Ortovox 3+

Steve - Thank you for joining the discussion and thank you for providing you link to the Calculated versus Recommended Search Strip Widths on BeaconReviews.com. And welcome to TAY. You web site is a huge resource to those of us trying to figure out the pros and cons of various new beacons on the market and I, as one of many, appreciate all your hard work.

When you did your tests of the 3+ for BeaconReviews.com did you see any of the perceived "weirdness" or "quirks", i.e. momentary erroneous/unstable indications at a particular distance as mentioned above and also mentioned in the video reviews cited above?

Thank for the kind words, Ron.

I did not see the 3+ quirk shown in the video. That certainly doesn’t mean that it isn’t real (and the video looks pretty convincing). I spent four or five hours testing a handful of 3+ transceivers (appreciatively, I did this testing with the owner of Ortovox). I spent much of that time searching for multiple transmitters and testing the Marking feature (which was excellent during my test session). I also spent a considerable amount of time testing the 3+’s range (versus the other popular transceivers). I definitely walked through the seven meter zone many times, but I didn’t see the quirk. Unfortunately, I haven’t received my 3+ yet. If the quirk is real, let’s hope it can be corrected with a software update.

Steve
BeaconReviews.com

Thank you for your reply, Steve.

Eric Kroger was in touch with Marcus Peterson, the CEO of Ortovox USA, on another matter, and mentioned to him the “quirk” with the 3+ we have been discussing here. Eric then put Marcus and I in touch with one another. I asked Marcus to review the posts here and also the video reviews mentioned above, and then talked with him at great length about the matter.

Marcus, like Steve of beaconreviews.com, says he has yet to see the anomaly we are discussing. 
In fairness to Ortovox USA I thought it might be appropriate to summarize my discussion with Marcus here.

Marcus suspects that any anomalies that one might encounter with the 3+ (or any digital beacon, for that matter) will most likely be from electronic (EMF) interference of some type, either from other personal electronics on the searcher or from EMFs on a larger scale such as overhead power lines, nearby building electrical systems, etc.

Marcus goes on to make clear that digital beacons work better when the searcher keeps them moving so that the relative position of the received signal(s) continues to change. He says stopping can slow down the beacon’s processing of the signal. So he feels the key to being effective with a digital beacon is to pace the processor with continuous movement but not “overrun” the processor by running or moving too fast (like some folks are used to doing with analog beacons).

He says that essentially ALL the digitals process the information at about the same speed so any difference in perceived search speed is a function of the relative pulse speed of the beacon signal being received, not the relative processing speed of the searching beacon. And that the analogs, with their much fewer relative total pulses emitted over a given time period will cause any digital to be slower in finding that analog compared to the time it would take the same digital to find a digital beacon.

So, bottom line: I believe that Marcus is of the opinion that there is absolutely nothing wrong with the 3+ and that any anomalies or “quirks” that one may encounter with its use would most likely be due to “operator error” and possibly lack of familiarity with the common “quirks” of digital beacons in general.

Hopefully if I have misquoted Marcus anywhere here, he will let me know or clarify here any misquote.

I finally got out to the Alpy beacon park with my 3+.
My major gripe is the range. Most beacons i didn't pick up until 20m (display read 20). I would walk away from the beacon and could hold the signal to 40 and a few times I picked up beacon 40m out.
It will take a while to get used to the delay between the number appearing, then an arrow and then sound. In a way its nice because it encourages you (at least me) to look up and scan the surface, rather than getting sucked into the beacon display.
The directional arrow did flip around erratically around 8-5m. I don't see this as a huge issue though. You simply continue on the line you have been coming in on and go by decreasing numbers, rather than relying on the directional arrow. I think any beacon will have quirks and you just have to figure out how to use your beacon. And practice probing techniques.
The other flaw I found with the unit was that the speaker is easily covered with your thumb while searching. Minor detail but can be a little annoying.
Pros: The flagging function worked great. I like the fine search display. Processor was fast enough, but not super fast.

My major gripe is the range. Most beacons i didn't pick up until 20m (display read 20).

Just reading the number on the display is not a meaningful measure of initial signal acquisition range.

I would walk away from the beacon and could hold the signal to 40 and a few times I picked up beacon 40m out.

That is also not a meaningful measure of initial signal acquisition range.

I think any beacon will have quirks and you just have to figure out how to use your beacon.

Agreed -- no beacon works perfectly, and sometimes a fine (and rather subjective) line can divide minor "personality" issues from dysfunctionality. (And perhaps the same can be said of people too!)

The numbers themselves alone aren't meaningful of course, but I was physically close to the beacons by the time the 3+ picked them up. I felt closer than I have been with other beacons. For example, the 3+ only indicated multiple burials for a couple seconds while four beacons were turned on in the Alpental beacon park. Either those beacons are REALLY far apart, or the range on the 3+ is lacking. I didn't test against other beacons, so I really can't back my claims.
Can anyone comment on the setup of the beacon park? Has anyone else been unable to pick up multiples?