ehuesman

Thanks again for everyone's input. I'll probably go without the sensors since I already have a compass and can probably remember how to use it again pretty quickly. I seem to remember words like azimuth, triangulation, ... now if I can only remember what they meant, lol.

Can anyone take a look at this link and tell me if one of these is the type of mini-USB that Garmin uses? Unfortunately, mini-USB is not a standard plug, but these are the two most common. I'm trying to figure out if I already have a compatible cable like Miragee did. Thanks! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Mini_usb_AB.jpg

It sounds like I'll be better off bringing my own compass with me. Luckily I still have the one I was issued while in the military - They forgot to ask for it back

Thank you, I didn't notice that the cable was not included with the Venture Cx when I was looking at Garmin.com

Thanks for your input Miragee, you've been very helpful. I'm getting closer...

I'm still trying to decide on gear. From looking at Garmin's website, the only difference I can see between these units is that the Legend Cx comes with a microSD card included and the Venture Cx does not. If I know I'm upgrading to more memory (which everyone - or at least most - convinced me to do), why should I not buy the cheaper Venture Cx?

Still trying to decide on gear and would like to hear how often everyone uses these features while caching. Note to Moderator: I know this is a gear question, but my concern is specific to caching. I've been getting better feedback in this forum and I promise not to duplicate it in the other one. Sorry about last time

BUMP. Hoping to get some fresh eyes on this since its prime time for surfing on the West Coast. Thanks for all opinions.

So having these things in mind, would you all recommend the new Vista Cx over the used 60CS?

If I'm not using the GPSr for city maps, only topo maps for caching and hiking, would the 24MB suffice?

Well I figured no one would know where I was talking about if I said I was in Brentwood...which, btw, is about 35K (but growing).

I noticed that Miragee, and others on other posts, talk about having enough memory for where they cache. I live in the San Francisco Bay Area (East Bay), and would be doing the majority of my caching in northern California. Is this an area where I would need more than the usual amount of memory?

Thanks for the info, I'm actually trying to save a little money and find a used Vista C at this point. I also have a laptop and was figuring I could do just as you described.

As I stated in my other post (look nearby), I'm new to this and trying to decide between a couple GPSrs (new Vista Cx or used 60CS). My question here is how much memory is everyone actually using for caching? I know its human nature to do the "bigger is better" thing, but geocaching.com recommended getting a GPSr with 8MB of memory if you are going to load maps (which I will). I thought that I would be sitting pretty if I got an old Vista with 24MB, but find myself getting caught up in thinking the upgradeable memory in the new series is a "must". Is it? Can't I just load a map as needed and then if I am going to another part of the state (or world), just unload it and put the new map on? How much memory does a typical topo map use? I need some solid advice on this. Thanks.

Well I'm happy to know that at least I've narrowed it down to two good choices, but you all are not making it very easy to decide between the two! This is a hard one with them being the same price.

If I'm not mistaken, the Vista has a patch antenna and the 60CS has the quad-helix...so is it the Vista that you have that you feel picks up better?

BTW, thanks everyone for your replies.

Customer Service is my concern with Magellan, again I am only speaking from my net research, not personal experience. Magellan's price point is better though. sbell111, it seems that your opinion (and most others I have come across) is that the patch vs. helix issue is a toss up. What about the ability to connect an external antenna? How often is that actually done in geocaching?

I can't afford the 60CSx, too big of a price jump from a used 60CS or new Vista Cx. I understand the limited memory, what is POI support?

I posted this under "GPS Units and Software", but since my questions concern the GPSr use for caching, I thought I would post it here as well. I am very new to geocaching, but am an avid researcher of new interests. It seems to me the primary difference between these two units are: Patch antenna vs. quad-helix antenna Removable 64MB memory card vs. 56MB perm. memory (Obvious which option is better here) No external antenna jack vs. yes, an external antenna jack These units are about the same price, so I am trying to decide which one to get based on their merits. Can anyone with experience with these help out? Which antenna is preferred? If only being used for geocaching and hiking, how important is the difference in memory capabilities and the option for an external antenna? Are there any other differences between these units that I should be considering? Thanks.

I am very new to geocaching, but am an avid researcher of new interests. It seems to me the primary difference between these two units are: Patch antenna vs. quad-helix antenna Removable 64MB memory card vs. 56MB perm. memory (Obvious which option is better here) No external antenna jack vs. yes, an external antenna jack These units are about the same price, so I am trying to decide which one to get based on their merits. Can anyone with experience with these help out? Which antenna is preferred? If only being used for geocaching and hiking, how important is the difference in memory capabilities and the option for an external antenna? Are there any other differences between these units that I should be considering? Thanks.