Ortovox 3+

I tested three different 3+ transceivers on 10/15/10. I physically measured the distance when the receivers were "locked-on" to the transmitter, consistently displaying distance and direction. I didn't "drag back" the transceiver (i.e., allow it to lock-on and then move further away).

The 3+'s ranges that day averaged 34 meters (the three 3+'s measured 36, 33, and 32 meters). I tested one Tracker2 that day and it measured 39 meters, one Pieps DSP that day and it was 42 meters, and one Pulse which was 51 meters.

The average of my testing Tracker2’s on four different occasions is 36 meters. The average my 19 tests of the Pieps DSP (eight different units on six different occasions) is 44 meters. The average of my six tests of the Barryvox Pulse (four different occasions starting in 2007) is 53 meters.

The 3+’s average of 34 meters is similar to the Tracker2’s 36 meters. Granted more testing may change the results, but testing three beacons should be fairly representative.

(FWIW, I’ve performed 201 formal range tests of more than 70 different avalanche transceivers beginning in 2004. Time to get a life?)

Remember that reception range is not everything. Yes, it’s better to have a longer reception range, but it’s much more important to perform appropriate search strip widths. If your search strip is two wide, you’ll blow the signal search. If your search strip width is appropriate, you’ll succeed.

If you test your transceiver and see significantly shorter ranges, I’d make sure you are inline with the transmitting beacon’s antenna (I think “otter” was at a test park, so he wouldn’t know the orientation of the transmitting antenna). I’d also try testing with a different transmitter (with fresh batteries).

I am concerned with the reported “quirks” in the 3+. I don’t think it’s reasonable to require a searcher to keep moving to get the correct directional indicator. If you are within a reasonable range and change the searching transceiver’s orientation, the direction indicator should adjust within a beep or two. I’ve seen the videos of the “quick” and am concerned, but I’m withholding judgment. I did remove (not lower) my rating of the 3+ from BeaconReviews.com until the dust settles.

Enough typing. The Wasatch is getting buried. Time to skin-up.

Steve
BeaconReviews.com

Thanks Steve!

Thanks Steve!

Yes, ditto, Thanks again, Steve.
I really appreciate you work and unbiased information.

Interesting in that I don't remember seeing on the second searching session [...]

Such inconsistency is consistent with my own testing the last three days, along with another test conducted elsewhere of my own beacon today. All of which prevents rendering any sort of definitive judgement.
(Review should be up soon...)

I am not sure why the range is such an issue since the fine search is where the time is made up and it is a rare avalanche where 30 meter range will inhibit good search practices.

It also seems important that every digital takes a lot of practice to reveal its limitations as well as its strengths. That was true when the first tracker came out and relevant with the triple antenna beacons with their additional functions.

My question is, when people have tested multiple beacons, have they actually verified that the numbers equate to a true measure of distance or just a close representation of the metric system, is .3(on a Tracker orMammut) really 30cm?

My question is, when people have tested multiple beacons, have they actually verified that the numbers equate to a true measure of distance or just a close representation of the metric system, is .3(on a Tracker orMammut) really 30cm?

I once ran some tests for that, but the results really don't show anything, since a beacon can never know the extent of the flux line's curvature, so pretty much any approximation between the two extremes of straight vs super curvy is reasonable.

Lou Dawson/Wild Snow just posted, 12/21-2, his quick review on the 3+, with comments on observed 'pointer' anomalies as well, FWIW.

Lou Dawson/Wild Snow just posted, 12/21-2, his quick review on the 3+, with comments on observed 'pointer' anomalies as well, FWIW.

Actually that's Jonathan_S posting on Lou's site.

Jonathan's article is here .

Steve
BeaconReviews.com

I played with my new 3+ today with my two old F1 Focus transceivers and did not see any erratic behavior. I was not successful in getting the "Partner Check" to work. It would just go into search mode and then "find" my F1. Has anyone had luck with the Partner check?

I played with my new 3+ today with my two old F1 Focus transceivers and did not see any erratic behavior. I was not successful in getting the "Partner Check" to work. It would just go into search mode and then "find" my F1. Has anyone had luck with the Partner check?

Richard, it took me awhile playing to get it to work because of the poorly worded instructions. They say Press the marking button while turning it on (hard to do both at the same time). Instead, switch on search, turn on beacon, then press and hold the mark button. Hold it through displaying the battery strength, then "--" appears, then finally the "00".

Thanks Russ! Ortovox should pay you to edit their manual!  That did the trick...

I got a little more play time in, and I'm liking the 3+ overall.
I tried orienting it vertically (poor coupling) with a searching beacon flat to test the dual-transmitting antenna function. The numbers on my friend's Pulse bumped from 20 to 26-27 from optimal to poor coupling . Then I set my beacon in the snow vertically and let it sit for about 2-3 minutes and observed nor change on the Pulse's indicated distance. Am I testing wrong or what? This was a big selling point for the beacon and I'm a little disappointed by the lack of observable advantages.
Anyone?

I got a little more play time in, and I'm liking the 3+ overall.
I tried orienting it vertically (poor coupling) with a searching beacon flat to test the dual-transmitting antenna function. The numbers on my friend's Pulse bumped from 20 to 26-27 from optimal to poor coupling . Then I set my beacon in the snow vertically and let it sit for about 2-3 minutes and observed nor change on the Pulse's indicated distance. Am I testing wrong or what? This was a big selling point for the beacon and I'm a little disappointed by the lack of observable advantages.
Anyone?

The increase in the 3+'s range (relative to a "normal" transmitter) will only be noticeable if the now-transmitting (i.e., bottom) antenna is pointed toward the receiving antenna. The more important improvement is that the 3+ should be easier for the searching transceiver to locate. If a transmitting beacon is vertical, the flux lines are all vertical (think of the flux lines as shooting straight up from the transceiver and falling from the sky). That’s difficult for any searching transceiver to interpret. When the 3+ switches over and transmits on the horizontal antenna, the flux lines are more parallel to the ground and easier to locate.

Steve
BeaconReviews.com