From Lou, 10/13/2019
Dear readers, when I tested the pre-production sample of this beacon, the mode switch in my opinion moved too easily from Search to Send. I’ve become more discerning about this after doing beacon drills over the past couple of years. With more than a few people, with different skill levels, such drills seemed to almost always get messed by a beacon or two accidentally being switched from Search to Send.A few days ago I received a retail version of the Evo5. I measured the resistance of the switch, using my force gauge, and saw virtually no difference (it moves with a force of about 14.7n). But the switch does feel slightly more difficult to move, probably because of the way it interacts with the pressure of my hand (hard to measure with linear constraint of my gauge). I’m going to change the conclusion of this review to “recommended with caveat, both regarding the switch and the auto-revert-to-transmit.”
There is another point I should clarify. This issue with ease of switching is a new one for my reviews. From this point forward I’ll hold all beacons accountable in this regard, and be sure to mention test results as well as feel. Likewise, I’ve become more concerned about automatic-revert-to-transmit. More on both these issues below.
So, in a nutshell, the size and functionality of the Evo5 is compelling. If you’re considering it along with a few other choices, be sure to note the switch detente on the other units. Some are not much different, though I hope to see that change. (One does wonder if there might be a European standard that requires these Search-to-Send switches to move so darn easily. I’ve got queries out about that.)
It began at the dawn of humanity when flint knappers made the smallest knives and arrow points possible for their tribe’s non-mechanized hunters — and continues to the present, as phones thin, batteries lean, living space shrinks — and human power takes the moral highground. The quest for miniaturization: as part of human endeavor as, procreation? Not quite. But, almost?
We’ll leave the worldly questions to those of you who care for philosophy, and have brains with the resilience to handle universal questions of existence. Meanwhile, back at the ranch:
I got a package in the mail. It was a small package. Inside was an Arva Evo5 avalanche transceiver, by a long shot the most compact low-mass avalanche rescue transceiver the French company has ever made. At a palm and pocket friendly 11×7 centimeters, it’s also one of the smallest rigs in the entire market. 164 grams with battery, excluding holster.
Follow along as I do my first fiddle with this attractive but pesky little thing:
– First, Arva’s design philosophy here is obvious: Keep it simple, small, and light.
– You control the Evo5 with a slider switch and a single button marked with a flag icon. While _in transmit mode_ a lock button prevents accidental switching. Slide farther, you hit search mode. The slider switch _does not lock or otherwise “snap” into search mode_. Move it a small distance (requires minimal force) and bam, you’re back to transmitting. I measured the force required to move the switch, as illustrated above, minimal at an average of 14.72n measured with my force gauge. The retail unit feels slightly better, but I’ve got a pet peeve about this and would like to see beacons that are difficult to switch by accident — between any two modes.
A slider switch can be knocked back to transmit while roughly handled during a search, and possibly while re-holstering. (For those new to avalanche companion rescue, non-victim beacons in transmit mode confuse searches, sometimes terribly — and in real-life, tragically.) As mentioned above but bears repeating, at least one other brand/model beacon has had a similar problem, test test test any beacon you consider purchasing, be unforgiving.)
Moving along… I’m a fan of configuring (or ideally, disabling) automatic revert to transmit (AR). There is nothing in the manual about changing the automatic AR of the Evo5. So for now, know that out of the box the Evo5 is set with an AR of eight minutes (while moving, or still). Eight minutes is too short in my opinion. But I can live with it.
As you’re searching, every eight minutes the rig will return to transmit (with an audible signal) UNLESS you press the marking button to indicate you are not a victim. It’s not hard to see the problem here. For example, say you have a guided group and some of your clients are inactive during a search, so you simply turn their beacons to Search mode and tell them to cool it. They zip up their jackets and do as requested. Eight minutes later they hear some beeping from under their coats. The beacon is returning to transmit. Most are emotionally stressed, and if they ever did really know how to cancel the AR, they don’t do so. Result, instant confusion.
One other thing about AR. When it happens to your beacon in the middle of a heated search, it’s disruptive. Not what you need when you’re in near panic.
