Road Test of the GlobalSat BC-337 and BT-338 SiRFstar III GPS Receivers

In this article I compare the GlobalSat BC-337 (Compact Flash) with the GlobalSat BT-338 (Bluetooth) connected to two Pocket PC during a short Sunday drive around Wellington (New Zealand).

The Globalsat BC-337 CF GPS unit was attached to my HP iPaq hx4700 Pocket PC, while the Globalsat BT-338 Bluetooth GPS was connected to my HP iPaq h3870 Pocket PC.

I also used the Leadtek 9534 (Compact Flash) for a brief comparison between CF adapters.

Join me on my journey... The Compact Flash BC-337 is in red, the Bluetooth BT-338 is the blue track:


A quick jaunt around my wonderful city


The windy hills of Northland. About the same.


The BC-337 (left) and BT-338 (right) both having a few problems going through the urban canyon, but the BT-338 just that little bit tighter.


Along the waterfont buildings, the BC-337 (red) seems to overshoot.


Both unit pick up my little detour through the Te Papa National Museum's drop off area.


Along the north facing oriental bay, both seem about equal.


And around the cliffs into Evans Bay...


... both still reporting pretty much the same tracking.


Both track a few times around the Basin Reserve cricket pitch without a hitch.


The red track here shows the BC-337, but also a section (circled) tracking with the CF-9534 for comparison - just a little way off all the way down Kent and Cambridge Terraces.


The BC-337 and the BT-338 holding their fix during a small traffic jam.

Conclusion
During side by side road testing, the BC-337 and the BT-338, both using the highly respected SiRFstar III chipset, performed well during the road test, and were almost identical. The BT-338 seemed to track just that bit tighter, but in reality, both are pretty good. The BC-337 also clearly outperformed the compact flash CF-9534, which uses the earlier SiRFstarII chipset.