View Full Version : GPS Watch
FanaticFringer
12-28-2006, 03:20
Anyone have an opinion on this watch?
I wonder how accurate the GPS would be in the woods.
FanaticFringer
12-28-2006, 03:20
Sorry. Here's the link:
www.campmor.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?productId=26103591&memberId=12500226&storeId=226&catalogId=40000000226&langId=-1
JimSproul
12-28-2006, 12:14
I have not used that watch although I do use a Times Ironman for pacing.
I have a Garmin 301 which does heart rate and GPS. The problem I have with these units is battery time. When you are in a valley or an area where they can't get a set of signals they will search for another signal. Searching burns batteries.
Suunto makes a wrist mounted unit the has a seperate and larger GPS pod which could be mounted on the top of a backpack for better signal.
Earl Grey
12-28-2006, 12:16
That's a really good deal if the watch is any good. I wonder how it works? It says something about an additional part you have to wear to rx GPS signals. I cant find a picture of the GPS transceiver to see how big it is or anything or any specs.
gdwelker
12-28-2006, 12:38
A fellow sea kayaker purchased a watch style gps. After several trips, he noted that his speed was either much higher than he thought it should be, or much lower.
A little experimentation found that what was happening was that if the gps updated it's position during the time when his arm was moving forward in the stroke, he was really measuring the speed of the kayak plus the speed of his arm moving forward. If the gps updated during the time when his arm was moving backward in the stroke (caming back toward his body) the measured speed was the kayak speed minus the speed of his arm moving backward.
So I would not trust a speed measurement based on a fully wrist mounted gps.
Earl Grey
12-28-2006, 12:43
I think you can attach it to your belt which would limit motions like that.
I don't think it's a GPS as much as a speedometer/watch that uses GPS technology. It doesn't appear to have waypoint/go to functions.
how many of you guys actually use a gps when hiking?:-?
i got one for christmas and was thinking about taking it on my next trip?
Rufous Sided Towhee
12-29-2006, 15:47
how many of you guys actually use a gps when hiking?:-?
i got one for christmas and was thinking about taking it on my next trip?
I've never been able to justify the weight on past trips on well-marked trails, like the AT. My Garmin Legend weighs about 4 ounces, which doesn't sound like much until you realize that 4 oz is a quarter-pound. :-? There are a lot better things to do with those ounces on a well-marked trail, IMHO.
OTOH, I will prob take it on my upcoming thru of the ATL, since this trail isn't nearly as well-travelled or well-marked as the AT and I will be marking waypoints for resupply, trailheads and food caches just for safety's sake.
I do wish I could afford a much smaller, lighter unit tho...wonder what the choices are these days?
Wish someone made a combination GPS/digital camera/cellhone unit that was weighed under 4 oz...or do they?
What A Good Idea
Cell Phone, Camera(decent Magapixel) And Gps All In In One
I Bet Somebody Makes One
A fellow sea kayaker purchased a watch style gps. After several trips, he noted that his speed was either much higher than he thought it should be, or much lower.
A little experimentation found that what was happening was that if the gps updated it's position during the time when his arm was moving forward in the stroke, he was really measuring the speed of the kayak plus the speed of his arm moving forward. If the gps updated during the time when his arm was moving backward in the stroke (caming back toward his body) the measured speed was the kayak speed minus the speed of his arm moving backward.
So I would not trust a speed measurement based on a fully wrist mounted gps.GPS doesn't measure speed. It calculates it. It locates your position, locates another position a short time later, and calcualtes speed based on the difference between the positions and the time involved.
GPSs usually only change the velocity display after taking measurements several seconds apart. The postion of the kayaker's arm might be significant if the positions were sampled a half second apart, but would be insignificant if sampled 15 seconds apart.
The biggest reason for volocity errors are errors in position locating. The more distance between the position fixes the more accurate the speed measurement, so the faster you are moving (walking or kayaking), the smaller the error introduced. They work almost perfectly in a vehicle moving at a steady speed.
