Introduction
If you've been around hound hunting very long, you probably already know Garmin. Its dog tracking systems have been a standard in the market for years. eSEEK is a newer competitor getting attention because it combines GPS/VHF dog tracking, training features and cellular connectivity at a lower purchase price.
At Double U, we wanted to know something simple: Is it actually any good?
Rather than compare specifications on two websites, we got an eSEEK system and used it. We compared it with Garmin equipment, Specifically a Garmin Alpha 300 and Garmin TT25 collar that we know extremely well, tested it with our dogs, tested stimulation against Garmin and Dogtra Pathfinder worked with its mapping system, tested range and interference, introduced multiple handhelds, and tested the VHF frequency transmitted by the collar.
Our conclusion surprised us in a few areas. eSEEK actually tracked dogs very well. Range was comparable to Garmin in our testing. We experienced essentially no interference. And eSEEK has a significant price advantage.
But after looking at the complete system - not just whether it could put a dog on a map - we still believe Garmin is the superior product today. More importantly, we identified a regulatory concern that currently prevents Double U from being comfortable selling eSEEK in the United States.
First: Why Double U Does Not Currently Sell eSEEK
We want to be completely transparent about this because Double U is a retailer. We sell GPS dog tracking equipment for a living. At the time of this review, eSEEK offers us a more attractive dealer margin than Garmin. From a short-term financial perspective, eSEEK would actually be an appealing product for us to sell.
So our decision not to sell eSEEK isn't because Garmin makes us more money. It is because we're looking beyond the initial sale.
The 162.220 162.370 MHz Issue
During our testing, we measured the VHF transmission of the eSEEK unit supplied to us at approximately 162.220 MHz. That concerned us.
NTIA materials identify 162.0125-173.2 MHz as a band heavily used for Federal fixed and mobile operations in the United States. Our measured 162.220 MHz signal falls inside that range.
We have not identified an authorization that resolves the regulatory question for the particular consumer eSEEK dog tracking unit we tested at 162.220 MHz in the United States. We want to be precise: we are reporting what we measured and why it creates a regulatory concern for us as a retailer; we are not making a blanket legal conclusion about every eSEEK device or every use of spectrum near 162 MHz.
Until we're satisfied that the U.S. regulatory question is resolved, Double U isn't comfortable knowingly selling or distributing the system. An individual consumer may evaluate that risk differently. As a business that expects to support customers after the sale, we cannot ignore it.
| Double U position We are not predicting that eSEEK will be shut down or become unavailable. The unresolved regulatory question creates enough uncertainty around future distribution, replacements and support that we are not comfortable selling the system today. |
Garmin vs. eSEEK: Quick Comparison
| Category | Our Verdict |
| Tracking performance | Tie |
| Range | Tie |
| Interference | eSEEK |
| Price | eSEEK |
| Mapping | Garmin |
| Offline mapping / usability | Garmin |
| Overall user interface | Garmin |
| Software maturity | Garmin |
| Training / stimulation | Garmin - significant advantage |
| Multi-handheld training control | Garmin |
| Hardware refinement | Garmin |
| Battery life | Not enough testing |
| Long-term ecosystem / support | Garmin |
| U.S. regulatory confidence | Garmin |
Tracking & Range: eSEEK Was Surprisingly Good
This is one area where we want to give eSEEK full credit. We didn't see a meaningful difference between Garmin and eSEEK in basic tracking performance during our testing. The eSEEK tracked our dogs, and its range was very comparable to Garmin.
If you're expecting us to tell you Garmin tracked twice as far or that eSEEK couldn't keep up, that is not what we experienced. Like wise we did not experience situations where the Garmin Dropped off and the ESeek was far superior. They both tracked very similar in distances. You can watch our two video's on this, One was a long day in the wood with dogs and real life situations, The second was more of a controlled and measured Side by side comparison.
Winner: Tie
Interference: eSEEK Wins Our Test
We experienced essentially no noticeable interference with eSEEK. Based strictly on our testing, eSEEK gets the win in this category.
There is an important qualification. Our eSEEK interference testing was limited compared with our years of Garmin experience. Garmin also has an enormous installed user base, so there are naturally more opportunities for congestion when many Garmin collars and handhelds are operating in the same area. We cannot conclude that eSEEK is inherently more resistant to interference; we can say that we experienced no interference problems during our test.
Winner: eSEEK
Mapping & Offline Use: Garmin Wins
The mapping experience was one of our bigger frustrations with eSEEK. It worked best when the handheld had an internet connection. The easiest solution for us was connecting the eSEEK handheld to the hotspot on our cellphone and letting it use our phone data.
That works fine until you're hunting where there is no cellphone service - which is common for hound hunters.
Starlink Can Help, But It Adds Cost
Some eSEEK users are using Starlink Mini systems in their trucks to maintain internet connectivity in remote areas. That can solve the connectivity problem, but it adds another device and another recurring service cost. We do not consider that an ideal requirement for most hunters.
eSEEK Does Have Offline Maps
eSEEK does not require internet service to track your dog, and it does offer offline mapping. Our problem was the experience of using it. Downloading larger hunting areas was slow and cumbersome, preparing map coverage ahead of time took more effort than we would like, and switching between online and offline mapping in the woods was not particularly intuitive.
