UKH

Not strictly outdoor gear but something most of us will have an appreciation of vs a city dweller; is there a consensus on what mobile phones have the best GPS receiver?

I have a small Garmin unit for getting a grid reference and wouldn't plan on using a phone for nav, but I do use it for the MTB nerd app and in the car to get to the hills. Got a basic Samsung A3 at the moment and the GPS is miserable, takes ages to find a signal then repeatedly drops, even on wide open motorways.

My first thought was that they're all the same receiver out of the same factory, but my other halves iPhone is much better. I'm not an Apple fan though, so looking for recommendations from other brands. A bonus would be a sturdier/basic phone rather than a slither of glass, but let's see what is suggested!

In reply to Taurig:

Motorola phones have reputation for top notch radio components. All the ones I've had have been great but in the most tiny city walkways. Probably more to do with the money you spend on it though, top spec expensive phone is likely to have better components including GPS/ Glonass. Or does this come as part of SoC these days?


D

In reply to Taurig:

I can't imagine there is any significant difference between the chipsets, with anything having been made in the last 5 years having GPS and Glonass tracking. The skill in the more recent chipsets will be to reduce the power consumption.

What lets the phones down is the terrible compromise antenna which is too small and hidden away amongst all the other components. Adding glitzy aftermarket metallic cases and phone covers probably only makes things worse.
There was some work (I think it even made it to the BBC) showing how you hold the phone makes a significant difference to the reception quality based upon where the antenna is.

i think your approach of going for a sturdier, larger phone will actually help you as the manufacturer might have been able to makes fewer compromises. It's amazing how compact the £600 quid phones are but there is a lot of delicate gubbins crammed in there. If it's any help, my cheapo Motorola G handset GPS works far better than a Samsung Mini 4 and a Nokia lumia phone camera for GPS reception, and all will be trounced by a 10 year old Etrex!

In reply to Taurig:

I've a Sony Z3 compact and the GPS is great, much better than that on the Motorola Defy I used to have. Download the GPSstatus app and download the assistance data to get a faster satellite lock.

In reply to Toerag:


I use Viewranger on my Sony Xperia Z3 Compact and it is brilliant

In reply to Toerag:

I regularly use an old Motorola G phone (1st gen is the smallest) as a nav device in the hills. GPS is reliable and never had an issue getting a lock, unlike my Suunto watch.

In reply to Glyno:


Another using Viewranger on a Sony Z3 Compact. Although we had a map and eTrax it was used for a snow covered Ben Nevis up the tourist path which stopped us following another pair of walkers venture a bit to close to the cornices and instead we set a fresh set of footprints in the snow which all the other walkers behind us used to the summit...we felt quite smug at the time!

In reply to Taurig:

Phones are very likely to have GPS & GLONASS, and some Chinese-sourced chipsets may also have BDS. The more satellites the better.

As said above, the antenna is the big compromise for low profile phones, with full-screen touch screens.

It would probably be illuminating to install something like GPS Status, and do a real-time comparison of the received C/No for the constellation, compared to other phones and GPS receivers.

The argument that more expensive is better certainly doesn’t necessarily hold; at one point, an iPhone had a 16dB reduced GSM sensitivity compared to an equivalent Sony. Hopefully, things have improved since then.

My little Moto E seems to work okay. Maybe I'll do the C/No comparison...

In reply to Taurig:

Didn't notice any problems with my old Samsung Galaxy S2.

These days, I've got a Sony Xperia Z5 and that's been great - use the GPS for satnav (Navmii app) and Strava.

In reply to Taurig:

I have read the responses, and whilst people will tell you that the GPS on the phone they had before is better (or worse) than the one they have now. Or a particular model is 'great' or 'and it is brilliant ' .

Of course it is Nice of them to reply , but it is not really that helpful, as your idea of great or brilliant may not be theirs.

What is needed is the data a proper reference point to measure all the phones against in controlled conditions.

Someone mentioned a 10 year old Etrex, and that would certainly be something to measure against. Otherwise its all a bit subjective. Is there not some real data out there ?

In reply to captain paranoia:


While playing with GPS Status on Moto E and Hudl 1, to check the compass function (for the other thread), the Moto came up with an instant fix (after getting A-GPS data), with a DOP of 0.9 and estimated error of 4m, computing a fix with 11 out of 21 satellites. The Hudl still can't see any satellites. After taking both to the window, the Hudl is just managing to track about three satellites. Oh, no; they've gone...

I'm inside a metal box warehouse office...

So that's a big win for the Moto E sensitivity...

In reply to Jim C:


The C/No measurements reported by most receivers and apps will allow you to compare the relative performance of the receive chains of two or moire devices, but you have to take measurements at same time and place, so they're all seeing the same constellation and degradations. Ideally, log the NMEA stream to get the status messages.

In reply to Taurig:
I've used Samsung S4 & S5 (and previously HTC) with Strava for biking for a good while now; Samsung seem very good and also very stable in Google Maps when navigating driving. Use in preference to my TomTom now. Also use with OS 1:25,000 maps - been impressed with that as well.

When biking, works best in vertical position in my camel back rear pocket (right on the back) and gives a pretty accurate trace on maps. In chest pocket or horizontal in bum bag, accuracy is much much worse (zig zag traces).