This is a bit simplied, but you get the idea.
GPSs are better as postion locaters than speed calculators.
SGT Rock
12-30-2006, 06:50
I would rather it just tell me the time and location in either UTM, MGRS, or Lat Long, although most Lat Long not the greatest way for land navigation. All that other speed calc or having waypoints is unnecessary.
I would rather it just tell me the time and location in either UTM, MGRS, or Lat Long, although most Lat Long not the greatest way for land navigation. All that other speed calc or having waypoints is unnecessary.
Location is a waypoint, isn't it? :confused:
SGT Rock
12-30-2006, 08:39
Not exactly. I can look at my GPS and it will tell me my location at that exact time and place. A waypoint is a stored location you are trying to get to or have been and you want to store that location for use later.
So say I am walking along through the woods and using a map, I think I probably know where I am to within about 100 meters. I can pop out my GPS and do a quick check to see where I am and make sure where I am and where I think I am jive.
Using a waypoint, you can store a location of some place you are trying to get (say a shelter) and when you use your GPS it can show you what direction to go and how far you are from that way point. I rarely ever use waypoints. About the only thing I ever do with my GPS is verify where I think I am. As to waypoints, I can see where I am and where I want to go, and then terrain associate my way there based on my map read. I know some people rely solely on their GPS and Waypoints for navigations, but I hate that sort of navigation.
Two Speed
12-30-2006, 09:04
. . . but I hate that sort of navigation.Fooled with a GPS unit for navigation in a small boat. Right handy there. On a trail I prefer a good map, supplemented by a compass as necessary. Point-to-point navigation using a GPS strikes me as potentially hazardous. Too much time looking at an electronic device, not enough time looking at your surroundings. Just my $0.02
SGT Rock
12-30-2006, 09:16
Fooled with a GPS unit for navigation in a small boat. Right handy there. On a trail I prefer a good map, supplemented by a compass as necessary. Point-to-point navigation using a GPS strikes me as potentially hazardous. Too much time looking at an electronic device, not enough time looking at your surroundings. Just my $0.02
That is sort of my experience as well. A GPS in the woods to validate or correct where you really are compared to where you think you are is a good way to use one if you plan to have one. But once you have verified that, using terrrain and the occasional azimuth check is a better way to be in tune with what is going on around you and traverse to a location based on what the terrain and trail dictate.
I've found that navigating a trail by waypoints is not only a poor way to travel, it also doesn't work well. A trail can switch back or curve in directions that navigation by way-point doesn't calculate in there, so say if you were at Walasi-Yi and wanted to get to your waypoint on top of Blood Mountain, well the GPS will not tell you where the trail it, it will shoot you straight to the top - but if you try walking it like that, it will probably take longer because straight up isn't always the best way.
Early GPSs came with the ability to only have a few waypoints, so you could say, put in a few tricky definitions for that day, but not the whole trail. These days, to try to make up for this, GPSs try to have memory for thousands of waypoints so you can add the entire trail curves and turns on a route to try and plot the entire trail. This sort of works, but IMO only makes GPS use more complicated than it really needs to be. It is easy to see you are at MB40149011 and that is about right here on the trail, and that means you only have 2.5 more miles to go - and you are about where you ought to be. But with all that other stuff, you have to make sure your waypoints are up to date, you GPS didn't skip a waypoint when it was out of signal because of canopy, and then you have to have it on more often to track with - meaning less lifespan for the battery. Plus you have to have a way to get all those waypoints for the trail and if you rely only on the GPS and do not have a map, well there is no back up and there is no off trail info available unless you get a really expensive one and spend a lot of time adding maps to the limited memory.
But I would like a watch where I could look down occasionally and see what my grid location was just like a time check. That would be handy as long as it wasn't more complicated than it has to be.
I've only used a GPS a couple times for geocaching.
