snakyjake

I read somewhere that providing vector data at the detail of quads for the majority of regions would be extremely expensive, and not something that Garmin wishes to venture alone. I believe Garmin is waiting for the the USGS to release 1:24K data. But what I don't understand is why Garmin doesn't work with a map vendor (perhaps Maptech) to bring raster maps to the Garmin. I'm actually quite surprised that today's technology cannot digitize raster maps, much like OCR can digitize text. My guess is that it is all about the competition. Before, there weren't too many devices with quad offerings, and not too many people really care about raster maps. Most don't even understand the differences or have had the opportunity to compare. But I encourage you to write to Garmin and beg for the feature. Maybe they'll appease us. http://www8.garmin.com/contactUs/salesSupport.jsp

What will the actual improvements be for us civilians? I can see a need for a new system/signal for military and aviation. Something that is difficult to jam, less susceptible to interference, and something that will be reliable for aviation. For my use, I just want to see improved performance and reliability in mountains and valleys, tree cover, in and between buildings. Having accuracy that is better than 3 meters would be great for caching, and perhaps provide the ability for a GPS to tell you exactly what lane you're driving in. But I haven't heard anything that explicitly says those areas will be improved. Jake

That's why I'm waiting a bit longer. Garmin appears to have the best hardware. Besides for software fixes, I hope they add software to be comparable to Delorme Topo or National Geographic Topo. Jake

Thanks for the input about XMap. Sounds like something that I would like. Delorme has the 30-day return policy. I wish the screen of the PN-20 was bigger and had a higher resolution. It may be something I can live with. Perhaps the screen size/resolution isn't that big of a deal (when compared to the Colorado or Triton). When looking at a map, it is extremely useful to have as much context about the surrounding area as possible. Device....................Resolution.....Screen Size Garmin Colorado....240x400........3.0 Diag Magellan 500.........240x320........2.2 Diag Magellan 1500.......240x320........2.7 Diag Delorme.................176x220........2.2 Diag I have very high expectations for something that cost $400-600. Very difficult to compromise with those kind of prices. Plus, I already have my investment with a cheap GPS, Delorme Topo 5, Maptech Terrain Navigator Pro, and TopoFusion for maps. Plus all the free online resources. Jake

1) 1:100K 2) Yes. 3) Customize your own maps with something like Mapwel and TopoFusion. 4) 1:100K 5) 2 axis. I have found 2-axis to be too much of a hassle to be accurate. Rather use the GPS compass, or standard compass. You might want to consider Delorme PN-20. I personally want 1:24K maps, so the choices are the Triton or PN-20. I wanted the bigger screen and reputation of the Colorado 400T though, but can't live without 1:24K maps. Between the Triton and PN-20 will probably come down to the software (National Geographic Topo vs. Delorme Topo). But the problem I have with Delorme and others, is that I refuse to pay for maps that I can download for free from the Internet. That's why the Colorado and option #3 sound appealing, even though I dislike spending the large money for the Garmin, and still have to do so much of the work myself. Also, I wanted a larger and better screen, and the PN-20 comes in last. Considering the prices, the problems, lack of features, and the laziness of most manufacturers to design a complete product, I'll most likely continue to use my Garmin 48, paper maps, and marked waypoints with GPS coordinates. It has worked extremely well for me so far. I'll continue to hope that future versions will be more complete, and not rip me off for free Internet map downloads. As a matter of principle I cannot pay these manufactures for their ineptitude. Perhaps a strong opinion, but I'm deeply disappointed in the manufacturers and the pricing of the new units. For the price, I think I should get a lot more. Jake

I've been considering a PDA/GPS device too, and using similar software (http://www.memory-map.com/). The only downside to most PDA's is durability and power consumption. If I add a case for the PDA, then I have too much bulk. Or if I had the money, I'd get this: http://www.tdsway.com/products/recon

Is there more information regarding the rumor that the Garmin Colorado may have raster map capability (hopefully 1:24k quads)? It does appear the Colorado is capable of storing photographs. The feature may be more multimedia oriented than navigation. However, I have heard that people can upload custom raster maps to the unit.

