Non-watch Altimeter

Hey Wyatt, u just dont want it to be an eletronic watch, or you dont want it to be electronic at all? If you want a non-electronic one, maybe this?
http://www.rei.com/product/752241

Here are some. I have bought from these guys:

http://www.ambientweather.com/altimeters.html

Here is another:

http://www.thealtimeterstore.com/analog.html

Correct. Unless there is some underlying reason an analog is worse than a digital in the accuracy department, I want an analog altimeter.

As far as I can find, that one you posted and the Sun 202 are the only ones readily available online that fit the bill for what I want. Has anyone had any experience with either? Are there any good ones I'm missing? Are those ones cheaply made or are they pretty nice/accurate?

My brother-in-law has some Swiss made analog model that cost over $200 back in 93. Every digital altimeter I have owned was more accurate than it and easier to use.

I have been using digital models since 1991 or 92 starting with the Ulti-meter. I have never had a problem with any of them, and the barometer and thermometer are nice additions.

Im not sure how analog ones work, but I know electronic ones either calculate height by a change in air pressure (utilizing a barometer) or through satellite tracking (as in gps units). GPS ones will be the most accurate when they have a signal. So if you're in slot canyons for instance, you'd want a barometer based one as opposed to a satellite based. In my experience, barometer based ones constantly need to be calibrated. I have a Suunto Core watch with an electronic barometer based altimeter…and its usually off by 200-400 ft. At the same time, thats not too bad when you're on a 14,000ft+ mountain

Arguably the CLASSIC barometer/altimeter is the Thommen:
http://walkhigh.co.uk/acatalog/Thommen.html

This was once beloved of all alpinists.

Cheers

Konrad wrote:

>>Im not sure how analog ones work, but I know electronic ones either calculate height by a change in air pressure (utilizing a barometer) or through satellite tracking (as in gps units). GPS ones will be the most accurate when they have a signal.<<

Actually, consumer GPS units aren't that accurate for elevation. They are less accurate for vertical position than they are for horizontal. A properly calibrated barometric altimeter however can be very accurate, to within a matter of a few feet.

G

In the days of analog altimeters, Thommen was king, as Roger suggested. I had one 30 years ago, back in the days before GPS. It worked good except when I pegged it out in Nepal. I tried to offset the zero reading to extend its use higher and higher, but once it returned to normal elevations, it was never quite the same again. Digital altimeters use the same kind of barometric capsule, but it uses electronics to compute the elevation and then display it. As a result, if the battery craps out, it's toast.
Civilian GPS can be very good, but it is not perfect, either. The best that it will do vertically is about 1.5 times the horizontal error. However, if the satellite geometry is poor, perhaps due to limited view of the sky, then the vertical accuracy gets bad. I've seen it 250 feet off before, but I've seen analog and digital altimeters off by over 500 feet when the barometric pressure is changing a lot, like when a storm is approaching. The best instrument uses some combination of these technologies, and it can show you the best guess result of them. Military GPS is better, but it is not perfect, either. None of us here has the crypto codes to use them.
–B.G.–

Dang you guys! You just had to tell me which was the ol' reliable classic one. Now I have to have one, even if I'm not going to use it for backpacking. I hate being addicted to awesome vintage gear.

Luckily ebay's got a couple.

Yay! Thanks for the analog tips!