Beacons with optional AR are perhaps a better choice (video). But if you’re on top of your gear, and practice, you can make Evo5 work. I’d advise not issuing it to clients in an institutional setting, however. As a mountain guide with clients, I’d want the choice of having AR, or not.
Again along the lines of switch operation, it’s too bad switching the Evo5 from search to send isn’t as hard as turning it off. To power down, rather than simply moving the locked slider from “SEND” to “OFF,” you also have to hit the circular red “flag” button on the front of the unit. The idea here: accidental switching-to-off is impossible occurrence. I’m not understanding why the locking slider switch isn’t enough — it is solid when locked in send/transmit mode, impossible to accidentally switch off, and impossible to switch to search mode. And yeah, I think this “feature” is a concern. Why? Simply because it is “bad UI,” i.e., changing an intuitive interface to something that requires guesswork or memorization.
– Now that I’ve satisfied readers who request BALANCED reviews, on to the good stuff. This is a three antenna rig. That means it works for “point and shoot” searching in the hands of nearly anyone. Further, it’s got a claimed 50 meter range (remember real-life “range” depends on a host of factors, some out of your control). Other beacons may boast of more range, but in my view 50 meters is plenty.
Of lesser importance to many of us, but still good so long as it doesn’t junk up the display (it doesn’t), you get a mark function for that time you’re in Zermatt and run across an avalanche that’s scoured twelve people off a ski run. Or can be used for the more common task of adding complexity and fun to your practice sessions. I’ve found the multiple-burial marking features on some beacons to add clutter to the display, while the Evo5 tends to be crisp and simple.
– I like the use of a single AA battery. Simple, light, easy to replace. When you power up, you get a battery capacity percentage. Swap in a new AA when it reads below 50 percent, so you have plenty of juice for searching. Use the half-depleted cell in your cordless mouse.
Downside here: unlike certain other models-brands, the Evo5 battery compartment is not moisture sealed. I’ve never required that level of water resistance in a beacon, but it’s a nice feature if you tend to leave your rig buried in a rucksack full of wet gear, or you carry it in a pocket where it gets lots of humidity.
Conclusion: I love the form factor and simplicity of the Evo5, but prefer a beacon that’s more difficult to switch from Search mode to Send, perhaps has an audible signal while doing so. I also prefer a unit with automatic revert-to-transmit that that can be used by choice. It should also be noted the Evo5 does not have an audible signal after being left on for excessive time (battery saver). Would I use the Evo5? Yes, with all the above in mind.
(Tips: With any avalanche beacon smear a small amount of dielectric grease on the battery terminals, to prevent moisture problems. And don’t forget the cost-effective zero-weight grade-64 waterproofing you get with a ziplock baggie.)
Other features:
– Backlit screen (mandatory for any beacon, in my opinion).
– Group check (yawn).
– Audible search signal (again, mandatory).
– “Interference Management” for those times you do a beacon search under power lines.
– Marking function.
Evo5 will be available fall of 2019, around $300.00 with a nicely appointed holster-harness. Shop for it here.
WildSnow.com publisher emeritus and founder Lou (Louis Dawson) has a 50+ years career in climbing, backcountry skiing and ski mountaineering. He was the first person in history to ski down all 54 Colorado 14,000-foot peaks, has authored numerous books about about backcountry skiing, and has skied from the summit of Denali in Alaska, North America’s highest mountain.
39 comments
Is there a reason no beacons have rechargable batteries? So convenient with headlamps amd com devices.
Probably because Li batteries are quite cold sensitive, and also have a limited life span. If you’re diligent about using a freshly charged battery before each trip, nothing stopping one from using a third-party rechargeable AA in a beacon, though the battery life indicator would probably be useless. That said, alkaline batteries are not exactly the best in the cold. Regular non-rechargeable lithium AAs are the best, but again, unless the beacon specs them, use will result in the battery level indicator being useless. Lou
IME new batteries in a beacon at the start of season will last most people all season and non-rechargeable batteries are pretty cheap … not the place to save pennies
“but again, unless the beacon specs them, use will result in the battery level indicator being useless”
This was a bit of “wait what” moment… I have a Barryvox Element and used Li batteries for years now. The manual states “cannot be used with Li batteries”.