The source I read says the maps preinstalled on the 400t are 1:100,000. Not sure if it is exactly the same as Garmin Topo ($119). I also believe vector maps take less storage than raster USGS Quads. I think your PN-20 is an excellent choice with ability to use 1:24k and Delorme Topo. The Colorado does not have this capability supported, except for national parks.

I'm looking forward to someone doing a full review and comparison between the Garmin Colorado, Magellan Triton, and Delorme PN-20. I've been using a GPS for many years now. I started with a paper maps, then added a GPS to my navigation tools. I just needed coordinates, and my maps. To me, this is the basics. There's only two reasons for me to upgrade: Integration and GPS performance. Performance: • I think the GPS hardware performs quite nicely now with SiRF III and other equivalent. • Screen quality and resolution. The more map information that I can see at once, the better. • Map speed. Zooming and changing views. Integration: • I want GPS + high quality maps. I do NOT want to compromise these two attributes. • I absolutely require 1:24K terrain resolution maps. • Vector maps at 1:24K still miss crucial details that are contained in the raster maps of same resolution. Planning: • Planning a trip only using the GPS is a real pain. I want to plan my trip using a computer because it is easier, faster, and simply superior. I want the best maps, and best information. I need to see terrain detail, which includes 1:24K terrain and aerial photos. I want good mapping tools that make it easy to plan routes. I also want to add information about my planned trip (photos, notes, etc). I plan and record my trips in detail. Features: • Electronic compass. Must be 3-axis, otherwise too annoying to use to be a feature. • Rugged. Really what I want is a laptop shrunk down to fit into the palm of my hand, with a GPS built-in, with 1:24k maps, and with aerial photography. And to top it all off, I want to do custom maps, like off-road vehicle parks. But what do we have as choices: • Laptop: Too big. Not durable. • PocketPC: Poor battery. Not rugged enough and won’t last too long in my environment. Not unless I add a case, which adds bulk and weight. • iPhone: I did see Google maps (satellite/aerial/topo) being used off-road. If you are around cell towers with coverage, this might be a great way to go. Battery performance may be an issue. • Garmin Colorado: Bigger screen and better resolution. No 1:24k maps (except for National Parks). You can create your own maps, but the competition offers better mapping. Good choice if you don’t mind doing your own maps. • Magellan Triton: National Geographic Topo looks decent. • Delorme PN-20: Delorme Topo maps is decent. • Bushnell: I don’t want to keep paying for map service. Maps are free! Between the Garmin, Magellan, and Delorme, the hardware does what I need it to do. What’s really going to differentiate for me is the mapping software and integration. Since I’ve heard that Garmin can be “hacked” to load custom maps, I may go this route. There’s free maps (nautical, aerial, topo, aeronautical) on the Internet. I just wish Garmin would offer better map software, and I would be content. Jake

This is a good starting point Alpamayo Thanks for the link...but dang...those steps are quite hodgepodged! I need something easier.

Ummm, yah, don't tell Garmin you are using 3rd party maps... And make sure they are gone if you send it in for warranty...... I'm sure they are not pleased about their proprietary map format being hacked open.... They should be, though. Free maps is the #1 reason I suggest Garmin products to anyone that asks. I want to make sure I got this right before I jump off the deep end into learning this. With Garmin, I can create my own topographic maps at 1:24k? aerial photo? satellite imagery? custom trail maps (e.g. offroad parks)? I want more than just overlaying tracks on top of Garmin maps. And how does this compare to Magellan w/ National Geographic Topo! or Delorme's PN-20? Is there any software out that there that makes map creation easy? I noticed some involves lots of steps, inaccuracy, and multiple software apps. Thanks, Jake

