How many Channels should I look for in a GPS?

Question

Is it better to have more or less channels in a GPS? I see Garmin usually runs around 12 channels but Tom Tom runs 20 channels. But Garmins have more features that I like. Which would be the better one to buy?

Answer 1

Honestly, it doesn't matter.  There are only 31 GPS satellites, and you will never see 20 at once, so the TomTom's 20 channels are overkill.  It's just a silly marketing thing.  People think a higher number is better and will buy whatever has more of something.  More channels is good, but not really that useful.  Most of the time, you will be seeing 5-10 GPS satellites at once.  

So don't let the number of channels determine which GPS receiver you buy.  Look at more important things like user interface, number of points of interest included, and other capabilities.

Answer 2

tom tom

as someone who sales gps devices at my job Gramin is way to slow at grabbing and holding the gps signal. tom tom is very fast tom tom has lots of features Garmin never will.

tom tom has editable maps right on their gps device tom tom has map share,tom tom buddies,voices tom tom is the only gps maker that allows you to record your own voice or someone Else's for navigation or download a celebrity voice like mr t. tom tom has audio books which you can use when not using the gps feature tom tom has tom tom weather.

i recommend you check out tom tom

Answer 3

yes

Answer 4

If you really want an outstanding GPS, look for one with G3 technology.  GPS only refers to USA satellites.  It is called Global Navigational Satellite System (GNSS) since that Russia launched GLONASS and Europe is currently launching GALILEO.  Hence the term G3 technology; GPS (USA), GLONASS (Russia), GALILEO (Europe).  The USA has currently 30 satellites in constellation, which about 3-10 are always in constellation, or orbiting-when one slips behind the horizon, another comes into view.

The channels doesn't really make it more better really, all it is  a L1/L2 signal that is modulated through its radio waves.  L3 is deactivated (I think) and L4 is now for military, which used to run L2 and L3.  I guess the FCC got tired of too much interference on the L2 signal!  That is what the GNSS satellites are really, bunches of radios emitting signals.  If you have the few extra hundred bucks (actually between $1000 - $2500), find one that allows RTK (real-time kinetics).  This is the most accurate form of GNSS you will ever find.  Since the average GNSS only is accurate up to 15-meters, adding a radio with an antennae and your GNSS receiver will pick up any Continuous Operating Reference Station (CORS) or High-Accuracy Reference Network (HARN) stations (just as one without RTK), but you will get an accuracy of 0.01 - 0.05 of an inch!  That is about the thickness of your hair.  Plus, your elevation will be more accurate, but not totally accurate.  Understand that whatever the elevation may say on any GNSS, that is not the real elevation.  GNSS doesn't accurately determine it since it goes of the Geoid of the earth, you may be plus or minus 0.00-feet to 100-feet, depending on your location on earth.  I think the GPS that is sold in the US are running the NAD83 coordinate system but I am not sure exactly; they run WAAS for sure!

If that RTK feature is too expensive for your taste...Again, check out how much MHz the L1/L2 channels are frequecing, this is your bread and butter!  More MHz, the better.  You don't want one that would multi-path, which is caused by powerlines, chainlink fences, etc...