# Best remote trainer?



## Rerun (Feb 27, 2006)

Looking for a remote trainer (shock, not sound) for short distance training use (doesn't need to be a long distance field trainer).

Needs to be *water proof (not resistant)*, have multiple settings to adjust up/down as necessary, and durable. Are the petsafe ones complete junk and if so, what brand(s) are recommended?

Suggestions on best reputable places to purchase from would be welcome as well. I know leerburg sells some, wasn't sure if they were top of the line or just overpriced because he puts his name behind them. Thanks


----------



## MaggieRoseLee (Aug 17, 2001)

Collar Clinic Electric Dog Training Collars, E-collar Batteries, Shock Collar Repair Services-Reconditioned Remote Trainers has the best prices! I've bought the reconditioned ones and they showed up looking like new in the original boxes (and have know worked for years).

I have the Tritonics and have had no problems. My dogs swim in them like maniacs so clearly they are waterproof.

The Innotek and Dogtra are the others I know people like.

These are the ones I have Reconditioned Sport 50 S: Collar Clinic


----------



## PupperLove (Apr 10, 2010)

I have used Innotek in the past. My dog was always in the water with it. It worked VERY well. It worked long range, and when my dog was standing behind a huge obstacle or even behind a hill, etc. I haven't tried any other brands, but I can say that Innotek worked well for us.


----------



## Liesje (Mar 4, 2007)

Everyone where I train uses Dogtra and seems very happy with them. I know the ones we are using are like $300+ though.


----------



## AbbyK9 (Oct 11, 2005)

TriTronics and Dogtra make excellent quality products. You can get some of the cheaper Dogtra collars for around $200. I believe I paid $199 for my Dogtra 200NCP. Not as many settings as the higher-end and more expensive ones, but enough for my purposes.


----------



## Ucdcrush (Mar 22, 2004)

I have read few but good things about these collars:

http://unleashedtechnology.com/

I like the idea of adjustable vibration, and stimulation if needed (GT3). Dogtras have just 1 level of vibe and many levels of stim.

There is much good advice here:
LOU CASTLE - ARTICLES

and on his forum,
Modern Ecollar Training • Index page


----------



## LouCastle (Sep 25, 2006)

The "pet quality" Dogtra Ecollars have just as many settings as the "professional quality." Both have 127 levels of stim. The difference is that the "pet quality" collars offer _low to medium _levels of stim and the "professional" collars offer _low to high _levels of stim. They are built to the same quality and offer the same warranty.


