![]() |
Garmin has announced the Colorado
Based upon the specs, my guess it that this new line may replace the 60-series. The 400t looks very attractive for biking but don't know if there is a way to mount it to a stem or handlebars. One nice feature is that the Colorado will connect to speed/cadence sensors and a hear rate monitor.
Some things I don't like are the size (somewhere between a Vista and a 60) and power consumption (15 hours of batter life as opposed to 20+ for the Visa). |
GPS devices like these are obsolete already. Mobile devices showing at CES have everything in the way of GPS and monitoring of body functions such as heart rate and temperature. The only thing currently missing is a bluetooth enabled cycle computer which is in the works. Monitor your heart rate, speed, location, listen to turn directions and power output and cadence at the crank all on your phone plus connectivity with with the internet by way of cell phone, bluetooth, and WiFi. Of course there is a camera as well!
|
Is the GPS on cell phones satellite based, or is it only useful in places with cell phone coverage?
Also, why is there any push for a small phone that is a good phone without the other crap? I am sure that the quality of the cell phone part of the phone could be increased dramatically by eliminating everything else that I don't use. I don't want a one thing does everything device, I want a small phone with good battery life. Also, since I am hijacking, I will do it all the way... I use an ear bud to keep the RF from the cell phone away from my head (probably paranoid, but it is easy to do), but I am curious as to why people would want a wireless communicator constantly plastered to their head. I realize that blue tooth is lower energy than a cell phone, but between potential risk and another battery to change, why do people buy into blue tooth? I know there is the cool factor, but is there any real advantage? |
Mobile phones will no more obsolete GPS receivers than they obsoleted digital cameras, for largly the same reasons.
|
Originally Posted by Little Darwin
(Post 5952981)
Is the GPS on cell phones satellite based, or is it only useful in places with cell phone coverage?
Originally Posted by Little Darwin
(Post 5952981)
Also, why is there any push for a small phone that is a good phone without the other crap? I am sure that the quality of the cell phone part of the phone could be increased dramatically by eliminating everything else that I don't use. I don't want a one thing does everything device, I want a small phone with good battery life.
Originally Posted by Little Darwin
(Post 5952981)
Also, since I am hijacking, I will do it all the way... I use an ear bud to keep the RF from the cell phone away from my head (probably paranoid, but it is easy to do), but I am curious as to why people would want a wireless communicator constantly plastered to their head. I realize that blue tooth is lower energy than a cell phone, but between potential risk and another battery to change, why do people buy into blue tooth? I know there is the cool factor, but is there any real advantage?
Verizon is opening up there network at the end of this year (2008) so be on the lookout for an explosion of new technology like a Bluetooth enabled bicycle! |
REI appears to have the Garmin Colorado 400t in stock now. Anyone know the difference between this and the Edge 705 besides the power meter function? The Colorado takes AA batteries which solves the problem for long rides.
|
This is in reply to several postings above:
REI doesn't have the Colorado yet according to their website: * Sizes and colors marked with an asterisk(*) are currently out of stock, but can be backordered. Talked to Garmin Rep this week, still not slated to be available until Feb. The Colorado has 96,000 pixels as opposed to the Edge's 38,720 pixels. Does not include the virtual partner features the Edge has. You can load street maps also on either unit. The Edge would be preferred as a training device, but as a multi-purpose unit, the Colorado is better. The 400t includes topo loaded for the US and a shaded relief basemap of the world. It allows for 3D terrain views on the unit. The Colorado has a high sensitivity receiver, the Vista with it's high sensitivity receiver has an 18 hour battery life rating. (Not much difference, especially considering it's processing load.) They can use rechargeable batteries, so it's not that much of an issue anyway. Unless you are competing in a race, the size/weight of the unit within reason should be fairly immaterial. Larger screen is far superior for use while riding. The Colorado also replaces the features of the cycle computer if you have the speed/cadence sensor. There are handlebar mounts for the unit, am hoping Ram-Mount will have their version shortly as I have a 400t on order from Garmin. As to saying it's obsolete is ludicrous. The devices mentioned don't have the screen-size, waterproofness, durability etc. of the GPS. Haven't seen the screens on the phones mentioned, but haven't seen one yet you could read in sunlight on a bar. I wouldn't think of mounting my GPS equipped cell phone on my mountain bike. Too small, too fragile, not waterproof, won't mark spots, trails etc. Silly cell phone can't even handle having a button pressed while playing music - cuts out. |
Originally Posted by n4zou
(Post 5949265)
GPS devices like these are obsolete already. Mobile devices showing at CES have everything in the way of GPS and monitoring of body functions such as heart rate and temperature.