I never really experienced any weirdness that said, indicator was maybe going down from 90 to 60 in one step which made me change the batteries every time it happened but otherwise can’t think of anything else :-/
Sedgesprite I’m guessing, other than the better temperate range of alkaline, it’s easier and more accurate to track the % left in an alkaline vs lithium chemistry due to their voltage drop off curves. This is a simplified chart that shows it well. http://www.boat-project.com/tutorials/vro.gif So with alkaline you don’t get any nasty surprises at the tail end of that curve.
Lou it takes you 4 minutes to change some clothes? You also changing pants? 😛 Not trying to shame you. But 4 minutes to me seems like a reasonable amount of time when paired with motion sensing, especially in the context of a rescue. Blister’s Gear:30 podcast with BCA starts talking about this a little bit.
I am with you that the button press of the flagging, and the non moisture sealed battery compartment are weird.
It is great to see the miniaturization of beacons. For something that is rarely used but always carried I am psyched!
Next year we will have three light beacon options that I am aware of
Pieps Micro 150g (looking forward to the non proximity sensor version)
BCA Tracker S 165g
Arva Evo5 170g
Tzed, the Evo5 I have here weighs 164 grams. Without holster or lanyard. In any case, the three beacons you mention are all close enough in weight as to be virtually the same as to mass. And yes, great to see. Lou
All, the production version of Evo5 will have a default 8 minute return to transmit (when stationary). I had it as 4. Now edited. Whatever. I prefer totally disabling the RTT. I’ll do another edit and comment when I find out how the user can adjust the settings.
RTT is controversial. In my opinion, it will result in more lost lives (due to messed up searches) than it will ever save. I feel it’s included in feature sets due to a factually unsupported theory about the likelihood of secondary avalanches. While the problem with confused searches due to transmitting beacons is related over and over and over again in accounts I’ve heard describing real-life accidents. Your opinion dear readers?
Lou
With just the one AA battery, I’d be surprised if it meets the EN 300 718 standard for operating time. The standard to be met is 200 hours of transmit, with one hour of subsequent receiving @ -10degC. The backlit LCD would also aggravate that.
The Ortovox 3+ has used a single AA for many years and is rate at 250 hours of transmit.
Lighter weight smaller beacons are designed to fit into the internal beacon zip pocket of skimo suits.
Arva also makes excellent lighter weight shovels.
Avalanche beacons do not use rechargeable batteries, particularly internal custom battery packs because it would not conform to the EN 300 718 standard for avalanche beacons. Clause 4.3.4 of part 2 of EN 300 718 2.1.1 states:
“The equipment shall use a widely obtained battery type.”
While that statement is vague, it is safe to interpret that as “off-the-shelf” alkaline batteries only. If you add in the operating time requirements, rechargeable batteries seem like a long shot.
https://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_en/300700_300799/30071802/02.01.01_60/en_30071802v020101p.pdf
Hi Lou, MO about RTT: I am totally with you on the subject of hardly any victims in companion rescue due to secondary avalanches (I think 1 recorded case in EU) and indeed many searches will/might be screwed up by transceivers jumping back to transmit while in search mode. In training even advanced searchers don’t recognize the warning tone transceivers emit before reverting. Therefore the advice (by ICAR, SLF, Mountainsafety.info, UIAGM, UIAA, etc) is to turn transceivers from people who are not searching OFF.
All that said I do think that an RTT based on motion detection is a good idea. I don’t think it will harm any searches and adds a bit of extra safety. For experts, educators, rescue crews the ‘standby’, ‘rescue send’ , whatever name, function based on motion detection on some models are possibly an interesting option in that regard.
@Herf: offcourse it complies with the EN 300 718 norm. But I noted that it burns up batteries very fast while in search mode.
I have an Ortovox Zoom, it is small and light enough for me, though it is too bulky. A thinner unit would be much more comfortable to wear, and would avoid any temptation to put it in a rucksack. How is this one?
Rolf, yeah, if we have to have RTT, then at least it should have motion detection. But it remains problematic. Beacons can end up stationary for a lot of reasons. For example, panicked searcher sets their beacon aside while digging or doing first aid, thing reverts to transmit. Or the example I used above, when a searcher needs to change clothing layers and take a break, and sets their beacon and complicated harness-holster aside, thus making the beacon stationary. And so on.
