Crid

Another option is to download GPS Babel. I think it's probably available for most platforms (I have PC and Mac versions). It can download straight from Garmin units (I do it this way with my 76CSx) and be set to only download waypoints, routes or tracks (or any combination). It can also process GPX files into something a bit more text-editor friendly, rather than having one great long line (as my Colorado seems to insist on doing). Not only that, it can also convert between different formats, such as Google Earth's KML and KMZ formats. I haven't found the button that gets it to make a cup of tea yet, but I wouldn't be surprised if there was one.

Try looking at the hint. It might give you a nudge in the right direction. (Only guessing, but I know what I'd try, given that clue).

They are the same, you now have the latest. GO$Rs Yes, sorry that's me confusing the issue. I put "b" meaning "beta".

I'm not sure that's necessarily a problem with the puzzle though. There are some great multis out there that don't get many visits either - presumably because they're too much work for some people. Why spend a couple of hours walking for a single multi when you can jump in the car and grab a handful of micros in the same amount of time? (I don't agree with that attitude, by the way - just observing what appears to happen). I've done a couple of 4-star puzzle caches around Surrey/West Sussex (quite a trek for me, given that I live in South East Kent) and I certainly thought they were worth the time and effort. It's the sense of satifaction. I think part of the appeal is the thrill of the chase, as it were.

I love having all the geocaching information in one place. Sure, the UI is a bit longwinded compared to the 76CSx I'm used to (mainly because there are less buttons), but I can live with it. I just wish they'd hurry up and sort out the accuracy "drift" bug.

g-o-cashers did ask what software version you're on. If you're not already on beta 2.51 (that's the firmware, not the GPS software - which is probably 2.60) it's well worth installing. While there are still some issues (accuracy after 30+ mins in difficult conditions such as woodland) some of the more glaring problems appear to have been fixed. I had problems with the Colorado not navigating to the target when I tried to select a geocache and that seems (largely) to be fixed with 2.51b. To find your software version, go to the main menu, then Setup, then System, then press the Options button and pick Software Version. 2.51 beta can be downloaded from here.

Yes it is very bad advertising Depends how you interpret "waterproof". My Gore-Tex jacket is waterproof, but I'd still get wet if I fell in a river.

The trick in my area seems to be placing the "multi" parts out as micros in their own right, with the coordinate parts in each one. Not only does that make them more inviting for those who are interested in the numbers, it also makes it a bit more obvious that you can do each one individually rather than trying to do them all in a single caching session. Then when you've got all the numbers you can go for the "bonus cache".

I've thought the same thing. And if it's the landowners removing fingers from fingerposts, that's pretty much the same. Without an indication of where the next stile/gate/crossing is, walkers are going to trample a lot more of the field.

Thanks Rutson. That link does seem to answer many of my questions. Looks like I'll be getting on to the council about that footpath.

My apologies if this has been asked/mentioned many times before... Today I encountered a footpath that was inaccessible simply because it was so overgrown. I got maybe 100 yards down in before deciding to give up because I clearly wasn't going to get through. It wasn't blocked deliberately (but I have seen that somewhere else), but was simply blocked through inaction. This got me thinking about other similar things I've seen, such as: - Crop fields. Some farmers seem to be very responsible and clearly mark the route they want you to take across their crop field. But I've also seen instances where there is a fingerpost pointing across a field with no path marked at all. - Missing fingerposts. I've seen this quite a bit actually. The post is there with the yellow, blue or red stripe around it, but there is no fingerpost. I'm not sure if it's a case of the council running out of money or fingers (as it were), or if it's the landowner or a vandal removing it. - Impassable stiles. I saw one recently which had a metal plate with details of how to contact the local council about it, so I did. Is replacement or repair paid for by the council (ie. ratepayers) or the landowner? Does the landowner have an obligation to ensure that ROWs on their land are accessible? And if it isn't accessible, what (if anything) is the walker allowed to do about it, both at the time and also afterwards (ie. notifying somebody that it's inaccessible)? Sorry, lots of questions and points there, but I think they're quite relevant to UK geocaching.

I want that on a T-shirt!