----------



## DogGone (Nov 28, 2009)

Of all the E-collars I’ve tried, I prefer Sportdog.
　
I don’t like the economy “training” collars. In the short term they may be cheaper but if you use them a lot and expect longer-range for more severe environmental conditions; a more expensive collar may be cheaper and likely to be much more effective and practical in the long. 
　
If you use them a lot, in the long run a more expensive one with a rechargeable receiver battery is typically cheaper and more environmentally friendly.
　
I don’t like the “trainer” versions because the receivers often don’t have rechargeable batteries and the ranges are too limited for my uses.
　
I prefer to get the hunting and professional specialty versions of E-collars. They are generally more rugged, more practical, more water resistant/waterproof have more range, and have better warranties (and often can control more dogs).
　
SportHunter 1825 is waterproof and has a mile range, can be expanded to control up to six dogs, and more than one transmitter can be programmed to the same collars. I think the choice of stimulation is limited when using multiple dogs; however there is a choice of type of stimulations; tone, vibration or electrical. The transmitter and collars are fairly ruggedized and waterproof.
　
The sport hunter series.
SportHunter - SportDOG 
　
The HoundHunter 3200 is waterproof and has a 2 mile range. Can be expanded up to four dogs.
HoundHunter® 3200 - SportDOG 
　
The ProHunter 2500 is only water resistant; however it has one of the most rugged transmitters I have seen and has a 1 ½ mile range, and can control up to six dogs.
ProHunter® 2500 - SportDOG 
　
　
I have both a ProHunter 2500 and a SportDOG SD-1800.
　
I misplaced my ProHunter 2500 transmitter, so I decided to get a cheaper replacement that works with my dog collars that was waterproof and was smaller and could be put on a lanyard. I found my ProHunter 2500 so I used that when I need the extra range and/or more ruggedness, however need my hands-free and/or want a waterproof transmitter I use the SportDOG SD-1800.
　
The SportDOG SD-1800 only has a ¾ mile range but in most cases that is enough for me. I’ve had it to the beach several times and have had it in the water for several hours in a row and have probably gone as deep as 15 or 20 feet deep. I wear it on a lanyard when I am swimming. The dog often stays ashore and/or wades in while I’m swimming; if she gets too close to people or looks like she might be getting into trouble or if I want her to swim out to meet me I will stick the antenna out of the water and give her a tone and she knows to look for hand signals. So even though I’m out of range that I can effectively give voice commands amongst the wind and noise I can still communicate and give commands to my dog and keep her out of trouble. Some people that have watched me and my dog were convinced that it was a walkie-talkie and that I was giving her voice commands over a radio. I got a good laugh and gave an explanation and they were still very amazed. A herd of deer came out of the woods to eat grass and get a drink of water by the beach; a Ranger saw my dogs off a conventional leash and he came over to give me a ticket, but as he was approaching me he realized that me and my dog and a bunch of nature watchers were all watching the deer that was just about 100 yards away and that the dog was under control with my “invisible leash”. Realizing the circumstances of my disability and what how well behaved and under control my dog was, the Ranger elected not to write me a ticket and we had a pleasant conversation while watching the herd of deer graze.


----------



## DogGone (Nov 28, 2009)

Ucdcrush said:


> There is much good advice here:
> LOU CASTLE - ARTICLES
> and on his forum,
> Modern Ecollar Training • Index page


　
　
=====
While most of what he says is dead on; some of what he says is inaccurate and misconstrued. Some of the advice is wrong from Lou Castle and he himself seems to be creating some myths because apparently he doesn’t fully understand all of what he is talking about. 
　
Under his myths section; he claims that modern E. collars offer up to 50,000 random frequencies; I think that is in itself a misconception and myth. 
　
With old technology you simply had to have the same frequency in the same broadcast tone to trigger a stimulation command. With more modern and more advanced/expensive technology uses much more advanced technology. Rather than a simple tone (audio frequency superimposed on the radio frequency) that often is created in nature or by other modern technology; newer and more advanced technology can require one or more binary codes be broadcast on a particular frequency before a stimulation command will normally be triggered; this virtually eliminates all bogus triggers.
　
It’s much like SETI has been scanning the skies for decades and has only once heard a binary code that seemed to be extraterrestrial.
　
I’m not sure if dog radio collar technology is fully using it yet; but there is frequency hopping technology that has two sets of binary codes. One set of binary code is to authenticate the frequency. The second set of binary code is to authenticate a command. This is the type of technology that is used by the most modern and most advanced military equipment. This helps prevent an enemy from jamming signals, hijacking signals, snooping, etc…
　
Anyway the 50,000 number that he came up with I don’t think is the number of frequencies; I think it is the number of binary codes that are commonly used. So there may be like 50,000 patterns of frequency hopping, and 50,000 command codes.
　
If you put a receiver collar in close proximity to an extremely strong source of electromagnetic radiation it could be possible to overwhelm the primary circuits and cause a bogus stimulation command or even fry the radio collar. So something like a high-powered CB, police/fire/air radio/radar or short wave radio antenna mounted a few inches or a few feet away from a radio collar could possibly inadvertently cause an unintentional stimulation.
　
Modern well.design expensive good radio equipment has very good shielding and is designed to reduce the odds of pulling in a stray signal is nearly astronomical if it is used properly.
　
There are some scenarios that have a lots of RF/EM radiation. Using an E collar on an aircraft carrier that is on maneuvers with active radar and radio transmissions would probably be asking for trouble. There also might be some problems in a SAR scenario where there is a lot of electromagnetic radiation from high-powered transmitters and from the area being painted and scanned by radar. It also may be unwise to use an E-collar in close proximity of an airport, its radar or transmission towers; radio station towers; TV station towers, under high tension power lines, etc… if you could hold up a fluorescent light bulb and if it lights up without being connected to wires; it is probably not a wise idea to use an e collar in that area. You might want to try carrying an AM or FM radio with you and if you get a lot of interference you probably shouldn’t operate the e collar in that area, while there is so much EM radiation. You probably should not operate an E- collar in close proximity of radiating x-ray, CAT scan or MRI equipment.