On the CDT my partner had one and we used it several times to get back on trail after missing a turn. He'd find our location using a GPS, plot that point on the map using a "waypointer (http://www.aerostich.com/catalog/US/Waypointer-GPS-Scale-p-16343.html)" find a suitable point on the trail on the map to get back on the trail, use the waypointer again to pick the coordinates off the map, enter those into the GPS and hit goto. It worked great and saved walking back a mile or two to the missed turn to get back on trail.
When lost, just being able to locate yourself on the map is more than half the battle and where a GPS shines. It's easier said than done with just a map and compass.
SGT Rock
12-30-2006, 09:43
It is easier and sometimes faster. But from what I have been led to understand about the CDT that using resectioning with a map and compass could be pretty easy since the areas are mostly open and terrain is prominent. What is your experience with the terrain out there Sly.
BTW, I go a video from Adam Pelletier from his hike of the CDT this year. That looks like an awsome trail experience.
Two Speed
12-30-2006, 09:46
Back to the boat business for a sec: the local fishermen didn't seem to need them much. Evidently they had charts, knew the waters and didn't need some gee-whiz double clutching piece of electronics to show them where they were, and appeared to be too busy making a living to mess around with a GPS anyway. This was around Port St. Joe and Appalachicola, some oystermen and shallow water fishermen left the last time I was down there four or five years ago, but I understand that's changing pretty rapidly.
Rock, you touched on one of my bete noir's. Batteries. I don't want to become reliant on a piece of electronics, then have the battery crap out on me. I'd be truly upset if the GPS function caused my watch to give up, in part because I use a Timex with a built-in flux gate compass. I'll personally guarantee the Timex to be accurate to the nearest 45 degrees. Yeah, I'm relying on a battery powered device, but the Timex seems to get four or five years out of a battery, so I've usually got plenty of notice when that sucker's about to act up. To date all the GPS units I've fooled with seem to be battery hogs, relatively speaking.
Back in the day, when I was making a living as a member of a survey party I bought a Suunto sighting compass, guaranteed accurate to the nearest 1/2 degree. I've had to use it to follow property lines, etc, and provided I correctly allowed for magnetic deviation I have no reason to dispute Suunto's claim. I used to bring that backpacking, and found that as long as I kept a reasonable estimate of my position going and wasn't doing anything too technical the Suunto was overkill. The Timex is sufficiently accurate, significantly cheaper, much lighter, far more tolerant of field conditions and less susceptible to loss.
This leads to me to ask a possibly offensive question: unless you're indulging in a spot of geocaching what the heck does anyone need a GPS for on the Appalachian Trail? HYOH and all that, but I don't understand the need to mess around with a potentially troublesome electronic device.
Hmmm, I seem to have exceed the "$0.02 worth" limit and spouted off with at least a nickel's worth. :D
SGT Rock
12-30-2006, 09:55
As for my opinion, you don't need a GPS on the AT. If you have a map, you can do a sort of dead reckoning based on time and terrain association in my experience.
Example, you know the shelter is 2 mile past a certain road crossing, and you crossed that 20 minutes back, plus the terrain is not very steep up or down, that means I have probably traveled one mile already and should hit the shelter in about another 20 minutes. If you had to point to where you are on the map, well that would be the trail, and as to the where on the trail you are probably within 0.1 miles of where you think you are. Close enough for trail work.
This leads to me to ask a possibly offensive question: unless you're indulging in a spot of geocaching what the heck does anyone need a GPS for on the Appalachian Trail?
Since The AT is such a well marked trail you don't, it would be more of a toy. Same with the PCT. Most people don't use them on the CDT either, but it's not a well marked trail and it did save several miles/hours of retracing steps.
Slosteppin
12-30-2006, 10:03
how many of you guys actually use a gps when hiking?:-?
i got one for christmas and was thinking about taking it on my next trip?
I carry a Garmin for most dayhikes, XC skiing and snowshoeing (when we have snow!)
While I do sometimes check my speed, the primary use is just to see how far I went that day. When alone (most of the time) I also set the truck location as a waypoint because I often go off trail.