No, I mean this pictures in the webalbum, which are screenshots taken from a Colorado 300. You have to read the hole post Where have you got your information from ? The information I received is from Garmin Support. I got further clarification on the maps. Garmin does not "support" 3rd party maps, but apparently the Colorado can work with 3rd party compatible maps. I haven't seen 3rd party maps for Garmin, so thanks for the links and enlightenment. If I can make my own high quality and detailed 1:24K topo maps, then the Garmin Colorado is back on my list. Jake

The Garmin Colorado supports: Garmin National Parks (1:24000). Garmin US Topo 2008 maps with the 3-D elevation (1:100,000). Does not support third party mapping programs. If you want better detailed maps, Magellan Triton or Delorme PN-20. Plus, the mapping software will help you plan your trips better. Colorado is inferior when it comes to maps and the compass. I can't see a reason to buy Colorado over the Triton or PN-20. Does anyone else have a reason? Jake

I don't think Magellan's Triton will have too much to worry about. Magellan Triton has the 3-axis compass, plus the map options are superior. For me, I will not go into the backcountry without 24K topo-quad maps. I'd like to see a full review/comparison between the Colorado, Triton, and PN-20 before my final decision. The review also needs to include the mapping software. Jake

For me, the best is software that does quad (24:000). I have Delorme Topo and Maptech. Both applications are quirky, and cost too much. Lately I've been using the software TopoFusion (http://www.topofusion.com/). I've been tempted to try National Geographic too. A review of all the software offerings would be nice to see some day.

My guess is that Garmin won't have topographic quads (24:000) needed for the areas I explore. Therefore I'll only consider the Triton or Delorme. Also disappointed the Colorado won't have a 3-axis compass. But I'm waiting for the Colorado to be finalized before making any final decisions. Jake

Thankfully the Delorme PN-20 hasn't forgotten about the outdoor enthusiast.

How good is the PDA battery life with an external GPS? My concerns about going to a PDA: #1. Battery life. How long does the battery last? #2. Very poor visibility in sunlight

I'd like to know what the battery life is like on such a device?

A quote from a website: "According to sources, the new consumer version of XM WX, entitled XM WX SkyWatch, will be available for only $3.99/month when combined with an XM Satellite Radio subscription. So that's a total cost of $16.94 a month. If you want the SkyWatch package alone without XM radio, SkyWatch will run you $9.95 a month. The XM WX SkyWatch package includes graphical NEXRAD radar summary (aka Doppler Radar), National Weather Service warnings, your current weather conditions, and 3-day or 7-day city forecasts." Sounds like they are trying to make this into a personal media player too. A GPS + radio for news, sports, music, weather, maybe traffic data? Getting traffic data and map overlays would be very nice, but I don't see it implemented. I must say, having weather data can be important for the outdoors. Having doppler, forecasts, weather warnings can be valuable. If they also provide marine forecasts that would be great too. But for $10 per month? $120 a year?! I'll probably save myself the $120 per year and get my weather info in other ways (like free NOAA reports or from a cell phone). I don't exactly need the radar capabilities. I'm usually hiking, and I can tell if it is raining or not, and what the weather is like 10+ miles away doesn't make a difference to me. I might pay $30 per year for the weather, but not $120. Many retailers have the device ready to sell for when it becomes available: http://www.cabelas.com/vprod-1/0046738.shtml

The main problem have with some of these devices is: a. Proprietary maps. b. The ONIX 200 is non-NMEA compliant (http://www.bushnellgps.com/support/cffaq/f...=4&Keyword=) If the ONIX 400 solved the above issues, it would probably be the perfect GPS solution (at least for me).

I'm disappointed that the maps are only 1:100,000. Why isn't their more demand for 1:24,000 scale?

Does anyone have a comparison report between the Delorme PN-20 (STMicroelectronics chipset with SiGE RF) and Garmin 60/76Cxs (SiRF III) when used under thick tree cover of a forest? I live in the Northwest, so good reception in valleys and trees is very important for the GPS to be useful. Thanks, Jake