jdog Posted March 22, 2002 Share Posted March 22, 2002 I am planning on buying an avalanche transceiver and am looking at either the Backcountry Access Tracker DTS or the Ortovox F-1. Which one of these transceivers would you recommend? Any pros or cons? Thanks in Advance. J Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rayborbon Posted March 22, 2002 Share Posted March 22, 2002 Neither I would get this one. Mammut Barryvox avalanche beacon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b-rock Posted March 22, 2002 Share Posted March 22, 2002 Yes neither. Ortovox M-2. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdog Posted March 22, 2002 Author Share Posted March 22, 2002 Why do you recommend the mammut over the other two transceivers? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b-rock Posted March 22, 2002 Share Posted March 22, 2002 I like the M2 because it has one of the longest ranges, plus a digital numerical readout that tags the burial distance to the meter when close. The analog signal 'beep' is great for multiple burials and checking against the digital readout. Also, the transmit rate is slightly faster than most other beacons, making it easier to be found. I've done a bunch of practice with this and a friend's Tracker. If you play and practice with it the M2 rocks. If you only go out every now and then, I recomend the Tracker because it is EASY. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beck Posted March 23, 2002 Share Posted March 23, 2002 ...get the review of all the transceivers Couloir magazine this season, it really spells out the differences in detail. Generally, digital beacons have a greatly reduced receive range vs. analog beacons. The F1 can pickup signals up to 70 meters away versus 30m or so for digital beacons. The plus side of digital beacons are ease of use, directional prompts and accurate distance readings in meters. The Ortovox M2 people are reccommending is a digi/analog beacon. The advantages of analog signal reception strength with the benefit of digital processing and display to make it more user friendly. the Barryvox and The Tracker are digital beacons but are very easy for an inexperienced user to use. If you intend to wear your beacon regularily and practice often for real life burial scenarios, pick up an Ortovox. If you only need a beacon on occasion to ski the backcountry at the resorts and DON'T intend to practice actually using the thing, get a Barryvox or the Tracker. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sobo Posted March 23, 2002 Share Posted March 23, 2002 quote: I like the M2 because it has one of the longest ranges, plus a digital numerical readout that tags the burial distance to the meter when close. The analog signal 'beep' is great for multiple burials and checking against the digital readout. Also, the transmit rate is slightly faster than most other beacons, making it easier to be found. I've done a bunch of practice with this and a friend's Tracker. If you play and practice with it the M2 rocks. If you only go out every now and then, I recomend the Tracker because it is EASY. I would echo b-rock's comments, but wherever he says "M2", replace it with ARVA 9000. Have done LOTS of practice burial scenarios, both at home and at the ski areas with my ARVA, and i'm almost always the first to find the victim. Great homing in skills, easy to read digital numerical face, easy to hear beep which increases in frequency in victim vicinity, and i get ranges of over 100m with fresh batts. Rmember, no substitute for practice. The one thing I will deduct points for is the battery size. It takes AAA batteries. This is generally not a problem, but all my other climbin' gear (torch, radios, CD player, etc.) take AAs. Makes it kind of a pain because if your batts die while on a long trip or out in the bush for several days, you're SOL because you can't switch them out with the other gear. [ 03-22-2002: Message edited by: sobo ] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winter Posted March 24, 2002 Share Posted March 24, 2002 100 m with the Arva 9000? No way. I've practiced a bit with my Arva and haven't got anywhere near that distance. I like it, but I also had a weird experience where the thing totally shut down because I got a little snow on it, and the inside got wet. Its ok, but I'm not thrilled with it. But when it does lock on, its super fast and easy to get to the victim. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teogo Posted March 24, 2002 Share Posted March 24, 2002 I find the trackers maximum operating distance of about 45 metres inadequate. In the event of a burial and no last knowen point of reference for the victim it could take a lot longer to narrow the field with a 45 metre range. The tracker is powered by triple a batteries---not nearly as common as double a batteries. A guide friend complained about the performance of the Tracker when looking for deep burials---2 metres plus. I know that Orthovox is coming out with a spiffy new beacon this autumn...from the little that I've heard this new beacon does an excellent job at combining the benefits of analog and digital technology; perhaps you might want to wait 6 months? Finally, there are some good beacon reviews at offpistemag.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rayborbon Posted March 25, 2002 Share Posted March 25, 2002 http://www.mammut.ch/english/barryvox/info.htmDigital and analog... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
imorris Posted March 25, 2002 Share Posted March 25, 2002 I don't think the range of the Tracker is nearly as important as some have suggested. It is a fine beacon that produces fast recovery times. I think the range measurement is highly overrrated. The main issue is how fast and how reliably in the real world are people finding their buried partners, and in that respect, I think the Tracker performs admirably. [ 03-25-2002: Message edited by: imorris ] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craftmatic Posted March 25, 2002 Share Posted March 25, 2002 Nothing is idiot proof, but the Tracker comes close. I'm an idiot so I like it. I would like to say that the range isn't an issue, but nothing ever is an issues until it becomes one, so I'm not going to jinx myself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Posted March 26, 2002 Share Posted March 26, 2002 here's a link to $180 ARVA. http://www.overstock.com/cgi-bin/d2.cgi?PAGE=PROFRAME&PROD_ID=32324 they also have $37 cassin flash ice axes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sobo Posted March 26, 2002 Share Posted March 26, 2002 quote: Originally posted by Winter: 100 m with the Arva 9000? No way. I've practiced a bit with my Arva and haven't got anywhere near that distance. Yes, it's true. But it was on a course, level ground, with the target buried just under ground level. Could have had something to do with it. I took a class from the NSP at Anthony Lakes ski area a year or so ago and in the field, buried at around four feet, i could pick up (multiple) targets with the closest being about 60-70m downslope. Just my experience... And Bronco... WOW! Thanks for a cool tip with that Overstock.com site! Getting another ARVA for the wife. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob2go Posted March 28, 2002 Share Posted March 28, 2002 I wouldn't go with either one. I'm not to hip on digital receivers in a multiple burial situation I’ve seen people walk right over the top of a buried receiver. When the Digital unit starts picking up the other burial. The F1 being analog works well as a standard unit, but I prefer the SOS F1ND. It cost less works a lot better then the F1. But the bottom line is which ever one you get become comfortable with it (practice, Practice, PRACTICE). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sobo Posted March 28, 2002 Share Posted March 28, 2002 quote: Originally posted by rob2go: But the bottom line is which ever one you get become comfortable with it (practice, Practice, PRACTICE). Amen, Brother... Can't say any more about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
savaiusini Posted March 28, 2002 Share Posted March 28, 2002 I used to own an Ortovox F1 and did fine with it for years, but switched to the Tracker last year.....My 2 cents on the range issue:Yes, you can get an initial signal sooner in most cases with the F1 and other analogs especially in a practice situation where you have very few visual clues to go on. However, in my experience with REAL searches in REAL slides, (admitedly not that many) your first reaction should not be to grab your beacon and start searching. Instead, use whatever visual clues you may have (ie. path and last sighting of the victim)and then pull out your beacon and start searching once you think you're in the ballpark. While the analog beacons do have a longer range, their success is highly dependant on the USER processing the noise and the lights. If you put yourself in the ballpark to begin with, the 2 receiving antenna beacons (Trackers) really excel. ....I guess that might be considered 3 cents [ 03-27-2002: Message edited by: savaiusini ] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.