On Saturday, November 24, 2012 7:16:55 AM UTC-8, Eric Greenwell wrote:
On 11/23/2012 6:46 AM, Evan Ludeman wrote:


Who else is thinking the extra bucks for an InReach is a good idea? I'd

be using it by itself, without a smart phone; possibly, I'd use it with

an iPod Touc

Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA (change ".netto" to ".us" to

email me)

I've been using an InReach (paired with an Android phone) since August. Works really well, with none of the hit and miss I've seen with Spot. InReach has advantages for tracking as it includes altitude and heading info. Being two-way, it confirms message and SOS reception. It works stand alone, of course, but when paired with a smart phone allows two way text messages from anywhere in the world. Though in one particularly narrow and deep Idaho river canyon, it took about 10 minutes to get through. Unlike Spot, since InReach is two way, it knows it hasn't gotten through yet so keeps trying rather than just waiting for the next tracking interval.

Also, when stationary, it shifts to one tracking fix per hour. When the paired phone is turned off (to save battery), the InReach will flash a message light if it has an incoming text message waiting - stores in in queue until you turn on phone to retrieve message.

You can send/receive text messages to any cell phone or email address when no cell service is available.

More expensive than Spot, but worth it IMO.

bumper