Last scenario is perhaps a reason to throw away the holster and use a pants pocket (smile)?
To be fair, I’m going off on RTT too much. The big issue IMHO is simply to keep beacons simple to use. Lots of brands-models do pretty good with that, including this one. And, if you tend to ski with larger groups or in populated areas, be ready to do beacon search with lots of confusing signals as you’ll never get every beacon turned off or switched to transmit, unless you want to spend ten minutes going from person to person making sure, when you should be searching and digging.
Mark, Evo5 is 20.93 mm at thickest, down to just under 20. My Tracker3 is 23.58 at thickest. I’d call the Evo5 “thin” but not radically so. Lou
Hey,
How about comparing beacons to see at what distance they find the first signal.
It will vary in real life, but comparo would be meaningful.
Hey all, I messed up this review, actually had to not recommend this beacon based on my opinion of the pre-retail sample I got. I amended the review. Please note. Apologies for not digging into it as much as I should have. Lou
To be fair did you compare the same forces that would be needed on the Tracker2 or Pieps DSP? I have heard of similar issues with these models in the field and not just a lab. Also to play devils advocate the surface area on this Evo 5 appears to be smaller than the Tracker 2 which would require a more concentrated effort. In all practicality though having it locked in transmit mode is 99.9% of the function people use it for, and when in an actual or practice search it should be in ones hand, eyes on it, and dealt with caution anyway.
Not that I am afraid that you are out of work, but (beside Ryan’s suggestions) I would love to hear about the forces needed to switch the ARVA ‘horseshoe models’ (EVO 3 & 3+, EVO 4, etc) back to transmit: they are known to cause havoc in rescuedrills, especially since they are awkward to turn off. And it will give an nice context for the quality of the EVO 5 switch.
The Evo 5 is already for sale in many websites and I am thinking about purchasing one. Do you know if the mass produced units have solved any of the issues that you mention on your review? Thanks
Hi DMF, I can tell you that Arva immediately responded in private to my concerns, and said the retail version would indeed be fine. They did not send another evaluation unit. So how about you just go for it from a reputable retailer with good return policy. Evaluate. Please leave a comment here on your findings. Meanwhile, I’ll pester those guys again. I don’t like leaving reviews such as this hanging out there when the product might be improved. Keeps me up at night, as I respect the hard workers in the outdoor gear industry. Lou
Hi Lou, any idea when are you going to be able to review a mass produced Evo5? I’d love to know if there have been any changes in the forces needed to switch it from search to transmit mode, and maybe in the moisture resistance of its battery compartment.
If I’ve got it right, the minimum autonomy of any beacon is 200h in tramsit mode. Is it higher for the Evo5?
Lastly, is it possible to disable the RTT function? Are 4 and 8 minutes the only options?
Hi DMF, thanks for asking, the answer is “any day now.” I’m super motivated as I generally don’t do negative reviews, but made an exception as I sometimes do, and am eager for the hard working Arvanian elves to get it right as I know they can. As for your question about RTT timing, likewise we need to wait for the retail unit. Are we defining “autonomy” as the maximum hours one can assume the unit can transmit without compromising a possible use for search? In any case, battery life will need to be measured in real life, simply by leaving the unit in the refrigerator, transmitting, and seeing what happens. I’ll do that for you once I have the retail unit. Lou
Hi Lou. Has the Arva Evo 5 arrived? If so, I’d love to read the review in case anything has changed. Thanks a lot
Hi there, have you received the retail unit? Sorry to insist, but I’d like to know if there have been any changes befores acquiring one. Thanks
Hi DMF, I know it’s been a while, so you have every right to inquire. I’m told my Arva here in U.S. we’ll have our sample retail unit in a few days. When it gets here, I’ll evaluate and share more thoughts. Lou
Hello, In response to a few things on the comment board I would like to answer as a representative from Arva here in the US.
@DMF We have now shipped production units to retailers and it is available for purchase! It was likely they were on pre-sale before as some websites do that, but it is live and we are excited. As mentioned we are excited to have the small and light size with a rich backlit screen and some advanced features we see as important.
