Garmin Forerunner Series and Whites Coverage

[una_dogger]

Is anyone using one of the Garmin Forerunner series (205-305-405) to trailruns/hikes in the Whites and if so, how are you finding the accuracy of the elevation/distance logs and the strength of the GPS satellite coverage?

Tks in advance for any useful beta.

 

[smitty77]

Max had an older forerunner (probably 5 years ago now) that didn't hold the GPS lock very well when under the tree cover, especially when strapped to your arm. It did better hanging on the pack, but I remember the GPS track of our hike up the Air Line to Madison (on FOT48 2004?) being very broken. He ended up selling it on eBay shortly after. Maybe the newer versions are much better? I would hope so, otherwise I wouldn't waste my money based on what I observed.

Hopefully someone can chime in with some current, more useful beta.

 

[Maddy]

Max had an older forerunner (probably 5 years ago now) that didn't hold the GPS lock very well when under the tree cover, especially when strapped to your arm.

Hopefully someone can chime in with some current, more useful beta.

Mine is about that old to and was a gift. Same problem.
I don't use it ever but love my simple Garmin Etrex H to track. No problems and use it often, sometimes just for the fun of it.

 

[DougPaul]

I would only consider one of the "high-sensitivity" versions. (Some forerunners are, some are not.)

Carrying a GPS on a part of the body that swings back and forth (such as an arm, hand, or leg) makes it much harder for the GPS to maintain lock. GPSes work best when stationary or in steady motion.

Doug

 

[alistair]

I just bought a Forerunner 305 for tracking my training.
I used it this last weekend on a trip in the Dacks. I'm not sure how useful the results are as I only pulled it out the box minutes before getting into my car to drive to trail head.
I will keep you appraised of how it works out.

 

[RickB.]

Sorry, Una D, just saw this.
Three of our hiking bunch use or have used 205's and another just picked one up (~$115, a bargain). In hiking two or more times per week for almost a year, I have not had a significant signal loss. On one hike this winter, one of our 205's lost the signal on the Rocky Branch Trail but came to its senses after a mile or so, the only such instance among us. The odometer and elevation functions are as accurate as my 76Csx and much more so (re: mileage) v. a Colorado 400 (understand this is a sample of one). As with its big brethren, the odometer reading ends out a little shy of the mileage indicated when the data is downloaded.
The bread crumb/"map" feature is very effective for finding a return path or intersecting your earlier track at any point.
I use it as a bike computer with the same results and never have to fuss with wheel magnets and the like.
The wrist strap is cheesy and the bike bar mount design is terrible. Battery life is adequate (10-12+ hours) but it would need a recharge for a multi-day adventure. 305 battery life was poorer, likely due to increased draw of the heart monitor function. One of our group upgraded to a newer model because of longer battery life but he is a non-recovering gearhead, anyway, and has found the wireless capability of the newer model hasn't changed his life.
In short, we marvel at the capabilities of these relatively inexpensive devices and have found them reliable, as well.

 

[una_dogger]

Thanks, that was a bargain!

Sorry, Una D, just saw this.
Three of our hiking bunch use or have used 205's and another just picked one up (~$115, a bargain). In hiking two or more times per week for almost a year, I have not had a significant signal loss. On one hike this winter, one of our 205's lost the signal on the Rocky Branch Trail but came to its senses after a mile or so, the only such instance among us. The odometer and elevation functions are as accurate as my 76Csx and much more so (re: mileage) v. a Colorado 400 (understand this is a sample of one). As with its big brethren, the odometer reading ends out a little shy of the mileage indicated when the data is downloaded.
The bread crumb/"map" feature is very effective for finding a return path or intersecting your earlier track at any point.
I use it as a bike computer with the same results and never have to fuss with wheel magnets and the like.
The wrist strap is cheesy and the bike bar mount design is terrible. Battery life is adequate (10-12+ hours) but it would need a recharge for a multi-day adventure. 305 battery life was poorer, likely due to increased draw of the heart monitor function. One of our group upgraded to a newer model because of longer battery life but he is a non-recovering gearhead, anyway, and has found the wireless capability of the newer model hasn't changed his life.
In short, we marvel at the capabilities of these relatively inexpensive devices and have found them reliable, as well.

 

[RickB.]

$117 on Amazon with free shipping.
The model has been discontinued for a while so the supply probably won't last too long

 

[bikehikeskifish]

As I have learned the hard way, buying a discontinued model means it is hard to find accessories as well. Great deal on the device, yes, but I'll be darned if I can find anything to carry it vertically on my shoulder strap. I'm gonna have to customize something.

Tim

 

[alistair]

Good Deal

http://www.amazon.com/Garmin-Foreru..._m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_r=0Y7CNSM73NSQGFMBB6FT

Forerunner 405 - $170

 

[RickB.]

As I have learned the hard way, buying a discontinued model means it is hard to find accessories as well. Great deal on the device, yes, but I'll be darned if I can find anything to carry it vertically on my shoulder strap. I'm gonna have to customize something.

Tim

The "good" news is that Garmin's accessories are generally poorly designed, anyway.
The bike mount (requiring a triathlon wristband) for the 205 was so flimsy that I made my own. Most of the accessories, though, are available on eBay.

 

[bikehikeskifish]

Yeah Rick, I noticed that. The only thing I can find for the 76CSx is the Garmin bag, which looks like a piece of crap to me. No photo exists of the rear, and it claims only to be a belt-loop mount...

When I asked about this previously I got an assortment of carabiner-based solutions... the 76 series hasn't got an attachment loop, other than for a thin string on the bottom

The best looking one I can find is this: http://www.gilsson.com/garmin_gps/cases/r76n.htm but it is discontinued and everybody online is out of stock, and it is not to be found (alone, can get it with a GPS) on eBay.

