jbclimber Posted February 12, 2006 Share Posted February 12, 2006 First of all, I my 60CSX works much better under tree cover, compared to the 60CS which I recently sold. However, I have tried 3 different sets of alkaline batteries (from 2 different manufacturers), and I get less than 8 hours of continuous use before the low batter message displays! I only have a very small amount of backlight on, and verified the battery setting was alkaline. Before I contact Garmin to get an RMA, I am curious how much battery life other users are getting? I also plan to do some more testing. I was outside and the temperature was about 40 deg F, but my old 60CS would get much better battery performance under these conditions. Anyone else notice poor battery performance of the 60CSX? -John Quote Link to comment
+Miragee Posted February 12, 2006 Share Posted February 12, 2006 A friend just bought that unit and his lasts a long time on the NiMH batteries he uses. He changed the battery setting to NiMH. Have you considered using rechargeables? I have the 15-minute Energizer rechargeables and they work very well, plus I don't have to keep buying new batteries and throwing away the used-up ones. Quote Link to comment
+Wienerdog Posted February 12, 2006 Share Posted February 12, 2006 We have a CS and a CSx and noticed the same problem. A little checking and I found that the current consumption on the CSx is the same with the compass on or off. With the CS the consumption decreases by about 40 percent with the compass off. With the compass on both units have the same power consumption. To me it looks like there is a bug in the compass on/off function. Quote Link to comment
Moun10Bike Posted February 12, 2006 Share Posted February 12, 2006 I'm currently using lithiums, not alkalines, but I have had excellent battery consumption so far. I am still on the first set I put in the unit when I got it a couple of weeks ago, and that time has included an all-day caching event and a 3-hour hike using external antenna, not to mention multiple daily cache runs. Quote Link to comment
+Mastifflover Posted February 12, 2006 Share Posted February 12, 2006 I only have a very small amount of backlight on-John That's probably your problem. The backlight eats batteries no matter how low you have it set. Quote Link to comment
+Wienerdog Posted February 12, 2006 Share Posted February 12, 2006 40 mA is a big problem too! Compass on or off. Quote Link to comment
Hertzog Posted February 12, 2006 Share Posted February 12, 2006 With fresh alkalines I get about 19 hours with the 60CSx. compared with 30 for the 60CS; similar results with lithiums (30 hours vs. 40 hours) and NiMHs. This is with the compass off and no backlight. It's disappointing, but remember, it's still better than the previous generation (the original Vista in my case) and I don't recall too many complaints at the time. I'd be curious to know whether its the new chip or the memory, or both causing the increased drain. Come to think of it, it would be interesting to know if battery life decreases with memory size. I'm still using the memory that came with it. That would be a real bummer for people who can't wait for 1 and 2G memories! Quote Link to comment
+Wienerdog Posted February 12, 2006 Share Posted February 12, 2006 (edited) Just using round numbers the 60CS at 85 mA should run for about 27 hours with 2300 mAh batteries with the compass off. With the compass on and a current consumption of 125 mA it should run for about 18.4 hours. The 60CSx draws 125 mA with the compass on or off. There are other factors that come into play but if the 60CSx continous to draw the same battery power regardless of the compass setting it leads me to the conclusion that there is a firmware problem with the X. These 'should be' numbers are very close to what Jon Tyson indicates using alkaline cells. Edited February 12, 2006 by Wienerdog Quote Link to comment
+Wienerdog Posted February 12, 2006 Share Posted February 12, 2006 (edited) I should add that my current consumption numbers come from 2 60C/CS units and one 60CSx. It could well be that I have a unique CSx with a compass that will not turn off. Edited February 12, 2006 by Wienerdog Quote Link to comment
Hertzog Posted February 12, 2006 Share Posted February 12, 2006 I should add that my current cunsumption numbers come from 2 60C/CS units and one 60CSx. It could well be that I have a unique CSx with a compass that will not turn off. I didn't check the compass-on drain, but my numbers are consistent with yours if my compass was drawing current, so I think you are right. It would be very nice if they can correct it with a firmware update; then we would be back to the 60CS lifetimes again. Quote Link to comment