As far as overall design I think all brands are moving towards a customizable product, there is a balance with cost and simplicity of use, but like all our smart phones 6 people will have 6 preferred setups or configurations. That said Arva did chose to make the Evo5 RTT as an 8-minute timer, we encourage people to practice, as once you run through a practice scenario once or twice you know exactly what to expect. There may be a software update in the future that can customize the beacon further, but not this year.
As far as the switch we did increase the overall resistance, the testing number on Lou’s meter should go up but realize too the positioning of the area of pressure applied (pinpoint vs. palm) would affect the chance or ability for it to move unintentionally. Aside from the need to handle and watch your beacon with heightened awareness while in search, I think the slide preference in the Evo5 is different that the old top toggles (that I think we will not see any more in new models from anyone) and being locked in send is most important.
This ability to slide and not lock as pointed out in Lou’s revision is not isolated to the Evo5, other beacons do this, and on the contrary I have heard of patrollers say it could be used as a quick “manual” RTT. Anyway, this could be analyzed in detail as a whole separate post, and at the end of the day it is preference, or potentially a reason to upgrade or buy an different model. The only real-time example of this accidental switching I am aware of is UAC: Horseshoe Mountain, 2011, one person in party was being lowered and bumped a top switch style beacon (not Arva) that confused the search for a short period. I am sure there is more examples out there, and it is good to share these as we all learn and practice (highly recommend reading “the Snowy Torrents” book too). My apologies if I seem to kick a dead horse here, but I see training as much or more than the gear, as most of the problem. Ironically the beacon model used that fowled up search was WS! recommended in 2011 along with a couple other models that had non-locking switches; I don’t state this to sling any mud, but want to point out that manufacturers have made progress. Arva, or any other brand for that matter, is not likely not build any more beacons with a top switch or lower tension toggle.
Back to the subject, I have a Evo5 in my hands now and can firmly rub a finger from bottom to top and it does not slide back to send without and intentional force, it seems pocket safe to me and I am looking forward to using it this year.
Thanks all for the feedback, we did actually use some of it as we made the final version! A new unit is on the way to WS HQ and hopefully it can find a special place in their pocket soon.
Thanks Jeremy, all valid points. Yes, training! Me, my ideal would be a beacon that locked in each mode and had optional, disabled by default AR. I think a big problem with beacons is that once they went with a microprocessor, it was easier to add “features” such as AR, and thus in my opinion “featuritis” occurred.
All:
Jeremy is correct (as most of you know) in that other beacons have switches that can be bumped. As expressed in my edit above, being concerned about this is a newish criteria for me, after some recent experiences. I’ll be mentioning it in an future beacon reviews.
My edit in a nutshell: The slider switch on my retail unit measures about the same, but did seem in terms of hand-feel to have a bit more resistance to switching, probably because of ergonomics. I’d still prefer it to be stiffer, but I think it’s workable. My pet peeve is now the automatic AR, which is mandatory at 8 minutes. But again, that’s something that can be worked with if you’re trained. (And another thing I’ll be paying more attention to in the future.)
Lou
BTW, Herf, thanks for the link to the standards document. I note that it says this about switching from transmit, but sadly has nothing about switching _from_ search _to_ transmit. Typical of these sorts of standards, they always seem to leave something out. Lou
4.3.2 Maintaining the transmit mode
A safety feature against involuntary or accidental leaving of the transmit mode shall be provided in the equipment.
ARVA JEREMY,
The design of the switch is clearly based on aesthetics of how it looks. The switch is a mirror of the other side of the case and someone decided to “cleverly” make that side of the case slide. It is in no way an actual normal switch and certainly not a locking switch. And the top of of this gimmick sliding piece of case switch is fairly broad in width and could easily be caught or snagged by clothing or bumped by movement and pushed down into the search position from the send position.
Electronic devices made for emergency, law enforcement, and the military are very well made. They are predictable, consistent, rugged, weather proofed, intuitive, and can be used by tactical feel in the dark. Avalanche Transceivers should be held to the same standards instead of the current toy like offerings that more closely resemble handheld transistor radios of the 1960’s.