Winner: Garmin
Handheld-to-Handheld Tracking — Advantage: Garmin
One feature that's particularly useful when hunting with other people is the ability to track the other hunters or handheld, not just their dogs.
We had intermittent results with this feature and tracks while testing eSEEK, and after spending more time with the system, we believe we understand why.
eSEEK's handheld to handheld location sharing appears to rely on an internet connection rather than the VHF radio connection used to track the collars.
eSEEK's current documentation confirms that its “Share My Location” feature requires the handheld to be online with internet service. In other words, the VHF radio system can continue tracking a dog's collar in an area without cellular service, but the location of another hunter's handheld isn't necessarily being transmitted to you through that same VHF network.
This also ties back into our concerns about eSEEK's dependence on internet connectivity for some of its more advanced functionality.
For hunters operating in remote areas, we'd prefer critical hunting functionality to remain available without requiring cellular data, Wi-Fi, a phone hotspot or something like Starlink.
Our Experience
During our testing, handheld to handheld tracking was intermittent.
Knowing now that eSEEK's own documentation says location sharing requires internet service helps explain some of the behavior we experienced.
This is different from our experience tracking the dogs themselves. eSEEK's VHF dog tracking performed very well in our tests.
The distinction is important:
eSEEK can track collars over VHF without internet, but hunter to hunter handheld location sharing appears to require an internet connection.
For the remote areas where we hunt, we consider that a significant disadvantage.
Winner: Garmin
Usability: Garmin's Experience Shows
Garmin has had many years, many product generations and a very large customer base to refine its dog tracking software. Garmin should be better at usability, and in our experience it is.
eSEEK was not impossible to use. It was simply much more difficult to learn. We would occasionally have dog tracks seemingly disappear after touching something on the screen. After spending more time with the system, we determined that certain on-screen selections were toggling tracks on and off. Once you know what is happening it makes more sense, but it was not intuitive when it happened.
The "Stay" Alerts
Early in our testing, we repeatedly received alerts telling us that a dog had a "stay" condition or command. The alerts occurred frequently enough to become frustrating, and initially it was not obvious what they meant or where to change the behavior. Some of the terminology and menu structure felt as though language translation may be contributing to the learning curve.
An App Inside a Device
The eSEEK handheld is essentially an Android style device running the eSEEK tracking application. That creates two layers of settings: settings inside the eSEEK app and settings in the underlying device. For a technically inclined user, that is manageable. For a customer calling from the woods because something changed on the screen, it adds another layer of troubleshooting.
Double U has spent years helping customers learn Garmin systems, and even Garmin users can struggle with menus and settings. Based on our experience learning eSEEK ourselves, we believe the support burden would currently be considerably higher.
You can watch some of the user ability issues and frustrations that we documented during our testing.
Winner: Garmin - by a significant margin
Training & Stimulation: Our Biggest Product Concern
Apart from the regulatory issue, the training system was probably our biggest concern with eSEEK. We tested eSEEK stimulation side by side with Garmin and Dogtra so we had familiar training systems as a reference.
1. Stimulation Progression Was Too Aggressive
Garmin, Dogtra and other established training systems allow the handler to begin with very low stimulation and progressively increase it. That gives the handler control and allows the lowest effective correction to be used for an individual dog.
Our eSEEK unit behaved differently. The stimulation increased extremely quickly between levels, and the upper levels felt considerably stronger than what we are accustomed to from other training systems.
We did not perform a laboratory electrical output analysis, and we are not making a veterinary determination about what stimulation level is medically safe. What we can say is that after personally testing it, we were not comfortable putting the eSEEK collar on our own dogs and using the stimulation feature. We believe eSEEK should reevaluate both the stimulation range and the progression between levels.
2. Stimulation Duration Didn't Behave Like We Expected
With the training systems we are accustomed to using, the handler controls a continuous correction: press the button and stimulation begins; release the button and it stops. That allows an experienced handler to give a very brief correction.
Our eSEEK unit appeared to behave more like the handheld was sending a timed stimulation command. A brief press could still result in the collar completing the commanded stimulation period. That removes some real-time control from the handler.
When you combine strong stimulation, large jumps between levels and less direct control over duration, we become even less comfortable using the training feature.
3. Multiple Handhelds Created Another Training Problem
Hound hunters frequently share dogs between handhelds so everyone in the group can see where all the dogs are. During our eSEEK testing, when we introduced another handheld and paired a collar with it, the most recently paired handheld appeared to become the handheld with training and tone authority. The original handheld lost that capability.
That means a hunter could let a friend add his dog simply for tracking and inadvertently give that friend's handheld training authority while losing it on his own handheld. We believe tracking permission and training permission should be separate. Ideally the owner's primary handheld should retain training authority, while shared handhelds receive tracking only access unless the owner explicitly grants training control.