jbclimber Posted February 12, 2006 Author Share Posted February 12, 2006 I only have a very small amount of backlight on-John That's probably your problem. The backlight eats batteries no matter how low you have it set. You may be right. I turned off the backlight and got 18 hours of use. Thanks for all of the replies! Quote Link to comment
+Mastifflover Posted February 13, 2006 Share Posted February 13, 2006 I only have a very small amount of backlight on-John That's probably your problem. The backlight eats batteries no matter how low you have it set. You may be right. I turned off the backlight and got 18 hours of use. Thanks for all of the replies! Glad to be of service! Quote Link to comment
yeeoldcacher Posted February 13, 2006 Share Posted February 13, 2006 (edited) I only have a very small amount of backlight on-John That's probably your problem. The backlight eats batteries no matter how low you have it set. You may be right. I turned off the backlight and got 18 hours of use. Thanks for all of the replies! Glad to be of service! I spoke with a Garmin rep on Friday regarding the battery life of the new x units. According to them, the battery life is not extended with the compass turned off. Apparently, the new sensors in the x units use minimal power so that the battery life is not affected by the compass/altimeter. He also explained that the reason the unit can not record elevation when the unit is off being due to the type of sensor. The decreased battery life in the new units is directly related to the sirf chip and memory modules. Edited February 13, 2006 by yeeoldcacher Quote Link to comment
+navigator49 Posted February 13, 2006 Share Posted February 13, 2006 I should add that my current consumption numbers come from 2 60C/CS units and one 60CSx. It could well be that I have a unique CSx with a compass that will not turn off. Does the 60CSx have a battery saver mode and if so what influence does that have on battery like? Quote Link to comment
Hertzog Posted February 13, 2006 Share Posted February 13, 2006 I spoke with a Garmin rep on Friday regarding the battery life of the new x units. According to them, the battery life is not extended with the compass turned off. Apparently, the new sensors in the x units use minimal power so that the battery life is not affected by the compass/altimeter. So they swiched from a compass that they have been using for several generations of models, and was a major drawer of current, to one that draws a negligible current? And they left the capability in the firmware to turn the compass off? I'm not up on electronic compass technology, but this all strikes me as being a bit odd! The key to this would be battery lifetimes on the 60Cx; has anyone reported on the battery lifetimes they are getting on these units? Quote Link to comment
+donbadabon Posted February 13, 2006 Share Posted February 13, 2006 I am using 2500 MAh rechargables in my 60CSx, and get a full three days of caching out of one set of batteries. I don't use the compass, I disabled the key beeps, but do have backlight on. Quote Link to comment
+GOT GPS? Posted February 13, 2006 Share Posted February 13, 2006 I have 4 of the 2500mah NiMH batteries charging up, then Im going to turn on both the 60C and 60Cx units at the same time, and going to run them both down to shut-off time. Will be interesting to see what happens here. - Geoff Quote Link to comment
Hertzog Posted February 13, 2006 Share Posted February 13, 2006 I have 4 of the 2500mah NiMH batteries charging up, then Im going to turn on both the 60C and 60Cx units at the same time, and going to run them both down to shut-off time. Will be interesting to see what happens here. - Geoff Great! Thats exactly what we need. For comparison, I got 18.7 hours out of two new freshly charged 2500 NiMHs in my 60CSx. Quote Link to comment
+GOT GPS? Posted February 13, 2006 Share Posted February 13, 2006 Just started up the 2 GPS units. Will let them run completely dead - Geoff Quote Link to comment
Rhialto Posted February 14, 2006 Share Posted February 14, 2006 The decreased battery life in the new units is directly related to the sirf chip and memory modules. That's why I reported the news on the new SiRF III LT. Same functions and they say ""Operating at one half the power consumption of existing SiRFstarIII family products, with tracking mode power of less than 50 miliwatts"" So ask Garmin if they plan to use this one in the newer models soon. Quote Link to comment
jcc123 Posted February 14, 2006 Share Posted February 14, 2006 Just started up the 2 GPS units. Will let them run completely dead - Geoff Are you guys doing this with the WAAS on or off? Won't that affect the drain? Quote Link to comment
Hertzog Posted February 14, 2006 Share Posted February 14, 2006 Are you guys doing this with the WAAS on or off? Won't that affect the drain? All my measurements have been with WAAS enabled. I don't think it's a major factor, but I could be wrong. I remember somebody doing some detailed current measurements for various operating conditions - on I think a 60CS I think - in 2004; I'll see if I can locate his reported results. Quote Link to comment