All, I finished testing Evo5 for a “left on too long” warning, e.g., a beep or otherwise audible signal that alerts you after it’s been transmitting for excessive hours, so you don’t end up with a dead battery. Conclusion: Evo5 does NOT have this feature. That’s too bad, though I would not call it a deal breaker. Lou
HI PHILLIP, Sounds like you have an affinity for another model of beacon , and that is great. We know there will be a market for this size and style of beacon in the future. We also are believers that the best beacon is the one you know how to use. I personally have been pleasantly surprised being able to place this in my pocket and not be reminded every kick-turn or glide that it is there, it is smaller in 2D than an iphone and the rounded corners make a big difference in a pant pocket. Not sure if you have had time to use it since it was just released, it does pass the waterproof standard, has a backlit screen, and the switch does have a mechanical lock in the send position as Lou pointed out, it will hold with forces of 40+ lbs. not sure exactly what it is tested to. Of course Arva offers a 5-year warranty on all models of toy-ceivers.
@Lou I was not aware of any beacons that have this “LOTL” feature while in send mode, I laugh because we all have done it, but at least it will be a single battery scramble. I will have to look into this more and advise, or wait for the day we can totally customize our tools. Knowing how our collective features work I think in use one will hopefully appreciate the Group & Frequency check, U-turn, and Interference management / notification that is model offers.
J, the BCA Tracker has the “on too long” warning beep. It can be annoying, for example when it’s someone else’s beacon in a hut, they are sleeping, and you have no idea where the beacon is (the beep is too infrequent and high pitched for easy location by hearing). But it’s a feature I prefer to have. Ideally, would indeed be best as an option. Lou
The Avalanche Transceiver that I want has not been made yet. It will be mil-spec and made by a highly experienced electronics company like Motorola or Icom.
@phillipo what are you looking for or wanting that a “highly experienced electronics company” would provide?
Mil-spec equipment is congruent, intuitive, and durable. Most mi-spec items handling is very similar and that’s useful for high stress situations that might involve, bad weather, steep angles, darkness, injuries, fear, etc. Carpet testing at home while sitting on the couch with the manual in one hand is not the same thing. Not gimmicky poorly designed flimsy cases and switches that are all very different and require close examination and concentration to use. I honestly have to review the manual for my beacon every few months because it is not intuitive and I have thought about a billion other things in the interim. And difficult for you partners to easily visually see if your transceiver is off, searching, or sending. Would be awesome if there was a DIN spec that would require the display of a 1 centimeter red dot for off, green square for sending, and yellow triangle for searching that everyone could easily see at a glance. And yes, a really large experienced electronics company inspires more confidence than relatively small new companies that make knit hats, etc. I have been around electronics, firmware, computers, and recently building software to predict remaining capacities for thousands of industrial lithium ion batteries at low temperatures simultaneously.
PhilllipO, I am genuinely curious: What “new” beacon company started out life making hats? Ortovix and Pieps have been doing beacons for 40+ years. (Longer than Motorola has been making cell phones, for example). Arva has been doing beacons for over 30 years (though they have been relatively rare in the US until more recently). Mammut and BCA have been in the transceiver field for over 20 years.
Why would a company with no background in avalanche rescue equipment, for whom beacons would be an infinitesimally small part of their market, inspire more confidence? I would guess if a company like Motorola did get into that game, they would contract out to the same manufacturers who make them now in the same way that Look and Fischer contract out to Dynafit and Tyrolia for touring bindings. Interface improvements aside, which are a design issue not necessarily improved by a manufacturer, what problems have you seen that would be solved?
Having recently handled an Arva EVO5 beacon, I feel compelled to share my initial impressions with regard to search-to-send switching as it pertains to the EVO5. While I cannot comment on the Newton-force required to move the switch from search to send, I do have strong hands from woodworking and rock-climbing and can say that a considerable and deliberate “push” is required. I have not tested this motion in conditions approximating post-avalanche, however, based on my observations it is difficult to imagine how one could trigger the switch (in either direction) without noticing. There is an obvious haptic registration when the switch is moved from search to send, off to send, and certainly when moved from send (where it locks into place). Otherwise, the EVO5 feels compact and solid in-hand.
Comments are closed.