The sampling rate also seems much better than friends cheaper Garmin (watch) devices (looking at their Strava traces) and comparable with mates dedicated expensive Garmin biking devices.

Battery life fine for the length of bike rides I do. Phone crashes perhaps 1 in 30 or 40 rides?

I also have the 'GPS Status' app. Usually gets first fix in 5 seconds or under. Once stable, usually 14 to 18 satellites locked, claimed accuracy 3m or under. (Wifi & Phone data off).

In our back garden, elevation on OS map (digital 1:25000 on PC) is c. 170mAOD. Phone says 180mASL (datum probably different?) .

Not sure this is all scientific enough for JimC, but is based on c. 5 years of experience of actually using phones for GPS tracking whilst biking, and for car navigation for the last couple. I certainly see no need (accuracy wise) for me to go for dedicated GPS unit.

Hope this helps.

Thanks for all the replies folks. The conversation has very quickly got too technical for me, but I have picked out that Motorola and possibly Sony are a good bet! ☺

I've also had a look at some 'rugged' phones which also have some appeal for outdoor use, but unsure whether the internals (i.e. receiver) are also sized up, or the extra bulk is all protection/sealing.

In reply to captain paranoia:


The Samsung S5 DOP/HDOP/VDOP readings in back garden just now were around 0.9/0.6/0.6, accuracy 3m

In reply to ChrisJD:

Now try it in a metal-shelled warehouse...

In reply to Taurig:
I can see that a mountaineering club meet might be a good opportunity to gather some data, out of say 20-30 people you should get someone with an entry level GPS , and maybe 5-8 different phones with GPS.

They would all be in the same place, same conditions for all devices, you just need to get someone to set up the test criteria, and check each devices results against the entry level GPS.
if you got several clubs doing similar tests ( ideally the same ones) across the country, you would soon get some good data to share with the rest of the outdoor community.

I'm sure some of contributors on here could quickly come up with some simple but meaningful tests that then could be used by anyone wanting to capture some data to share.

In reply to Jim C:


<cough>

As suggested twice above; for antenna and receiver sensitivity, compare reported C/No (signal strength) for satellites.

Simple method: compare the bars in the signal strength display.

More sophisticated method:
Log the NMEA streams (plenty of data logging apps to do that).
Extract logs, and compare reported satellite C/No figures, correlating between different receivers using the UTC timestamp sentences.
You might even be able to get some 3D relative antenna response information, by knowing the azimuth and elevation of the individual satellites at the time...

Or I suppose I could fire up our spare GSVF-2 and come up with some test constellations...

In reply to captain paranoia:


Is this part of a tin-foil-hat paranoia set up?

In reply to Jim C:

OK well my Sony Z1 Compact gets and hold a fix far better than my Satmap Active 10 in fact my Suunto watch is better than the Active 10 for speed of lock

Problem I think is not just the speed / GPS of the phone but what happens if it gets wet. Sony are waterproof but the screen goes bananas if it is wet making it pretty unusable. Ideally you would want something with a few mechanical buttons and the GPS / Map software that then just used those and switched off the touch screen.

In reply to m0unt41n:

Ideally you would want something with a few mechanical buttons and the GPS / Map software that then just used those and switched off the touch screen.

Wrap it in a Condom (NOT ribbed) , and tie a knot in it.
Keeps electronics dry in all weathers , but not sure about the 'sensitivity' issues for the touch screen !

In reply to captain paranoia:

Jings! tests for ordinary punters to do.
(probably after/during a few drinks, in or around a bothy or a club hut. )

In reply to Jim C:

Comparing devices side by side under tree cover eg a dense forest would be a good test as they will reduce the signal level and then the differences between devices will become clearer.
In open air, they should all work well and differences will be harder to detect.

In reply to m0unt41n:


"Problem I think is not just the speed / GPS of the phone but what happens if it gets wet. Sony are waterproof but the screen goes bananas if it is wet making it pretty unusable. "


You can use a touchscreen thru a small Ortlieb bag. Works great in the wet.

In reply to Taurig:

My mate did a run last night using Strava on both an Android Phone and an (older) Garmin Forerunner 10 watch.

You can clearly see that the sampling freq of the Garmin was complete rubbish (half the density at least) compared with the Android, so the Android phone (not sure of model, fairly new) was easily the better/accurate of the two for running/biking. And the Android seemed to place him better on the trails on the Satellite map in Strava.

In reply to Taurig:

i use a Motorola G3 (2015). the GPS system works well and quickly for what i do, which is hill walking - i don't use it to see which foot to put in front of the other, i just use it to get a fix along with map and compass, use viewfinder/peakfinder/whatever, and the OS locate app.

i have used it in thick forest in a steep sided gorge to find a bothy in appalling viz and it delivered me straight to the door, but its only the only time i've used in in that phystical environment so i can't tell that it does it in that way every time...

In reply to richard_hopkins:


That is a good point , and my suggested Mountaineering Club Meet in a bothy or a club hut (in or outwith trees) might be a useful testing ground, with lots of people all in the one place with various devices to check.
(not been out on a club meet for over 3 years myself though, but maybe others will take this up)

In reply to richard_hopkins:


nail . head . My Etrex Vista was much better than phone GPS in this situation 4 years ago - we have a geocache near us in a wood and only people with proper GPS receivers had success in summer, those using phones simply couldn't find it. Not sure about more modern phones though.