+GOT GPS? Posted February 14, 2006 Share Posted February 14, 2006 Just started up the 2 GPS units. Will let them run completely dead - Geoff Are you guys doing this with the WAAS on or off? Won't that affect the drain? WAAS is ON Still Draining batteries in the 60C, and 60Cx - Geoff Quote Link to comment
+Wienerdog Posted February 14, 2006 Share Posted February 14, 2006 Hey this will be the definative test. There is probably a lot more computing energy spent with the SiRF front end and, if the Garmin tech reply is true, maybe the compass sensor was changed to keep the battery life to an acceptable level. Either way I will go with your answer and the battery life is still much longer than the GPS V. How easy it is to get spoiled. Quote Link to comment
Hertzog Posted February 14, 2006 Share Posted February 14, 2006 (edited) I remember somebody doing some detailed current measurements for various operating conditions - on I think a 60CS - in 2004; I'll see if I can locate his reported results. The tests I remembered were for a 76CS: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Garmin_GPSmap_76C/message/213 From this the compass draw was about 40 mA. The WAAS enabled/disabled measurment wasn't done, but the GPS on(WAAS enabled)-GPS off was only 12 mA. Edited February 14, 2006 by John Tyson Quote Link to comment
+GOT GPS? Posted February 14, 2006 Share Posted February 14, 2006 Just this one so far, the older map60C still going with it's energizer 2500mah batteries. - Geoff Quote Link to comment
+donbadabon Posted February 14, 2006 Share Posted February 14, 2006 Hey GOT GPS, Are both receivers in an area where they can get a signal? If I recall, if the units don't get a signal after a certain amount of time, they stop searching. The point being that if the Cx is computing satellites, and the C is not, I would think the Cx would be using more power. Quote Link to comment
+GOT GPS? Posted February 14, 2006 Share Posted February 14, 2006 I had the 2 GPS units in a south facing window. The 60C has had a LOCK most of the time, and the 60Cx all the time. - Geoff Quote Link to comment
Hertzog Posted February 14, 2006 Share Posted February 14, 2006 Just this one so far, the older map60C still going with it's energizer 2500mah batteries. - Geoff Your time for the 60Cx is basically the same as I got for the 60CSx, which supports Garmin's claim that the compass is not a factor. One thought I had though, were you using the memory card that came with it or a larger card? If a larger card, that might be a factor, but it would be quite a coincidence that the larger card in the 60Cx happened to draw exactly the same current as the compass in the 60CSx. Quote Link to comment
+Wienerdog Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 It looks like they did change both the front end and the compass then. In a way that is good news because it means that there is no penalty for extended compass usage. The extra 8 or so hours of run time that was lost is a tough give up but the performance under challanging conditions more than makes up for that. What was the run time on the 60C? Quote Link to comment
+jotne Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 I remember somebody doing some detailed current measurements for various operating conditions - on I think a 60CS - in 2004; I'll see if I can locate his reported results. The tests I remembered were for a 76CS: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Garmin_GPSmap_76C/message/213 From this the compass draw was about 40 mA. The WAAS enabled/disabled measurment wasn't done, but the GPS on(WAAS enabled)-GPS off was only 12 mA. Not all have account on yahoo, here is the rest of the post: I was curious to see how much power my 76CS consumed under various conditions. Here's the results. Methodolgy Removed the PowerEX 2200mAh NiMH batteries from the unit and connected a Tektronix DMM916 multimeter (10A terminals--mA wouldn't work) in series with the (now removed) batteries. Measured the current on the Amps(A) range and used the min/max/average feature to measure the average over 1 minute of operation. Results GPS off, Compass off, on Satellite page 67mA GPS off, Compass on, on Compass page 107mA GPS on (WAAS enabled), Compass off, Satellite page with 8 satellites locked +/-9ft 79mA Gilsson external antenna, GPS on (WAAS), Compass off, Satellite page with 9 satellites locked +/-9ft 89mA Gilsson external antenna, GPS on (WAAS), Compass on, Satellite page with 9 satellites locked +/-9ft 131mA As you can see turning the compass on dramtically increases power consumption. This probably explains the difference (30hrs vs 20hrs) in Garmin's battery life specifications for the 76C and 76CS. Quote Link to comment
