GPS - 8 vs 12 channel ... a web-site of interest ...

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guest
  • Start date Start date
G

Guest

Guest
Having tried to wade through all the data and info - passed to me over the years that I have run GPS Nav group - I dragged through my old favourites etc.

8 Channel vs 12 Channel GPS

This site deals directly with the question and I can only say that the guy writes a believable text. As to being correct - I leave that to the experts.

I can say that his description about different receivers - mirrors my GPS sets over the years ... from the old Garmin single step machine that jumped from one sat to next ... through the Magellan that "appeared" to be parallel but I belive is not, to the eTrex that seems to lock on and track so much faster and more reliably than all I have seen or had before ...

I also remember using Transit on ships many years ago ... a system that I am glad got replaced / superceded with better - GPS system ...

So I leave it the reader of the site ....
 
So let me get this straight.

One question.

Ten pages and almost a hundred posts of flames, insults, tears, opinions, partial reconciliations...

...and the answer to the question is:

Most folks find no difference in a unit that tracks 8 versus a unit that tracks 12

dv.
 
Older than the hills...

The article you've linked to was last updated in 1998! In the fast-moving world of GPS products, it surely has no relevance today.
 
Re: Older than the hills...

But it does, because the original question was about an old 8-channel jobbie: to get a comparison you'd have to go back in time a bit, cos mostly all of the newer ones are 12-channel...
 
[ QUOTE ]
Most folks find no difference in a unit that tracks 8 versus a unit that tracks 12

[/ QUOTE ]
Yup... in fact it was answered in the first page of the original post by
Forethought
[ QUOTE ]
The 8 channel receiver will be just as good as a 12 channel in a boat once underway where nothing much gets in the way of the sky. 12 channels are better in town, a car or walking when you need to quickly find a different set of visible satellites.
Quite often there are less than 8 satellites in the sky anyway.

There is no need to discard a GPS just because its 8 channel. Other factors should come into it. Like what you need it for.
Do you want chartplotting or just a position ?


[/ QUOTE ]

poter
 
Re: Older than the hills... agreed ...

But I am trying to post reagrding a aquestion of whether its worth having a 12 recvr against an older 8 .....

I still have an 8 and I definitely see an improvement in the 12 against it.

There are plenty of people out there who are stil using older gear than '98 ... which can be either sequential or multi-plex ... parellel in those days would have been expensive if available ....
 
there used to be someone called Nigel that lived in Latvia had a raceing boat and MOBO in the UK. He had a yahoo site about GPS i remember but the answers to questions were quite complicated i think??

I wonder it it still exists small-boat-champ should get together with him im sure nigel would enjoy a winter trip to the Var (France)
 
Trouville .... I am Nigel

I changed my ID as I wanted to champion the smaller boat on the forums ....

I sold the Race Boat in Tallinn, still have the Motor-Sailer in UK and also the weekender boat in Latvia ....

GPS Nav group is still going strong - with even more members now .....

Hope winter here is not being too unkind to you ...
 
An expensive early 6 channel parallel receiver was better than most of today's cheap 8 to 12 channel receivers. The former picked out the best satellites to use based on geometry and elevation, the latter use everything in sight above 5 degrees elevation and frequently use "bad angles" in the position computation and degrade the accuracy of the result.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top