I discovered yesterday (in woodland, admitedly) that my 76CSx doesn't like being upside-down vertically. I have a cover with a carabina clip at the bottom, so the GPS hangs upside down when clipped to my rucksack strap. Accuracy was showing at about 40ft. I turned it up the other way and used the belt strap to attach it to the ruckstrap strap the other way up and accuracy improved to about 25ft. The only problem then was reading the display because I couldn't angle it away from myself enough.

I love the puzzled looks I get when I try to explain geocaching to a non-cacher. (Not a muggle out in the field - just trying to explain it to friends when I say that I'm going geocaching at the weekend).

It's a good geocaching GPS. But don't forget that you'll probably want maps of some sort too. The base map is not terribly good (well, it wasn't for me and I'm in Europe, but I doubt the US ones will be much better). Commercial maps are good for roads (and I believe the 60CSx can do routing if the maps support it). I've found OpenStreetMap + mkgmap makes for good offroad maps in my area, which is ideal for geocaching. The downside is that you need a little bit of tech knowledge to create the map files yourself.

Largely because caching gives me an excuse to go walking in the countryside and also because it encourages me to visit new places that I didn't know about. Prior to geocaching my walks in the countryside were pretty much in the same places. Now geocaching (and geomapping) has changed that and I'm regularly digging out the map to look for new places to go (or visiting the GC.com map to see what places have good caches to visit). I've been geocaching for just over a year and have 78 finds so far. That's hardly a breakneck pace. Yesterday I did a cache in a wood that I've never visited before and that hasn't been mapped on OpenStreetMap. The cache was only about 3/4 mile from the car park, but I followed the trail to the cache and then followed in on as it looped around and eventually got back to the car park. A little over 4 miles in all. If I was in it for the numbers, I would have been in and out and on to the next cache. That's not to say I won't do a happy little dance when I get my 100th find.

I'm guessing he means doing 2 Sight'n'Go readings from different places on the same target and then plotting where the target is from that.

While we're on the subject of issues (time for a whinge - sorry), who on earth came up with the colour scheme for the satellite page and also decided not to let the user change the colours? Dark bars on a darker background really isn't terribly useful without using up battery power on the backlight. I can see the white "acquiring" bars just fine against the dark background, but I'd rather be able to see what satellites are currently acquired. </rant>

I'm not sure if this problem has been mentioned already. On certain caches I'm having the Colorado do this to me: Most caches display fine. It only seems to affect the first page of the description, but it's really annoying to be confronted by that out in the field. Other examples (other than GCJH5K shown above) include GC12VQV, GC12VRA, GC12VT3 and GC12VRY. Those last 4 are all by the same person, so perhaps it's something to do with the HTML they've used in the cache description. 2.51 beta.

I'd also recommend OpenStreetMap. The site is down at the moment because of a hardware problem (which they're undoubtedly working on right now). I had a trip to Toronto a few weeks ago and discovered that Toronto was really well mapped on OSM, so I grabbed the map data for that area and used mkgmap to create a map file for my 76CSx. I regularly get the extract of UK data and build maps for my Garmin because a lot of footpaths, bridleways, etc are mapped (very useful for geocaching). The downside is the maps aren't routeable. But I have City Navigator on an SD card for that.

I'm encouraged by what I read in the HCx accuracy thread (same chipset), that downgrading to GPS firmware 2.30 (from 2.60) appeared to fix the accuracy problem. Hopefully that means the problem will be fixable with a firmware upgrade (rather than it being a hardware problem with the chip itself). Downgrading probably isn't an option for Colorado users, but I'll take it as a good sign nonetheless.

I'd love my Colorado more if it didn't have accuracy issues after 30 minutes in woodland. It's great out in the open, but in woodland the 76CSx still wins at the moment. I'm still holding out hope for a firmware fix though.

If you're considering the 60, take a look at the 76 range. Basically the same unit but in a different form factor (buttons above the screen rather than below it, no antenna stub). When I was looking to buy a GPS a year ago (just before the HCX range came out) I discovered the 76 was the same spec, but cheaper.

Duplicate post.

I agree with RonFisk - I don't quite trust the Colorado in wooded areas. Hopefully they'll fix the problem soon with a firmware upgrade. I use a 76CSx (my "old" GPS, which the Colorado was supposed to replace). Had it for about a year and it's always been very good, even in woodland. Pretty much the same guts as a 60CSx, just in a different form factor (buttons above the screen instead of below, no aerial stub, etc). And cheaper - that's what clinched it for me.