----------



## DogGone (Nov 28, 2009)

Another point that I’m on partial disagreement with is the claim that there is no health risks involved with using E- collar. I am a big fan of E-collars; however they should be used wisely and for the most part on healthy dogs. Dogs that are susceptible to seizures or have spinal cord or brain damage should probably not be exposed to electronic/shock stimulation like e-collar. An electronic shock can have the same effect as a strobe light to someone that is susceptible to seizures, it could trigger a seizure event.
　
I have a spinal cord injury. Because of my spinal injury with nerve damage I have started to have some occasional myoclonic seizures. I used to use a tens unit that uses electronic stimulation that allegedly is supposed to reduce pain; I found it was largely ineffective at reducing pain but regretfully it increased the severity and frequency of my myoclonic seizures. Regretfully many people, including many people in the medical community dismiss seizures as harmless and or insignificant; however if there is a pre-existing medical condition like broken bones that are fusing it can easily re-fractures the bones or shift vertebrae and discs to increase pain and/or paralysis. Another bad side effect of seizures is it can be much like electroshock therapy; it can wipe out memories, especially short-term memories; sure you get most back after a period of time but after each event more and more is permanently lost. Because of myoclonic my ability to record/recall short term memories is very limited. The myoclonic seizures also reduce my cognitive skills and coherent thought. In many ways it is much like Alzheimer’s. There are times when my mind works almost normally; however there are times when my short term memory is nearly shot and it’s nearly impossible to think coherently.
====
　
Another thing I recommend with the E-collar is to be very careful and consistent about how tight the collar is. To tight could reduce movement, circulation and possibly cause pain. To loose and the stimulation level can be very inconsistent. There has been several times that I had the collar too loose and the dog was not getting a stimulation because the contacts were not contacting the skin so I increased the level of stimulation to a level that was unnecessarily painful. A snug collar that doesn’t allow sloppiness will give the most consistent stimulation. Believe it or not a collar that is too loose can actually increase pain. 
　
Veterans of using tens units should know what I’m talking about. A well attached electrode on a tens unit should give consistent stimulation. If you take a tens unit and attach the electrodes so the stimulation is reasonable; then try slowly pulling off the electrodes; the amount of stimulation will increase until it feels like it’s burning and/or painful. Electrodes that have good contact will spread the electricity over a wider area so there is less pain and burning. Electrodes that don’t have a good contact will concentrate the electricity to a small point where it can feel like burning or pain. Patients that are in such heat or in such pain that sweat significantly so the electrodes start falling off and sliding around and having inconsistent contact notice that stimulation becomes very inconsistent. 
　
With a e-collar having the electrodes placed firmly against the skin will help limit the voltage that is produced by the small transformer. Without the resistance of the body to resist the transformer the voltage can climb to the point that it might arc over to the skin which would be more painful and inconsistent. So if you have your collar too loose sometimes your dog may feel nothing when the stimulation is engaged and other times it could be significantly painful.

There are risks with any type of training system or collar. Any tool can be used for good or bad and can be dangerous in the wrong hands.


----------



## LouCastle (Sep 25, 2006)

DogGone said:


> While most of what he says is dead on; some of what he says is inaccurate and misconstrued.


 
I'll disagree. LOL. 




DogGone said:


> Under his myths section; he claims that modern E. collars offer up to 50,000 random frequencies; I think that is in itself a misconception and myth.