Tim

p.s. Sorry for hijacking, Sabrina

 

[climbingbassist]

Forerunner

Ive had my 305 for 5 years9 actually Ive had 3- first one stolen with everything else out of my car, 2nd knocked off my wrist as I passed an idiot wearing headphones, and run over. 3rd one is very quiet. I use it for running/ biking. My only attempt to use it hiking was not successful.

 

[una_dogger]

Thanks gang

Ended up gout with a Spot-- doesnt give me accurate mileage but does more than I was initially looking for.

 

[Peakbagr]

Tim,

I've destroyed 2 of the Glisson cases. The clear plastic face looks nice, but tough to manipulate the GPS buttons with it and with any kind of use or bushwhacking or winter wrecks it. I ended up duct-taping the 2 Glissons so the GPS looked like a mummy. The issue is that the neoprene Glisson is a stretchy fit for the GPS and once you duct tape, it's a challenge to get the GPS in and out periodically.

I have 3 of the Garmin cases on different packs. The attachment to vertical packstraps is not the best with the case, but craft shop velcro tape supplemented with velcro electrical cord ties make for a safe attachement.
It's a loose fit inside the case for a 60CSx so I leave the top partially zippered and clip the GPS lanyard to the packstrap with a mini-biner.
Just unzip the top of the Garmin case about 2" and pull it out easily.

They really work if you're willing to spend 10 min velcroing the case to your pack. Buy it from other than Garmin and save money on the case.
You can also sew in closed cell foam inside the case for a snugger fit or put some foam in the bottom of the case as well.

 

[bikehikeskifish]

In response to Alan's post, and to my own queries for a pack carrying solution for the 76CSx, I got the official Garmin GPS case with a belt loop, and I attached it using two 3/4" strips of double-sided Velcro (available at Michaels, and other places, including online) and a small carabiner, like so:

Top to bottom:

1. The load-lifter strap and loop runs through the hydration tube guide
2. The loop at the end gets a carabiner, which also gets the belt loop of the Garmin carrying case
3/4. The double-sided Velcro wraps the shoulder strap and through the belt loop.

I also have a lanyard with a quick release attached to the 'biner so when I pull the GPS out, I can't accidentally drop it.

Tim

 

[Mohamed Ellozy]

Is anyone using one of the Garmin Forerunner series (205-305-405) to trailruns/hikes in the Whites and if so, how are you finding the accuracy of the elevation/distance logs and the strength of the GPS satellite coverage?

Better to reurect an old thread than to start a new one

From today's NY Times: GPS Watch Can Be an Unreliable Running Partner.

But after a while, I noticed something disconcerting. My watch might record my run as, say, six miles, but according to Google Maps, the actual distance was more like 6.5 miles.

That kind of discrepancy, of course, plays havoc with your training. The pace calculated by the watch is much too slow, and the run becomes an exercise in frustration.

So I got another watch, from a different maker. It was just as bad, maybe worse. I returned it and got a third one, but that one seemed to be absolutely accurate only once, when I was running along the lakefront in Chicago, under a clear sky with no tall buildings and few trees nearby.

Perhaps more interesting than the article itself is a link to The Great GPS Test comparing eight units on three types of run. Well worth reading in full (come to think of it, you might as well skip the NY Times article that led me to it )

 

[MichaelJ]

Yeah, a variation of this article made some news source several weeks ago. Basically, all the people who know about how to use a GPS all said "Duh," while the non-tech-savvy having only read the marketing material all shared the surprise of the author.

That said, on your wrist is still a nice, convenient place for a tracker compared to having a full-size device clamped onto your pack or straps.

 

[DougPaul]

Better to reurect an old thread than to start a new one

From today's NY Times: GPS Watch Can Be an Unreliable Running Partner.

Perhaps more interesting than the article itself is a link to The Great GPS Test comparing eight units on three types of run. Well worth reading in full (come to think of it, you might as well skip the NY Times article that led me to it )

Both of these articles suffer from the problem that the author does not seem to understand GPS very well...
* One basic problem that both miss is that one's wrist or lower arm is a lousy place to carry a GPS. (As I mentioned earlier (and explained in another thread), this location has a poor skyview and your arm swings back and forth.)
* They assume that a source like Google maps is accurate enough to use as a standard for evaluating GPSes.
* Mounting GPSes right next to each other may result in mutual interference.
* Typical consumer GPSes compute one position per second, not one every 5 or 6 seconds. It may record fewer points in the tracklog depending on the settings. (Power saving mode on my 60CSx turns the GPS on and off to save power, but increases the error by almost a factor of 3. I hope that wrist GPSes don't use such a mode...)
* Surprise at the max speed--all it takes is one bad point to give you a high max speed.

FWIW, I often take a standard exercise walk (Fisk Hill, Minute Man National Historical Park, Lexington, MA). This route is mostly under trees and I have walked essentially the same route for the last 3 times. My 60CSx (carried loose in the top pocket of my pack, not necessarily oriented vertically) gave me distances of 2.44mi, 2.42mi, and 2.45mi. (I wasn't trying to walk exactly the same distance each time--there were minor variations.) In spite of all the caveats, this is pretty consistent.

Yeah, a variation of this article made some news source several weeks ago. Basically, all the people who know about how to use a GPS all said "Duh," while the non-tech-savvy having only read the marketing material all shared the surprise of the author.

That is pretty much the response that I would expect...

That said, on your wrist is still a nice, convenient place for a tracker compared to having a full-size device clamped onto your pack or straps.

Convenient, but not good from the standpoint of accuracy.

Doug

 

[MichaelJ]

* Mounting GPSes right next to each other may result in mutual interference.

Not what I would expect from a device that's a receiver, not a broadcaster. Why is this?