Overall Training Winner: Garmin - by a large margin
Hardware: Garmin Feels More Mature
The eSEEK hardware worked, but it did not feel as refined or purpose-built for outdoor use as Garmin. Garmin has decades of experience building outdoor electronics, and that experience shows up in small details: battery housings, clips, latches, seals, connections and how components fit together.
The eSEEK hardware felt more function-first. Garmin often feels like the engineers went beyond "How do we make this work?" and also asked, "How will a hunter interact with this thousands of times in rain, dust, mud and cold?"
Charging Clips
The eSEEK charging clips felt like a weak point in the design. But Garmin does not get a free pass here: the first version of Garmin's TT25 charging clips was not great either, and Double U saw many customers break them. That is a good example of why product maturity matters. Years of products in the field expose weaknesses and give manufacturers an opportunity to refine them.
We have not used eSEEK long enough to claim its hardware will not last. We are saying Garmin currently feels more refined and rugged to us.
Winner: Garmin
Battery Life: We're Not Scoring It
We did not test eSEEK long enough or under controlled enough conditions to make a fair battery life comparison. Both companies publish specifications, but this review is about what we actually experienced. If we did not adequately test something ourselves, we'd rather say so.
Verdict: Not enough testing
Price: eSEEK Wins
Price is one of eSEEK's biggest advantages. A hunter can get into an eSEEK tracking system for substantially less money than a comparable Garmin system, and the difference becomes more meaningful as additional collars are added.
Someone could reasonably read this comparison and decide: the tracking worked well, range was comparable, interference was excellent and the system costs less, so I'm willing to accept the other compromises. That is a legitimate conclusion. Our job is to tell you what we experienced, not make every customer's decision for them.
Winner: eSEEK
Updates, Repairs & Long-Term Support
One of our concerns is not necessarily how eSEEK works today, but what happens several years after purchase. Every electronics product has bugs. Garmin certainly has, and we have seen Garmin collar issues corrected through firmware updates.
During our original eSEEK testing, we could identify how to update the handheld software, but we could not identify a straightforward customer process for collar firmware updates. We therefore want clear answers about how collar firmware is updated, who performs the update, and how bugs in collars already in the field would be corrected. If eSEEK has since improved or clarified this process, that is something we would be glad to update in this review.
U.S. Repairs
It does appear that some U.S. companies are stocking parts and working toward domestic eSEEK repair capability. That is encouraging. Garmin, however, has an established service ecosystem with years of history. eSEEK is still developing that infrastructure, and we do not yet have the same long-term confidence in parts availability, repair turnaround, software support and replacement device availability.
Winner today: Garmin
Dealer Margin: Here's Something You Might Not Expect
eSEEK currently offers Double U a more attractive dealer margin than Garmin. That is tempting. GPS tracking systems generally operate on relatively small dealer margins, while specialty dealers have significant costs that are not obvious when someone is simply comparing box prices online.
Customers call us for pairing help, maps, warranty assistance, repairs, troubleshooting and support from the woods. Providing that support costs money. From a purely short-term business perspective, selling eSEEK could potentially make Double U more money per system.
Yet we are choosing not to sell it today. We are not only asking, "How much can we make on this sale?" We are asking, "Can we confidently support the customer who buys this system from us several years from now?"
We would rather make less money selling something we are confident we can stand behind than make more money today on something we are uncertain we can support tomorrow.
What eSEEK Got Right
We do not want the criticisms above to obscure something important: eSEEK has built a legitimate tracking system. More importantly than any feature list, the fundamental tracking performance impressed us.
If we were advising eSEEK where to concentrate development, we would not tell them to start over. We would tell them to keep the tracking and refine everything around it: improve the user interface, make offline mapping easier, reevaluate stimulation levels and progression, give the handler more precise control over stimulation duration, separate tracking permission from training authority when sharing dogs, continue refining the hardware, make firmware updates and support as simple as possible, and provide clear documentation resolving the U.S. regulatory/frequency question.
Garmin vs. eSEEK: Which Would We Choose?
Today, Garmin. And it is not particularly close when we evaluate the complete system.
But eSEEK did not lose this comparison because it could not track our dogs. It tracked them very well. Range was comparable to Garmin in our testing. Interference was excellent. It is less expensive, and its current dealer margin is more attractive to us.
Garmin wins because of the entire ecosystem surrounding the tracking technology: mapping and offline use that better fit remote hunting, a more mature user interface, more refined outdoor hardware, a training system that gives us considerably more confidence and control, and an established software, repair and support ecosystem.
And today, we have much greater confidence in Garmin's regulatory position and long-term availability in the United States.
Could Our Opinion of eSEEK Change?
Absolutely. In fact, we hope it does. Competition is good for this industry and ultimately good for hound hunters. eSEEK demonstrated during our testing that its core tracking technology is capable.
If eSEEK resolves the U.S. frequency/regulatory questions, improves the training system, continues refining its software and offline maps, and establishes a strong long-term support ecosystem in the United States, we would be interested in testing it again.
If our conclusions change, we'll update this article. For now, Garmin And Dogra Pathfinder remains the GPS dog tracking system we're comfortable recommending, selling and standing behind.