 
While you're correct that there are not 50,000 frequencies in use, the point is that there are about 50,000 different combinations of codes that Ecollar transmitters use to communicate with their receivers. Early versions were about as sophisticated as garage door openers, with only a few different codes. In fact, in the not too distant past, when you purchased an Ecollar they asked where you trained and who you trained with. They checked their lists to see what frequencies others in your group were using to prevent people from having the same frequency as others that they trained with. 

It was not at all unusual to have to send the unit back to have the frequency changed. If you want to argue that the word _"frequency"_ is not the precisely proper word, that's fine. But I don't think it's necessary to communicate to the average pet owner (whatever that means) all the facts on the binary code system It's minutiae and in the grand scheme, unimportant. The point is that it's virtually unheard of for one Ecollar to interfere with another. 




DogGone said:


> Anyway the 50,000 number that he came up with I don’t think is the number of frequencies; I think it is the number of binary codes that are commonly used. So there may be like 50,000 patterns of frequency hopping, and 50,000 command codes.


 
Thanks for the detailed explanation. But I really don't think that you've furthered knowledge of any significance here. But to be more accurate I've changed the website so that it now says "codes" rather than "frequency." Thanks for helping improve the website. 




DogGone said:


> If you put a receiver collar in close proximity to an extremely strong source of electromagnetic radiation it could be possible to overwhelm the primary circuits and cause a bogus stimulation command or even fry the radio collar. So something like a high-powered CB, police/fire/air radio/radar or short wave radio antenna mounted a few inches or a few feet away from a radio collar could possibly inadvertently cause an unintentional stimulation.


 
Can you cite any incidents of this occurring or is this just theory? Police officers regularly use Ecollars worn on their belt or sitting in the front seat a few feet from their _"police radio antennae"_ without incident. I've been at command posts for SAR and police incidents alike, standing a few feet from the radio antennae and also noticed nothing untoward. 




DogGone said:


> There are some scenarios that have a lots of RF/EM radiation. Using an E collar on an aircraft carrier that is on maneuvers with active radar and radio transmissions would probably be asking for trouble.


 
All of you who do your training on the flight deck of aircraft carriers please take heed. ROFL. 




DogGone said:


> There also might be some problems in a SAR scenario where there is a lot of electromagnetic radiation from high-powered transmitters and from the area being painted and scanned by radar. It also may be unwise to use an E-collar in close proximity of an airport, its radar or transmission towers; radio station towers; TV station towers, under high tension power lines


 
Many training fields are in the areas that you mention. I've trained on many of them myself and not had the slightest issue. Perhaps what we're seeing is the difference between theory, that allows that such things might happen and reality, where they don't. I prefer to deal in the latter. 




DogGone said:


> etc… if you could hold up a fluorescent light bulb and if it lights up without being connected to wires; it is probably not a wise idea to use an e collar in that area. You might want to try carrying an AM or FM radio with you and if you get a lot of interference you probably shouldn’t operate the e collar in that area, while there is so much EM radiation. You probably should not operate an E- collar in close proximity of radiating x-ray, CAT scan or MRI equipment.


 
Again, do you have any verifiable incidents to tell us of, or is this more theory?


----------



## LouCastle (Sep 25, 2006)

DogGone said:


> Another point that I’m on partial disagreement with is the claim that there is no health risks involved with using E- collar.


Please show us even ONE scientific study that showed any health risks associated with the use of Ecollars. Surely you have at least one that supports this argument?! 




DogGone said:


> I am a big fan of E-collars; however they should be used wisely and for the most part on healthy dogs. Dogs that are susceptible to seizures or have spinal cord or brain damage should probably not be exposed to electronic/shock stimulation like e-collar. An electronic shock can have the same effect as a strobe light to someone that is susceptible to seizures, it could trigger a seizure event.


