Garmin GPS failure with a side by side comparison
Posted: Sun Mar 21, 2010 9:39 pm
Just got back from an out of state hunt. My partner and I both had garmin GPS recievers and collars on our dogs. His hand held unit worked fantastic up to about 2 miles in hilly country. Mine would lose signal within 400-500 yards on all recieving collars. Both reciever units were connected to the same dogs. My gps reciever hasent been exposed to excessive ammounts of VHF wattage or interferance.
Im beginning to understand what the gripe is all about. It seems that a side by side comparison in the field between seperate gps recievers will show a widely different result. 90% of the time I had nothing but question marks for the location of the dogs while my partners gps had the dogs located 90% of the time for the same tracked dogs.
There has been a lot of talk about losing signals with the garmins. While I understand the concept of "line of sight" the side by side comparison shows that each Garmin reciever isnt equal to the other.
Im kinda screwed at this time. Ive had the unit too long to return it and the unit basically worked as well as it did when I first bought it. I assumed at the time that the loss of signal had to do with "line of sight". Now with the comparison in the field. It shows that peoples gripes about signal failure may not be due to line of sight but inconsistant performance from one reciever to the next.
Has anybody else been able to make this comparison besides me? What was your result?
Im beginning to understand what the gripe is all about. It seems that a side by side comparison in the field between seperate gps recievers will show a widely different result. 90% of the time I had nothing but question marks for the location of the dogs while my partners gps had the dogs located 90% of the time for the same tracked dogs.
There has been a lot of talk about losing signals with the garmins. While I understand the concept of "line of sight" the side by side comparison shows that each Garmin reciever isnt equal to the other.
Im kinda screwed at this time. Ive had the unit too long to return it and the unit basically worked as well as it did when I first bought it. I assumed at the time that the loss of signal had to do with "line of sight". Now with the comparison in the field. It shows that peoples gripes about signal failure may not be due to line of sight but inconsistant performance from one reciever to the next.
Has anybody else been able to make this comparison besides me? What was your result?