (for signal purposes). Some have them clip on the shoulder strap. I'm not that much into it where I need to check it often.

If you don't have GoogleEarth you should download it from google, it's free after all. You can load routes into it. It's pretty amazing for visuals. Especially on a ten megabit connection that sucker flys seamless. However IMO it's a complete nuisance for routing compared to GPS specific programs. Then again, it's free!

Another reason to get Garmin is they come with software, some of the others you pay extra.

Using a small piece of double-sided Velcro tape makes it easy to attach it high on a shoulder strap. Although, even with it sitting there I rarely ever look down at it.

In Garmin MapSource one can upload a route and then do a "show profile", which will provide a fairly accurate track of elevation gain along the route. Using that you can estimate the total gain for the trip. It has a little pointer that helps a lot.

joe bartels wrote:However I would only recommend a newer Garmin with expandable memory.

Joe, does that mean you would not recommend any other brand, like Magellan? Or you only recommend a newer Garmin, if you got a Garmin?

It may be too late on the Magellan Triton, with Father's Day right around the corner. ;) But if not, I'd love to know your thoughts out there on the Triton. It has the SiRFstarIII™ chipset which "says" it's accurate to within 3 meters. A 3-axis electronic compass (not using GPS to determine) and a barometer to help warn of changing barometric pressure (in case a storm's a brewin'). But those all, as I'm reading this, may not be new features at all, but the same old stuff that the others (poorly) read?

Grasshopper wrote:I still have a lot to learn about GPS,etc.. t-hank-s for all the good info and for all the knowledgeable ones on this great site!

I would agree there, thanks everyone

I like my Garmin a lot. You just can't expect some things to be too accurate. As mentioned earlier, total distance is reported from sparse sampling and it cuts corners between samples. You have to download and rework to get an accurate answer. Even with continuous coverage, I find about 10% error on the trail. It does even worse when you have outages.

Any new GPS receiver with high accuracy should do well for telling you where you are in almost all places. GPS's with less accuracy also would have trouble in tree cover and canyons, etc, although trees are not generally a problem in over half of AZ!

Other features to look for are

Color: if you want to display maps or data in color
WAAS enabled: these units pick up broadcasted GPS correction signals, making them even more accurate.
Mapping units that can load and display maps
Expandable memory allows you to use even larger maps and store more data
Backlight for use at night
Electronic Compass: can help tell you which direction without having to move (of course, I'd always recommend you bring a real one as well.)
Number of hours of operation/battery life
Waterproof units won't die when they get wet
Floating units if you take them out onto a lake and drop them
Altimeter if you're interested in approximately what your elevation is
Weight and size: how heavy and bulky is the thing

Garmins have a better developer community, in my opinion, for developing 3rd party maps and tools, if that is important to you.

One note on the garmins, the screens are not rugged enough in my opinion, make sure you get a protective carrying case for about 15 bucks if you don't want to scratch it.

nonot wrote:Other features to look for are

Thanks Steve for this additional info to consider!

Just as soon as I receive my GOV stimulus check (where is it!?) I heading to buy a new Garmin 60CSx with accessories. I think the price is now right for this close to "top end" Garmin GPS unit now that they have introduced their new top end unit- The Colorado 300t and 400t unit.

dshillis wrote:

joe bartels wrote:However I would only recommend a newer Garmin with expandable memory.

Joe, does that mean you would not recommend any other brand, like Magellan? Or you only recommend a newer Garmin, if you got a Garmin?

I recommend Garmin because they're products work with more programs, they come with software from what I understand and their customer service is known to be better. The expandable memory is something you may not understand but a month later you'll be wanting it. IMO it doesn't have to be brand new. You can find good barely used ones on eBay. People get them as gifts and never use them so they sell them.

That 60csx looks like a good unit hank, it doesn't have waas, but is pretty fancy otherwise!

nonot wrote:That 60csx looks like a good unit hank, it doesn't have waas, but is pretty fancy otherwise!

Are you sure about that? The 60cs had it. One thing I like about it was that you could turn of waas to save power.

website doesn't mention it on either the 60csx or the 60cx, but does on the base 60, shrug.

nonot wrote:That 60csx looks like a good unit hank, it doesn't have waas, but is pretty fancy otherwise!

can you add the NatGeo TOPO! maps into the 60CSx pretty easily? any downsides to this model?

i might switch from the Magellan Triton 500 instead when buying, as they look pretty comparable but the Garmin boasts much better battery life...seems like a tough call though, as between these two models I've found the Triton 500 for $198 online, and the Garmin 60CSx I can't find any cheaper than $280

by the way, the garmin site does say that the 60 Cx and 60CSx are WAAS enabled...

nonot wrote:That 60csx looks like a good unit hank, it doesn't have waas, but is pretty fancy otherwise!

my little Geko 201 has WAAS- and its the second-most bare bones unit made by Garmin. But it got us out of Deer Creek!
I cant imagine the csx doesnt have WAAS. Or maybe it does, but its not defeatable like other units by Garmin.

They pop up on craigslist now and again; usually for sale by people that never took them out of the box, which is a huge bonus...

dshillis wrote:
can you add the NatGeo TOPO! maps into the 60CSx pretty easily? any downsides to this model?

You can easily transfer routes and waypoints from TOPO!, but not maps. Garmin sells 100k:1 maps for the whole US and 24k:1 maps for only the National Parks, as well as excellent street maps. There are third-party methods of downloading public-domain mapping data. The one I have bookmarked
google "cinci garmin.htm", but I haven't tried it yet myself.

If I were buying a GPS today, it would be the 60CSx.

big_load wrote:You can easily transfer routes and waypoints from TOPO!, but not maps.

oh, that's a downer. the triton will do the maps too...

Do you recall seeing any cigar or saucer shaped objects hovering nearby? ;)

This is a rhetorical post...