|
Originally Posted by n4zou
(Post 5953544)
All new cell phones are required to have a GPS receiver so the location of the phone user is provided to emergency responders.
|
Originally Posted by gps_dr
(Post 5973391)
This is in reply to several postings above:
REI doesn't have the Colorado yet according to their website: * Sizes and colors marked with an asterisk(*) are currently out of stock, but can be backordered. Talked to Garmin Rep this week, still not slated to be available until Feb. "REI Exclusive until 2/11/08!" Does this mean they have an exclusive on not having it in? |
Originally Posted by quester
(Post 5974137)
Really? Are you sure you're not just talking about a way to triangulate via cell towers?
The increased demand for enhanced 911 (e911) emergency calling capabilities, stimulated by the events of 11 September 2001, has pushed forward GPS tracking technology in cell phones. At the end of 2005, all cell phone carriers were required to provide the ability to trace cell phone calls to a location within 100 meters or less. To comply with FCC requirements, cell phone carriers decided to integrate GPS technology into cell phone handsets, rather than overhaul the tower network. However the GPS in most cell phones are not like those in your handy GPS receiver that you take hiking. Most cell phones do not allow the user direct access to the GPS data, accurate location determination requires the assistance of the wireless network, and the GPS data is transmitted only if a 911 emergency call is made. Complete link to this article is here. http://www.travelbygps.com/articles/tracking.php |
Originally Posted by n4zou
(Post 5949265)
GPS devices like these are obsolete already. Mobile devices showing at CES have everything in the way of GPS and monitoring of body functions such as heart rate and temperature. The only thing currently missing is a bluetooth enabled cycle computer which is in the works. Monitor your heart rate, speed, location, listen to turn directions and power output and cadence at the crank all on your phone plus connectivity with with the internet by way of cell phone, bluetooth, and WiFi. Of course there is a camera as well!
|
Originally Posted by quester
(Post 5974129)
Names, models, links, details!
http://www.cetusgps.dk/ this software is ready to download and use with supported mobile devices. If you want to develop your own software for the Palm platform you can download GPS4Palm here. http://gps4palm.sourceforge.net/ The software package includes all source code and is a very good example of how to code a program for any platform. it also includes fetchmap allowing you to "fetch" the map currently on your mobile device, save it to your device, and allow your mobile device to automatically load that map when the GPS unit is in the area covered by that map. This allows you to continually update maps without being charged for that service. You can also make your own maps and run a paper map across a scanner and use it on your mobile device or PDA. I'm currently working with a group to develop a Bluetooth enabled cycle computer system with off the shelf hardware. this development hardware is currently available at www.mouser.com A basic stamp microprocessor provides the bicycles Bluetooth connection and interface for sensors. http://www.parallax.com/Store/Microc...%2cProductName http://www.parallax.com/Portals/0/Im...00/30068-L.jpg This is coupled with a GPS unit. http://www.tycoelectronics.com/gps/modules.asp http://www.tycoelectronics.com/gps/i...A51pers_bg.jpg After development and testing this product will allow any mobile device or PDA to become a bicycle specific cycle computer with the ability to upload data to any other internet connected device. |
Originally Posted by operator
(Post 5975935)
Please show me a cell phone which includes power and cadence and all those other nice features you mention. I'm espeically interested in the power output.
|
maybe I'm just old school but i've never understood why people need GPS on their bike, but then again I live on an island....
|
Originally Posted by rockabilly808
(Post 6029162)
maybe I'm just old school but i've never understood why people need GPS on their bike, but then again I live on an island....
