Car tracker (anti theft) outdoor car - RAK 7200 vs LGT-92-LI/LGT-92-AA:

End Devices (Nodes) Dragino
1

Hi,
I want to put a tracker on top of a caravan. There is some space so the size or weight is not an issue.
Later I could imagine to put an additional solar panel on the roof (maybe with usb solar panel → standard power bank → tracker).

So my current understanding:

  • LGT-92-LI
    ** I like it is already in a case and
    ** has a USB Port (for later solar panel)
    ** but “which target for real time tracking with short tracking uplink” → this is what I don’t need. Is it possible to get the complete configuration for the LGT-92-AA and configure it the same way?

  • LGT-92-AA
    ** no case (well could 3D print it somehow from thingiverse
    ** matches my use case more “This is designed for asset tracking where only need to uplink a few times every day”

  • RAK 7200
    ** already in a case with USB plug
    ** seems to fit my use case from the configuration already

When I see the resources in the internet there is far more for the Dragino.
But the RAK 7200 seems for the ready to go device.

Any recommendations? Any more things to consider?
Thanks

2

Gateway coverage?

3

I would not recommend this device. The device has very immature firmware and suffers from performance issues in both LoRa antenna circuit as well as GPS performance.

As a contribution to your list you may consider the Oyster tracker: Oyster3 Battery-Powered GPS Tracker | 10+ Years Battery - Digital Matter

4

I have both. Dragino is much better as sleep mode (and wake-up thanks to accelerometer) is implemented.I confirm RAK7200 is poor in term of antenna and battery duration…

5

Thanks for the responses so far.
Well the gateway coverage depends where a theft is driving to :smile: .
But where I usually park the care I have a coverage of a gateway (not my own).

Ok thanks for the info to the RAK 7200.
Still the questions concerning the both LGT-92 versions. I would prefer one for the case and the other for the better out of the box configuration for my use case.

I also have seen the Oyster.
But somewhere I have read about monthly subscription. But maybe this counts only for the gsm version and not for the lora version. I also don’t see somewhere the integration via TNN but only via their own server?

6

@oberour which version of Dragino do you have? With our without case?

7

I use Oyster LoraWan on the TTN, no subs are applicable. They work well.

8

So you will know it’s been stolen and possibly have some sort of idea which direction it’s gone in, assuming the other persons gateway is always there, but after that, it’s entirely up to gateway coverage …

1 Like
9

With case LGT-92.

10

Well yes of course, no coverage - no car anymore.

Thanks for all the information.
So I think I will go for the LGT-92 with case. Which means some configuration efforts to change it to long term tracking.
The Oyster looks like a good product but isn’t chargeable from outside (due to waterproof case) for later solar panel use.

11

The Oyster use penlight batteries and you just swap them out, I have been running for more than year on one set. There spec is 3-4 years on a set.

My Oyster moves 3-4 hours every day. They are also easily configurable.

12

Does no one else here think it’s a bit academic discussing the why’s & wherefore’s of a theft tracker that has a good chance of not being heard?

If you’re in an area with a reasonable number of gateways, that’s fine - but I’d still have a GSM SMS module on the side to supplement the LoRaWAN.

13

We have good coverage in our area - 50x60km area, so Lora tracking is a good option for us, as long as you respond in time.

Also bear in mind the velocity the tracked object can travel at. Due to limitations of msg.

If you travel at 100km/h you cover 16.667Km in 10 min.

14

And signal path effects at that speed can turn uplinks in to confetti - best to transmit when stationary or moving slowly.

15

I have a Oyster on my car and when travelling on the highway at 120km/h , I don’t miss a uplink. Most uplinks are at SF7-9.

Have other LORA trackers in the car every now and then, when I go and demo them, uplink success is 70-80%.

So placement is important.

1 Like
16

Good coverage will get you SF7-9, signals are more inclined to go wrong with longer transmissions times - SF10-12

17

I do agree the SF10-12 you are more likely to miss, due to longer TX time, but even those I don’t miss, If I look at my db with my uplinks in, 99% of them are there.

So from the time intervals I can see dropped packets very easily on the DB.

18

Also whilst LoRa Modulation is great for fast moving objects (relative device to device closing speeds vs tangential/normal to or at an angle) compared to many other technologies, IIRC good to >>180km/h at low SF’s. As SF increases, signal coherence ( signal coherence - Search results - Wikipedia ) can be a problem and so (again IIRC) at closing speeds >45km/h SF 12 - useful for longer range gps trackers - can have issues, with a scale of speed/SF’s in between. (Has been called out previously on forum - use search), which is why when I go out on mapping/coverage runs I typically go slow if interested in mapping higher SF coverage and pretend to be a caravan, sorry a slow moving vehicle, holding up the traffic as I crawl along! :wink: (early LoRa test work was done travelling on e.g. French TGV to see how it worked and compared to e.g. Sigfox, NBIot etc. - tech was originally developed in Grenoble after all :wink: and of course the LoRa Satellite tech guys have had to consider doppler induced signal coherence conditions - impacts sensitivity closer to the horizon with faster infered closing speed - falls to near zero closing speed when directly overhead)

19

My velocity comment were more aimed at the gateway coverage than the IIRC.

But as you mention the IIRC you need to take this in consideration when tracking high velocity objects like planes, rockets and the granny driving around town :smiling_imp:

20

But mostly, and this is the important thing, is that no one visiting this forum reads a thread where they get the impression that just because they can buy a tracker based on LoRaWAN, that it will be a definitive solution. Lest they come back to complain that all their stuff has gone missing …