Again, is this your theory or do you have an incident to back it up? Ecollar manufacturers have taken to including warnings of this nature but it's because of product liability, not based on any actual occurrences. Unless of course you can show us one. New hair dryers bear the warning, *DO NOT USE IN THE SHOWER! *I think this is much the same as what you're talking about. 




DogGone said:


> I have a spinal cord injury. Because of my spinal injury with nerve damage I have started to have some occasional myoclonic seizures. I used to use a tens unit that uses electronic stimulation that allegedly is supposed to reduce pain; I found it was largely ineffective at reducing pain but regretfully it increased the severity and frequency of my myoclonic seizures.


I'd caution anyone against accepting your account of this. It's human nature when something occurs to look at the last thing that preceded it. But just because two things occur near one another in time hardly means that one caused the other. Correlation is not causation. Do you have any scientific studies to back up this speculation? 




DogGone said:


> Regretfully many people, including many people in the medical community dismiss seizures as harmless and or insignificant; however if there is a pre-existing medical condition like broken bones that are fusing it can easily re-fractures the bones or shift vertebrae and discs to increase pain and/or paralysis.


Same question. If what you claim is true how is it that _"many people ... in the medical community dismiss seizures as harmless and or insignificant? ..."_ 


HERE'S something that is on my website. It comes from someone who had an extremely fear aggressive dog that I "fixed" with an Ecollar. _"I should also say that in addition to being a SAR dog handler in my free time, I'm a veterinary student and am simultaneously working on a PhD. in Neurobiology. If I were AT ALL concerned about negative neurological or behavioral consequences of Lou's methods, or his Ecollars, I would not use it on my own dog."_ 




DogGone said:


> Another thing I recommend with the E-collar is to be very careful and consistent about how tight the collar is. To tight could reduce movement, circulation and possibly cause pain. To loose and the stimulation level can be very inconsistent. There has been several times that I had the collar too loose and the dog was not getting a stimulation because the contacts were not contacting the skin so I increased the level of stimulation to a level that was unnecessarily painful. A snug collar that doesn’t allow sloppiness will give the most consistent stimulation. Believe it or not a collar that is too loose can actually increase pain.


Detailed instructions for putting the Ecollar on a dog can be found on my website HERE 




DogGone said:


> Veterans of using tens units should know what I’m talking about. A well attached electrode on a tens unit should give consistent stimulation. If you take a tens unit and attach the electrodes so the stimulation is reasonable; then try slowly pulling off the electrodes; the amount of stimulation will increase until it feels like it’s burning and/or painful.


I've had hundreds of hours of TENS. This comparison is about as close to meaningless as it gets. TENS electrodes are sticky pads that are about one square inch. Ecollar contact points have about 1/8" of stainless steel in contact with the dogs skin. When you slowly remove the TENS pad, you "concentrate" the stim in a smaller and smaller area. The same amount of current will flow through a smaller and smaller area, "focusing" it on a smaller and smaller area of skin. While _theoretically _this could happen with an Ecollar it's just about impossible for it to happen in reality. Either the contact point will be against the dog's skin or it won't. I'd say that it's virtually impossible for this "slowly peeling" to occur in real life with Ecollar contact points. 





DogGone said:


> With a e-collar having the electrodes placed firmly against the skin will help limit the voltage that is produced by the small transformer. Without the resistance of the body to resist the transformer the voltage can climb to the point that it might arc over to the skin which would be more painful and inconsistent. So if you have your collar too loose sometimes your dog may feel nothing when the stimulation is engaged and other times it could be significantly painful.


I've been using Ecollars for well over two decades. I have friends who have been using them since their invention, over forty years ago. NEVER have any of us found this to be true. AGAIN we see the difference between real world and theory. I'm pretty sure that no Ecollar has enough power to cause arcing. I've played around with them, trying to get them to do so but never have been successful. 




DogGone said:


> There are risks with any type of training system or collar. Any tool can be used for good or bad and can be dangerous in the wrong hands.


There are FAR MORE dangers inherent in leashes and plain buckle collar and/or choke chains that with an Ecollar.


----------