I will probably also carry it backpacking this next year since I will be going solo most of the time.
If you just calculate the distance from start to finish it will be straight line and much shorter than the distance traveled. I reset the distance traveled each time I go out.
Slosteppin
It is easier and sometimes faster. But from what I have been led to understand about the CDT that using resectioning with a map and compass could be pretty easy since the areas are mostly open and terrain is prominent. What is your experience with the terrain out there Sly.
BTW, I go a video from Adam Pelletier from his hike of the CDT this year. That looks like an awsome trail experience.
As I said, we really only used it a couple times as a step saver. One time we were in the woods and another on open plain without discernible landmarks. But for the most part they're not needed.
I have another CDT video by Savant who hiked in 2005 that I actually like better. I'll make a copy of and send it to you when I finally get that package together. :o
SGT Rock
12-30-2006, 10:14
Hell I leave here in 44 days. I may get it if you mail it out soon.
Two Speed
12-30-2006, 10:31
Since The AT is such a well marked trail you don't, it would be more of a toy. Same with the PCT. Most people don't use them on the CDT either, but it's not a well marked trail and it did save several miles/hours of retracing steps.You've been there and I haven't, so I'll take your word for it. It didn't sound like your partner spent their days buried in the thing, though.
Hell I leave here in 44 days. I may get it if you mail it out soon.Gonna use a GPS to get home?
OK, that was a pretty lame wisecrack. Come on back and maybe we'll get a chance to dispute the superiority of cognac vs Tennesee whiskey as adult beverages. You bring the whiskey and I'll bring the cognac and we can do side-by-side comparisons. :banana
Hell I leave here in 44 days. I may get it if you mail it out soon.
I know! How long did it take me to get you that hat, two years? :o
You've been there and I haven't, so I'll take your word for it. It didn't sound like your partner spent their days buried in the thing, though.
No, not really. He did pull it out to check our speed a couple times crossing the Red Desert on BLM roads a couple times. 3.3, 3.4, 3.5, 3.6, 3.7. Each time he announced the speed my feet hurt more! ;)
Two Speed
12-30-2006, 10:43
No, not really. He did pull it out to check our speed a couple times crossing the Red Desert on BLM roads a couple times. 3.3, 3.4, 3.5, 3.6, 3.7. Each time he announced the speed my feet hurt more! ;)Were you walking or driving a la Fred Flintstone? Dang, you move pretty fast for an ol' broke down hiker!
SGT Rock
12-30-2006, 10:48
You've been there and I haven't, so I'll take your word for it. It didn't sound like your partner spent their days buried in the thing, though.
Gonna use a GPS to get home?
OK, that was a pretty lame wisecrack. Come on back and maybe we'll get a chance to dispute the superiority of cognac vs Tennesee whiskey as adult beverages. You bring the whiskey and I'll bring the cognac and we can do side-by-side comparisons. :banana
Well I personally won't but I bet the pilot on the freedom bird does.
I know! How long did it take me to get you that hat, two years? :o
I know. Maybe I can just drive over to NC and get it now that I live in TN.
Were you walking or driving a la Fred Flintstone? Dang, you move pretty fast for an ol' broke down hiker!
That was after about 1800 miles and on the flats. I didn't start out that way! ;)
Two Speed
12-30-2006, 10:52
Uh, Rock, check Sly's coordinates.
I know. Maybe I can just drive over to NC and get it now that I live in TN.
I'm near Atlanta now. :( I'll do my best to get it out next week. How long does it usually take for a package to get there?
Uh, Rock, check Sly's coordinates.
N33*49.949' W084*41.376'
SGT Rock
12-30-2006, 11:05
I'm near Atlanta now. :( I'll do my best to get it out next week. How long does it usually take for a package to get there?
About 2 weeks. So if you get it off by the end of next week, I should get it about the 20th give or take a few days.
