The first impression of the Ortovox 3+ is appealing and the device makes a handy impression. The positive first impression is also confirmed in practical use. With a total weight of 315 grams including carrying system and battery, the 3+ is about as heavy as the old M2 from Ortovox, which accompanied me for 10 years, and is therefore slightly heavier than stated by the manufacturer.
This positive impression is only clouded once during the entire test phase and only until you get used to the fact that the on/off knob also serves as a cap for the battery compartment of the AA battery. In contrast to most avalanche transceiver manufacturers, Ortovox actually only uses one AA battery and not several AA or AAA batteries as is usual on the market. If you turn the knob too far, the battery compartment opens and closing it is not exactly user-friendly, at least at first: quite a fumble. I would like these two functions to be separate, but this is not the deciding factor when it comes to making a purchase decision.
Processing
The workmanship is good and the holding device is easy to use. I doubt whether it will survive 600 days of skiing like the M2, especially as the bag is so tight that you have to push and pull a little to stow the device. But this could also be due to the fact that I tested a pre-production model.
The battery life is stated by the manufacturer as 250 hours. In my own test, the display dropped to 50% after 250 hours, which for me calls for a new battery. Who wants to have to start a search with an almost empty battery? The battery then completely died after approx. 360 hours. It was somewhat irritating that after less than 24 hours, the battery indicator dropped from 4 to just 3 bars. After approx. 130 h, the display then began to alternate between 2 and 3 bars. In addition to this simple battery indicator during operation, the battery status is briefly displayed in % when the device is switched on.
In extreme sub-zero temperatures, the display has a little trouble with the indication, but remains within the acceptable limit. This would only be noticeable during long searches at EXTREMELY low air temperatures, but not otherwise.
The 3+ in the field test
In the field test, I found the first search process too slow and inaccurate, but I found that this was only due to my application. The search was much better on the 2nd attempt and perfect after the 3rd. My impression was confirmed on further attempts. At long distances, I placed more emphasis on the distance display than on the direction arrows and only paid more attention to the direction arrow when the distance was less than 10 meters. This may sound confusing. It is a combination in which I first paid more attention to the decreasing distance and then more and more to the direction arrow. This does not correspond to the "standard search", but I have had the best experiences this way. At a distance of less than 2 m, the display switches to fine search mode, which is also very accurate. Only the acoustic support is a little too quiet for me and the positioning of the loudspeaker is unfavorable, as it can easily be covered by a finger or glove when searching.
The device also performed convincingly in tests that simulated the burial of several people. As soon as the first victim has been found, all you have to do is press the marker button and you can concentrate on the next victim. The distance between the two victims was around 7 m on the first attempt and was then repeated at a distance of 2 m without any difference. Unfortunately, I have not found out how to reverse an accidentally pressed multi-person burial without briefly switching off the device.
Possible burial due to post-avalanches: The manufacturer has solved this problem super simply. If the searcher is buried by a secondary avalanche, the device switches back to transmitting after 2 minutes without movement.
The 3+ has a unique technology here. Anyone who practices a lot with avalanche transceivers will have noticed that the way the device is buried plays a major role. Depending on the position of the antennas in relation to each other, the transmission distance is reduced by up to 50%, as the transmitting antenna transmits into the "sky". Not so with the 3+, which recognizes the unfavourable "sky-transmitting position" (coupling position) and uses a different antenna for transmitting if necessary.
First signal reception / rough search:
The first signal can usually be received from approx. 40 m - and that is a distance that I have never been able to accept. We've all seen avalanche cones that were hundreds of meters long and wide. Anyone who observes the descent of such a large avalanche from a distance and is unable to track those caught is searching on a huge avalanche cone and will probably have absolutely no signal reception for a long time. Of course, we all hope that there will be several searchers, but that doesn't have to be the case. This is not just a problem with the 3+ from Ortovox, as other competitors are no better. My old (analog) M2 device indicated 50 to 60 m acoustically, depending on the situation. It would be nice if the technology was pushed forward and could be located better and faster.
Group check function:
It not only checks whether all devices are transmitting, but also whether they are doing "everything right". For example, if a device transmits an inaccurate frequency or is too weak, this is indicated by an error code E1 to E7. Switching on this function requires both memory and skill. With the device switched off, the search function is triggered, then the button for burying several people is pressed and the device is switched on. Now each member of the group can approach individually and as soon as an "ok" from the device is received within one meter, the 3+ shows this with "00" in the display. A really good feature which, as far as I know, is only used on the S1 from Ortovox and the Barryvox Pulse.
Updating the firmware is possible with Ortovox if required.
In a nutshell:
A successful device with a very good price-performance ratio and only little potential for improvement.
A comparison of all avalanche transceivers: Current test of the 3 by the DAV safety circle
Here is the link to the report on the update from 22.12.2010 by DAV safety experts Chris Semmel and Florian Hellberg.
