Garmin v phone app

flet©h

yeehaamcgee wrote:

flet©h wrote:

I use mine (a Nokia 5800) all the time with Viewranger software. If I know

That's waht I have at the moment, and it's so innacurate it's not even funny.
I can ride the same 20-or so mile route, and the distance recorded will vary by up to 6 miles.

Thge altitude accuracy is shocking. I can take three steps in any direction, and gain 300m in altitude. What's even funnier is that on a loop of trail, the start/end altitude have no correlation to each other.

Sounds like your phone is farked mate. I'd try and get it fixed on waranty.

Anonymous

Warranty? I'm due a new one any time soon anyway. sod getting it fixed on warranty.
And besides, I quite like seeing it tell me I've hit 38mph on the Penmachno trail

TowerRider

Sorry but not read all replies, would I be correct in thinking that Bar Shaker is talking total nonsense?? Sounds like a 'techie' in PC World.

May be it is me that is wrong BUT GPS Garmin Edge 705 never lost signal and perfect tracking, same route with Nokia N95 and software mentioned (irrelevant) and the GPS plotting was very wrong when under trees - route woods. HTC Desire same software and tracking spot on plus it was in my Camelbak unlike N95 mounted on bars.

Anonymous

Yep, I think you got the thread sussed. He also doesn't believe in digital error correction.

rudedog

yeehaamcgee wrote:

Yep, I think you got the thread sussed. He also doesn't believe in digital error correction.

Are you sure he's got the thread sussed? He just said that tracking was spot on with his HTC desire , which would completly contradict your opinion thaty all GPS found on phones is nothing more than a "gimmick"?

MarkLG

I've had maybe 8 different Garmin models and a couple of Tomtom, and yes there are differences in accuracy. Whether this is down to internal software or the antennae I've no idea.
I was at the top of a pass in the Alps in the car a few weeks back and had my Dakota with me as well as my Garmin 276c, which I generally use in the motorbike.Both units had WAAS enabled. At the top of the pass the 276c was reading the altitude to within 2m of the true elevation. The Dakota was quite a long way off, more like 20m. This was using GPS data on the Dakota, no the internal barometer to measure elevation. Also the reported accuracy on the devices was different by quite a margin.
The 276c was designed originally as a marine chartplotter, and they do a physically identical version with different display layout for aviation use. It's a few years old now, but I'd definitely rate it as a more accurate device than the more modern Dakota.
I haven't got any experience of phone based systems, but a device which isn't waterproof and can't be mounted to the handlebar is a bit of a non-starter as far as I'm concerned.

tilt

TowerRider wrote:

Sorry but not read all replies, would I be correct in thinking that Bar Shaker is talking total nonsense??

yeehaamcgee wrote:

Yep, I think you got the thread sussed.

Is that really how you think this thread panned out? Blimey.

Jenks66

Dedicated GPS devices usually have a long battery life for constant display of data ranging from 8 hours upwards.
Most phones would struggle to run for 2 hours continuous display without an outside power source.
Many GPS devices can use conventional AA batteries so easy to keep running as dont need mains charger
GPS devices are generally robust whereas phones tend to be more of a fashion item good to guide you to the nearest bar or such and useful to run you sat nav on in the car with an auxiliary power supply

My Garmin etrex rarely looses signal even in the depths of the Forest Of Dean, it gave a warning beep last week for the first time in 6 months to say the signal was week but did not loose the signal.

Both devices have their place but phones are for talking, GPS devices of navigating.
Keep the phone for calling the emergency services as would not be great to run your battery flat using the GPS only to find you need to make an emergency call.
Simple

Bar Shaker

"I haven't read the whole thread (or even much of it) but I just thought I would come on here and make myself look stupid".

Read what I wrote if you want to comment on my posts.

The N95 was the only phone I know of that was worse than my P900. And that phone was dire Are you really judging phone GPS on the basis of it's performance.

You will also find, if you can be bothered to read more than the last couple of posts, that I said the latest phones give perfect coverage. Just as your HTC does.

Then again, perhaps I'm talking nonsense.

Anonymous

Jenks66 wrote:

Both devices have their place but phones are for talking, GPS devices of navigating.

Third function is tracking, and both are good for that. Depending on the phone. An iPhone drains battery fast just by tracking. A Nokia can be left tracking on GPS all day long and still have plenty left for talk time. I know as I've had mine tracking all day in the mountains when skiing.

Thing is, tracking isn't using the display backlight and the GPS is fairly passive and low power as there's no transmitter involved.

For hard core navigation though a dedicated device is going to be better. More so if you really do need to get down to X marks the spot to dig up that treasure .

Anyone else who just needs a quick reference to see where they are, or using it for tracking, and they happen to have a decent GPS smartphone, then it's fine. Or get a Garmin or whatever if you like. Or just use paper maps (I still do for navigation. Just easier and bigger for OS maps).

Does it matter really? No. Go with what works for you.

Anonymous

Ah, I hadn't realised an HTC desire was a phone! :oops: