Jump to content

imajeep

+Premium Members
  • Posts

    610
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by imajeep

  1. Who really cares?

    Not being snarkily nasty, but there is an expression, don't sweat the small stuff--and it is all small stuff. Don't let these small issues loom so large that they affect your having an enjoyable hobby. Emphasis on YOUR Having an enjoyable hobby.

     

    Hey, if that's what it was all about, then I'd just take up coin collecting! :D

     

    In all seriousness, it's not a big deal. But when you're a newbie, it's easy to breach the local rules of etiquette without knowing it. IMHO, always best to check first. I think it comes from travelling overseas.

     

    Taking all of the above opinions into account, here's what I think I'm going to do. I'm going to clear a DNF once I find the cache, but I'm going to note in the find log how many tries it took to find the cache. That way, later hunters get an idea of the difficulty of the cache, but paperless cachers (like me and Ms. Imajeep) don't lose one of their five logs (Jeremy, please, please increase it to twenty!) to one of my DNFs.

     

    Thanks for the advice, one and all!

  2. Over time, I've purchased several cheap, off brand hydration systems, and disposed of them kwickly, mostly due to discomfort. As a Charter Member of the ol' fat, crippled guy's club, I like having a lot of water with me, and I finally splurged on the CamelBak Rim Runner. It holds 3 litres of water, as compared to the off brands 2 litres. It is exceptionally comfortable for extended wear, and holds everything I can imagine needing on the hiking trail.

    923782.jpg

     

    That's a nice pack! We use "cheap, off brand hydration systems", but we haven't had any discomfort problems. I do like the 3L capacity of the Rim Runner.

  3. I cleared a DNF off my list tonight. Do I leave the DNF, or delete it, now that I've found the cache?

     

    Here's why I ask: If I delete the DNFs once I find them, I am left with a very maintainable list of 'live' DNFs that I can use to pick caches to go take another crack at. But, if it's considered bad form to do so, I can live without it.

     

    So, what's the etiquette here?

  4. I initially thought my 60 CSx was less accurate than the eTrex Vista I had previously. I decided later that the 60 CSX was simply reporting its accuracy more acurately. I never really got the accuracy that my Vista had claimed. In fact, the 60 CSx often underreports its accuracy. Many times, my 60 CSx is more accurate than the range shown on the satellite page.

  5. Being an 'H' model, AFAIK it's not identical to the 60 CSx. But the 'H' series chipset is supposed to be comparable to SIRFStar III, the chipset used in the 60 CSx. One poster a couple of months ago even liked it better. But at this point, it's all speculation. We won't really know until the units have been out for a while.

  6. EBay is your friend. You can get a Palm Z22 for about $40, and if you don't have a data cable, you can get one for about $10. Go to SmittyWare.com and buy CacheMate for $8. That's about all you need.

     

    With that, you can download pocket queries to the Palm and your Trex. The eTrex holds the coordinates, and the Palm holds the descriptions, hints, and logs. It's about all you really need.

     

    As to computer literacy, here's an excellent excuse to ramp up your skills! You are already more literate than you think, because you are here. The truly computer-illiterate can't manage that. If you feel weak on basic computer skills, there are tons of adult-extension courses. Ask at your local library--they can point you in the right direction. Other than that, post questions here. Nobody bites (well, not many, anyway :laughing: ), and you may be surprised at how quickly you pick it up.

  7. It's more fun to find the cache without any hints/logs! :D

     

    Well, if I had 2,000 finds, I suppose I would feel the same way! :lol: But as lowly newbies to the sport, we(desperately) need all the help we can get!

  8. Download the GPX files one-at-a-time from each cache page and you will get the 20 most recent logs.

     

    Actually, I've considered that, but then I've got to do individual downloads, which is a hassle for even a dozen caches. Then I've got to download the files individually to my GPSr, another hassle. As it stands now, I simply bookmark the caches I want to do, then PQ the bookmark list. Fast and easy!

     

    What I'd really like is up to 20 logs, as with the GPX download, in a PQ, with the option to download fewer, for those who don't want that many.

  9. Okay, I know this has been requested before, but Jeremy & Co., any chance of an upgrade to pocket queries to fetch more than the five most recent logs? It would be a great help to us paperless cachers who download our caches as we find them. Even ten logs would be great!

  10. I didn't know about the horizontal position of the Vista unit to record points, I thought that was only for the compass.

     

    For recording waypoints, you pretty much have to hold the unit horizontally, so it's not an issue. It's when recording a breadcrumb 'track' that it becomes an issue. I had an eTrex Vista before I got my 60 CSx. I ran some tests to determine the relative accuracy of tracks recorded with the unit. When I held the unit horizontally, I typically got 20' accuracy, assuming no tree cover. But when I walked the same course with the unit on my belt, accuracy ranged from 20' to more than 200'.

     

    That situation may change with the HCx, given its high-sensitivity receiver. It may record a much better track when hung from one's belt.

×
×
  • Create New...