N33*49.949' W084*41.376'
Dang, that is too far south and west to be close to the AT.
Dang, that is too far south and west to be close to the AT.
About 75 SW of Amicalola. Heading there right now.... Y'all a Happy New Years!
SGT Rock
12-30-2006, 11:28
Happy new year. Light a campfire and remember me ;)
Lone Wolf
12-30-2006, 11:29
About 75 SW of Amicalola. Heading there right now.... Y'all a Happy New Years!
your ass is gonna get wet tomorrow!:eek:
slacklinejoe
01-05-2007, 18:57
Not to try and argue any points about overreliance on technology but many GPS systems use "tracks" as well as waypoints so it can have a complex trail shape to follow even without maps loaded with waypoints along that trail as necessary. It's a feature many folks done use, but it can certainly be useful if prepped before you leave.
slacklinejoe
01-05-2007, 19:05
"It's a feature many folks don't use" - can't type and couldn't find an edit button.
I've never been able to justify the weight on past trips on well-marked trails, like the AT. My Garmin Legend weighs about 4 ounces, which doesn't sound like much until you realize that 4 oz is a quarter-pound. :-? There are a lot better things to do with those ounces on a well-marked trail, IMHO.
OTOH, I will prob take it on my upcoming thru of the ATL, since this trail isn't nearly as well-travelled or well-marked as the AT and I will be marking waypoints for resupply, trailheads and food caches just for safety's sake.
I do wish I could afford a much smaller, lighter unit tho...wonder what the choices are these days?
Wish someone made a combination GPS/digital camera/cellhone unit that was weighed under 4 oz...or do they?
I have the Garmin 305 (got it for Christmas as well) and was wondering how you will power your GPS on your thru. I leave in 14 months to thru and would take my Garmin if it were solar powered like the Casio G-shock. I expect battery charging to be a tad tough on the AT. I am very surprised I can't find a solar powered unit like that anywhere.
The choices for lighter and smaller units do not SEEM to expand significantly even if you spend more. The 305 was about $200 and is not light.
That is sort of my experience as well. A GPS in the woods to validate or correct where you really are compared to where you think you are is a good way to use one if you plan to have one. But once you have verified that, using terrrain and the occasional azimuth check is a better way to be in tune with what is going on around you and traverse to a location based on what the terrain and trail dictate.
I've found that navigating a trail by waypoints is not only a poor way to travel, it also doesn't work well. A trail can switch back or curve in directions that navigation by way-point doesn't calculate in there, so say if you were at Walasi-Yi and wanted to get to your waypoint on top of Blood Mountain, well the GPS will not tell you where the trail it, it will shoot you straight to the top - but if you try walking it like that, it will probably take longer because straight up isn't always the best way.
Early GPSs came with the ability to only have a few waypoints, so you could say, put in a few tricky definitions for that day, but not the whole trail. These days, to try to make up for this, GPSs try to have memory for thousands of waypoints so you can add the entire trail curves and turns on a route to try and plot the entire trail. This sort of works, but IMO only makes GPS use more complicated than it really needs to be. It is easy to see you are at MB40149011 and that is about right here on the trail, and that means you only have 2.5 more miles to go - and you are about where you ought to be. But with all that other stuff, you have to make sure your waypoints are up to date, you GPS didn't skip a waypoint when it was out of signal because of canopy, and then you have to have it on more often to track with - meaning less lifespan for the battery. Plus you have to have a way to get all those waypoints for the trail and if you rely only on the GPS and do not have a map, well there is no back up and there is no off trail info available unless you get a really expensive one and spend a lot of time adding maps to the limited memory.
But I would like a watch where I could look down occasionally and see what my grid location was just like a time check. That would be handy as long as it wasn't more complicated than it has to be.
Sounds like what you are saying is one of those forehead slappers: the GPS calculates in a straight line, and the trail does not go in a straight line. DUH! I new that (but I guess I forgot to recall it:-?). Thanks for the lesson in common sense, Sarge!