Customer Reviews

Oregon Scientific Weather Forecaster And Self-Setting Clock

5 star:		(38)
4 star:		(22)
3 star:		(7)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(5)

 

 

I just picked this up and it seems to be a very nice unit. A couple quick pointers: 1)If you have trouble getting the remote sensor (as someone reported) I have successfully added 2 of the radio shack 63-1092 remote sensors, they are identical to the OS sensor. RS also sells an outdoor unit that goes down to -40F. I got one of those.

2) if you are in a cold climate, you may have trouble with batteries. Take a look at lithium AA batteries for the RS outdoor unit or AAA for the one that goes to -4F. According to Energizer, "Energizer AA Lithium Batteries perform even in the most extreme temperatures -40° F to 140° F. ( Non-Rechargeable ) and will last about 5-7 times longer than standard alkaline batteries."

3) one person reported that they had trouble getting the remote unit to communicate with the base. There are two tips here: a) Everytime you change batteries in the Remote, you should also perform a Reset on the remote. b) I have noticed that if I change the channel on the remote, I need to perform a Reset on the Remote AND on the Base, in which case I need to reset the Pressure altitude and reset the clock.

4) one person said that to get the atomic clock to work you need to live near Denver... not so, you need to be close to a Satellite signal. Try placing the unit near a window with the blinds open, also, the clock can be set manually.

Hope this helps.

These units are great. We have a few of them in different rooms. They perform as advertised.

The outdoor device reliably senses temp -- but keep it out of direct sunlight or the readings will be high.

It sends the signal to the base unit indoors, so we can figure out what to wear for the day.

I wouldn't rely on it for weather forecasting -- look that up on the web.

The atomic clock is a nice feature, but we've had some issues with picking up the signal from time to time.

Overall, however, this is a great unit at a very reasonable price, and it's been reliable.

I'm no expert on hygrometers and thermometers, so I can offer my opinion but not a comparison or objective criticism. This device measures the temperature, pressure and humidity in two locations. It uses a time series of this data to make predictions about coming weather patterns. I'm using it to track the humidity in my home and the temperature outside. I find the readings to be accurate and when changes occur the device is quick to register them. I'm using this device to properly humidify my home and calibrate my thermostat. It has been very helpful in this regard.

Until recently I had no complaints about this unit, but recently the temperatures dropped and I discovered a flaw in the device. Due to its dependence on batteries, it won't function very well at low temperatures. My outdoor unit has trouble accurately registering temperatures below 20 degrees fahrenheit. The batteries get too cold, and the unit can't make accurate measurements. The instruction manual claims that the unit will function properly above -22 degrees fahrenheit, but AA batteries don't function at low temperatures. Take this into consideration if you live in a climate where temperatures routinely drop below freezing.

Edit: I recently learned that Lithium ion batteries will function as low as -40 degrees fahrenheit. The remote unit will accept these and it should fix the above mentioned problem. Standard Alkaline batteries won't operate correctly below 10 degrees fahrenheit.

My main concern in choosing one of these units was the accuracy (or lack thereof).

The remote and base station on my sample agree on temperature within 0.2 degrees F. This is at both 70 and 35 degrees (room and refrigerator). For humidity, the remote consistently measured 2-3% higher than the base station.

I compared the BAR608HGA's readings with two calibrated meters, temp was within 0.5 degrees and humidity was within 4% (one on either side). As the calibrated devices' accuracies were +/- 1 degree F and +/- 3% relative humidity, this fell within the accepted tolerances. I was pleasantly surprised.

Now, this leads me to some speculation: I could not locate any stated accuracies on the less expensive "weather stations" or "forecasters" like this unit (i.e. anything in the $100 range or less). I assumed it was because the accuracy was poor; it may be because a stated accuracy of +/- 2 degrees F and +/- 4-5% RH (reasonable accuracy given the price) would scare people away? Especially the "high" RH range? Well, based on my (albeit limited) experience with calibrated devices, it's relatively expensive to get good RH accuracy in a device and temp accuracy beyond +/- 1 degree F is expensive as well.