I saw the Colorado at an REI last weekend and it is very large. Did not like the scroll wheel either. Think I'll get the 705 when it comes out. |
Originally Posted by rockabilly808
(Post 6029162)
maybe I'm just old school but i've never understood why people need GPS on their bike, but then again I live on an island....
|
Originally Posted by Bolo Grubb
(Post 6029571)
I don't need a gps unit for the bike, but it is neat and I am a data junkie :D
Originally Posted by rmac
(Post 6029432)
Those of us that are directionally and map challenged need all the help we can get.
I saw the Colorado at an REI last weekend and it is very large. Did not like the scroll wheel either. Think I'll get the 705 when it comes out. |
There's three main contributions to GPS accuracy:
1) WAAS capability - without it, no better than 10 meter accuracy. With it, 3-5 meter accuracy on average. 2) Antenna - A patch antenna is pretty omnidirectional, but only something like 50% as efficient as a Quadrifilar Helix when the Quad Helix is oriented correctly. This of course means sometimes the patch antenna actually tunes a better signal, but the potential is higher with the Quad Helix. 3) Chip design - There's a variety of GPS chips out there and they are not all equal. The latest, greatest are those with the SiRF chipset. Those have the quickest, most accurate signal acquisition and tracking, especially under cover and in obstructed areas. The reason I bother pointing all this out is that generally the Palm-Pilot and cel phone style GPS will be acceptable for automobile driving directions, but it will never be as accurate as dedicated units like the high end stuff from Garmin. It's up to the user to decide what fits their budget and demands of course, but remember that not all GPS receivers are equal. |
Originally Posted by Photosmith
(Post 6030122)
There's three main contributions to GPS accuracy:
1) WAAS capability - without it, no better than 10 meter accuracy. With it, 3-5 meter accuracy on average. 2) Antenna - A patch antenna is pretty omnidirectional, but only something like 50% as efficient as a Quadrifilar Helix when the Quad Helix is oriented correctly. This of course means sometimes the patch antenna actually tunes a better signal, but the potential is higher with the Quad Helix. 3) Chip design - There's a variety of GPS chips out there and they are not all equal. The latest, greatest are those with the SiRF chipset. Those have the quickest, most accurate signal acquisition and tracking, especially under cover and in obstructed areas. The reason I bother pointing all this out is that generally the Palm-Pilot and cel phone style GPS will be acceptable for automobile driving directions, but it will never be as accurate as dedicated units like the high end stuff from Garmin. It's up to the user to decide what fits their budget and demands of course, but remember that not all GPS receivers are equal. http://www.tycoelectronics.com/gps/modules.asp The latest Tyco Electronics’ SiRF chip set is the III generation A1080-A. This is the chip set used in all GPS receivers with SiRF III labeling. This is true for all suppliers including Garmin. Hand held computers, and PDA's do not have GPS receivers built into these devices. These devices use a wireless connection to a bluetooth capable GPS unit. If you purchase a bluetooth GPS unit with SiRF III chip set you get GPS accuracy as good as any other SiRF III equiped GPS receiver. Smart Phones have a GPS receiver but may not allow you to access the internal GPS receiver without purchasing that function from your cell phone network provider as is the case with cell phone only devices. Purchasing a SiRF III wireless GPS unit avoids extra charges from your cell phone network provider and you get a much better GPS receiver as well. Currently DX has a SiRF III bluetooth receiver for $61.68. http://www.dealextreme.com/details.dx/sku.10614 http://www.dealextreme.com/productim...14_1_small.jpg This receiver is just as accurate as any other GPS unit with SiRF III chip sets including the Garmin units. It also is paired with there smart GPS antenna. http://www.tycoelectronics.com/gps/smart.asp |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:19 PM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.