+luthur Posted February 21, 2006 Share Posted February 21, 2006 First of all, I my 60CSX works much better under tree cover, compared to the 60CS which I recently sold. However, I have tried 3 different sets of alkaline batteries (from 2 different manufacturers), and I get less than 8 hours of continuous use before the low batter message displays! I only have a very small amount of backlight on, and verified the battery setting was alkaline. Before I contact Garmin to get an RMA, I am curious how much battery life other users are getting? I also plan to do some more testing. I was outside and the temperature was about 40 deg F, but my old 60CS would get much better battery performance under these conditions. Anyone else notice poor battery performance of the 60CSX? -John Hi , John............yes the csx will have one third of the power that the 60cs thus the reason i kept the 60cs........a csx owner here in town has the same complaints .............carry lots of batteries and have fun............you do have the memory card which is a plus though. Quote Link to comment
Hertzog Posted February 21, 2006 Share Posted February 21, 2006 (edited) Hi , John............yes the csx will have one third of the power that the 60cs thus the reason i kept the 60cs........a csx owner here in town has the same complaints .............carry lots of batteries and have fun............you do have the memory card which is a plus though. It's actually more like 2/3rds, and that's with the compasses turned off (see earlier messages in this thread). The compass on the 60CSx apparently doesn't draw significant amounts of power, so with the compasses on the 60CSx may actually be comparable to the 60CS (something I haven't directly checked yet; may do a side-by side check on this tomorrow). Edited February 21, 2006 by John Tyson Quote Link to comment
jbclimber Posted February 21, 2006 Author Share Posted February 21, 2006 [ Hi , John............yes the csx will have one third of the power that the 60cs thus the reason i kept the 60cs........a csx owner here in town has the same complaints .............carry lots of batteries and have fun............you do have the memory card which is a plus though. Yes, the battery drain is unfortunate, but overall the 60csx has been a great unit. I especially like the ability to maintain reception under tree cover. It has been a worthwhile purchase for me. No regrets. Thanks for the replies! Quote Link to comment
+geofindr Posted February 21, 2006 Share Posted February 21, 2006 I, likewise, really enjoy having a GPS that I can hang on my belt and have it track wherever I am in trees and otherwise. The 60CSx is an amazing unit. I have especially found the compass useful. The altimeter is very good and it is fun to see how much elevation change I have covered. I just resigned myself to the fact that when I geocache, I spend money for gasoline, and don't think alot about it, then why worry about batteries that cost less than what it costs to drive 5 miles. I just buy mine in bulk at Costco and carry extras. The one thing I will do is that when I am hiking in unfamiliar areas in Oregon, I always carry my compass and hardcopy topo map of the area. Technology can always fail even with a fully charged gps. Quote Link to comment
+Sputnik 57 Posted February 21, 2006 Share Posted February 21, 2006 So Geoff, how did the 60C fair? Surely it isnt still running on those 2500mah batteries! Quote Link to comment
+GOT GPS? Posted February 21, 2006 Share Posted February 21, 2006 (edited) So Geoff, how did the 60C fair? Surely it isnt still running on those 2500mah batteries! It ran about 23 hours continuous on the same day as the 60Cx, but even being in a south facing window, it did not do well with reception. Edited February 21, 2006 by GOT GPS? Quote Link to comment
+whitecrow Posted February 21, 2006 Share Posted February 21, 2006 (edited) 18.5 hours versus 23 looks like 20percent less battery time for the 60csx w/ rechargables. Edited February 21, 2006 by whitecrow Quote Link to comment
+navigator49 Posted February 21, 2006 Share Posted February 21, 2006 I asked this earlier in the thread but noone answered so I'll ask again: I see in the manual that the 60csx has a battery saver mode. Has anyone tried this and if so what effect does it have on the battery life and performance? Quote Link to comment
+Wienerdog Posted February 21, 2006 Share Posted February 21, 2006 Battery saver mode would work just fine on a trip but the update rate is so slow that it is hopeless for locating a cache. As for how it affects battery life I don't know but now that I know what is going on with the Cx run time I am fine with the 16-18 hour numbers. Much better than the GPS V we use to use all the time. Quote Link to comment
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.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.