Lastly, the "weather forecasting" in all of these units is nothing more than trending based on atmospheric pressure readings and trends (i.e. either falling, rising or steady). Depending on how good such measurements are at forecasting the weather in your area, take the "forecast" with a grain of salt and hit the web if you need a real forecast. Expecting otherwise is, well, not wise.

The clock updated within ~30 seconds of powering up the device (this is in Minnesota).

So, in conclusion, I'd say that my sample of the device (the only sample I have experience with) was well worth the price. [A note on language: I use "sample" in the statistical sense -- I paid full price, it wasn't a free review unit or anything.]

This is the only weather station I could find in this price range that has a backlight. It is well designed and has functioned well.

I've had this working since the day I got it in 9 months ago. I love the fact it receives time from the atomic clock. I'd say the weather predictions are as good as any based on a few variables (I don't think the forcast is received from the weather service though that would be cool).

Unfortunately, when I'm sitting on the other side of the room it's not big enough to read the time display. The light only goes on when you press the button. Also, the buttons and labels are not clearly arranged (sort of like the Florida balots in 2000). But, generally, I'd definitely recommend this product.

I've had this weather station for about 1 month.
All functions are working very well.
The barometric pressure reading is dead on when compared to local weather reports.
RH seems to be accurate within 5%.
Temperature is accurate within 1 degree F.
The time is sync'ed with the atomic clock. A nice surprice since I live in MD.
The weather forecast is remarkably accurate.
The alarm works well. It has no problem waking me up.
The backlight is a nice feature at night.
I have the remote sensor outside down down stairs and the main unit upstairs. The two are separated by about 40 feet and 3 walls. The two communicate flawlessly.

Overall, I am extremely pleased, especially at this price. I am thinking of buying 5 more for Christmas gifts.

Highly recommended !!

For under $30, this weather station is well worth it. Just the fact that it does humidity both indoors and outdoors makes it a bargain. The atomic clock self-adjustment is also a great feature. The only thing that it's lacking is the max/min temperature with reset. The barometer has both the digital readout (which is very accurate when compared with local weather observations) and the graphic display (which is correct most of the time). All-in-all, I'm very pleased with this item and with the great price I paid for it.

This unit has a lot of good things going for it. It's easy to read, easy to use, and the atomic clock updates assure you always have the right time. I put the unit next to my friend's atomic clock and the two were less than a second apart.

The problem with the unit is that the temperature and humidity readings are inaccurate. I live only a few minutes from the airport and their official readings are usually quite different than mine (about 5 degrees of variation in temperature). And yes, I have assured that the transmitter is not in the sun. Humidity might as well not be included at all, as it is off by as much as 40% from the airport readings. Perhaps the most frustrating problem, however, is that the wireless transmitter is not consistent with the base unit. I have placed the two immediately next to each other several times, let them sit for over and hour, and returned to find NO similarity in humidity and as much as 10 degrees difference in temperature. In this respect the unit is only effective in relative terms. If it says 51 degrees you'll probably want to throw on a sweater, but don't expect it to actually be 51 outside.

Overall I'm really happy I bought the unit, but it's probably not good for someone who's really interested in the weather.

Having purchased the larger home weather station by Oregon Scientific, I had no reservations about getting this model as a present for a friend last Christmas.

This unit has some really neat features even my larger system does not. For instance, it has a built-in atomic clock radio, which works surprisingly well even up here in the Sierra foothills. Also, it has an altitude adjustment for the barometric setting that simply asks you for your altitude. In contrast, I had to figure out the difference in pressure from sea level for my system and add that factor manually.

Now, the reason behind my caution in the title. The person to whom I gave this present has become totally enthralled with it. She has spent much time watching the trend lines for air pressure, temperature and humidity. Unfortunately, she has also become disillusioned when the forecast icon seems to show something that's not consistent with her observations.

I tried to explain to her that it's only analyzing trends and is suggesting weather for the near future. Plus, it only provides about a handful of alternatives. This explanation was not good enough. She wanted a definitive answer and decided to both write and call Oregon Scientific. Ultimately, they replied and informed her that the forecasting tool looks ahead from 2-10 days. This seemed to satisfy her, although she was still on the verge of returning it because she felt it was defective.

From my point of view, it's as accurate as the forecasts I read in our local paper.