dictum9

First, the resolution just kills me. Way too low. The resolution is where cell phones were in 2004. Garmin is way behind on this point. Compare a Montana with any 'smart phone', what a difference. 4" and 272 x 480 resolution does not cut it in 2015. They can keep the screen at 4" or slightly bigger but gotta double or quadruple the pixels for a much sharper image. My phone is HD 1080p and it's painful to look at Montana. Second, the NiMH cell with only 2000 mAh and 7.4Wh is wholly unacceptable either. Need something at least 3-4 times that capacity (to support the higher pixels). The main point here is the NiMH technology has been obsolete for more than a decade -- all laptops for example moved from NiMH cells to Li-Ion. Why is Garmin embracing obsolete technology? Lithium-Ion is the way to go, say 2x18650 round cells with the ability to run primary Lithium CR123A cells. At the very least, have a dual option of 2x18650 cells or 4xAA. The 3xAA option is weird, it's an odd number, I would very much prefer 4 for greater runtime and higher voltage. Lithium-Ion 18650 cells have a much higher capacity of 3500 mAh per cell and come at 4.3V. So do the math: 3500*2*4.3=28wh, a 4-fold increase in runtime with just slightly more weight/bulk. The current runtime is not sufficient, I've had a Garmin 60CSx and that thing got far longer runtime than Montana and on fewer cells. Garmin, are you listening, need to make major upgrades to the current line of "on the trail" equipment.

First, the resolution just kills me. Way too low. The resolution is where cell phones were in 2004. Garmin is way behind on this point. Compare a Montana with any 'smart phone', what a difference. 4" and 272 x 480 resolution does not cut it in 2015. They can keep the screen at 4" or slightly bigger but gotta double the pixels for a much sharper image. My phone is HD 1080p and it's painful to look at Montana. Second, the NiMH cell with only 2000 mAh and 7.4Wh is wholly unacceptable either. Need something at least 2-3 times that capacity (to support the higher pixels). The main point here is the NiMH technology has been obsolete for more than a decade -- all laptops for example moved from NiMH cells to Li-Ion. Lithium-Ion is the way to go, say 2x18650 round cells with the ability to run Lithium CR123A cells. At the very least, have a dual option of 2x18650 cells or 4xAA. The 3xAA option is weird, it's an odd number, I would very much prefer 4 for greater runtime and higher voltage. Lithium-Ion 18650 cells have a much higher capacity of 3500 mAh per cell and come at 4.3V. So do the math: 3500*2*4.3=28wh, a 4-fold increase in runtime with just slightly more weight/bulk. The current runtime is not sufficient, I've had a Garmin 60CSx and that thing got far longer runtime than Montana and on fewer cells. Garmin, are you listening, need to make major upgrades to the current line of "on the trail" equipment.

24K garmin topo map How do make it not show all these food places once you zoom in at 800 feet? MOntana 650

Inclined towards a suction cap mount but will consider all options. My main concern is that it will fall off under weight. Choices: Plastic ram mount: http://www.rammount.com/Portals/0/Skins/NationalProducts/images/166ga46iu1.jpg RAM Mount Aluminum Garmin Montana 600 650 650t Locking Suction Cup Mount (RAM-B-166-GA46 http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0060BE09K/ref=pd_luc_rh_sbs_01_03_t_lh?ie=UTF8&psc=1#customerReviews

Might be good to have both. high capacity 2500 mah that you plan to use immediately and don't care about higher self-discharge, and lots of backup 2,000 mah Eneloops.

Get 3rd generation Eneloops, they are at 2,000 mAh. They keep going for 5 years. And with low self-discharge. I believe there is a 4th gen out but not available just yet. Costco has a good deal on those. Higher capacity cells age faster, so a 2700 mah cell may not have all that in a year, and secondly may self-discharge to the 2,000 mah level in a month. If you need the highest runtime at any price, get the highest capacity you can get, the 2700 mah I think is it. Provided you recharge it all the time and not worried about replacing cells soon or losing capacity in a few weeks. Some of these 2300 mah cells were just terrible. Poor runtime, very high self-discharge. I have 6 year old Eneloops that keep going. Amazing. My Maha Powerex 2700 mah cells died within a year or two.

Yes, I know about AA batteries. To build up the same voltage, they need to use 4xAA cells. With NiMh chemistry, that's 1.2V*4 =4.8V or surpassing Li-Ion in voltage or capacity. 3 cells is an odd number anyway.

The maps that come with it are pretty inaccurate. You have to buy some 24K maps. I found them to be much more accurate than the 100K map that comes with Garmin.

No, 2300 mah has been obsolete for a long time. They are up to 2900 mAh cells now. The problem is the reduced number of charge cycles vs. an Eneloop that's only at 2,000 mah. The other problem is higher capacity cells have a higher self-discharge rate but if you use it frequently, should not be an issue.

I don't want all the bells and whistles of a mini computer. I want a high quality large display where I can see every detail on the map. I don't need wifi or even a camera. I used 60CSX for a number of years, then Montana which was a big upgrade from that. But I can see where they can make further improvements. Stick a 9,000 MaH Li-Ion cell in it if you have to, like I did in my smart phone to get a 2-day runtime. I want PQ at any price. Looking at the google maps in my HD smart phone next to 24K maps in Montana, the latter looks so 2005. They don't need to replicate a smart phone. I want PQ and water resistance and shock resistance and all these GPS features. Smart phones make very poor GPS units. If that was not the case, I would have dumped Garmin a long time ago.

I am aware of the obvious. As I indicated, I am willing to pay that price for better picture quality. Make it take 4xAA batteries. Increase the capacity of the Li-Ion cell as well to double or triple where it's at. It's too low anyway. Smart phone makers are coming out with 4K smart phones real soon. What will that do to pic quality. The 1080 HD models already look stunning in about a 6" package. I will get a Garmin if they seriously increase the DPI and possibly the screen size. To me, the DPI count is more important than screen size but a 1080P in a 5.5" unit looks stunning. Monterra is the same recycled stuff we already have.

1) I expect the screen not to break if dropped. Gorilla glass found in some smart phones is so much better, more durable and more scratch-resistant. Garmin is way behind the standard in smart phone technology. I don't know if Monterra is better but not dropping 600 tokens on it to find out. 2) If the screen does break, I expect them to replace it without charging 200 bucks. within the 1 year warranty period. They don't stand by their units. Warranty means nothing. After using Garmin for the last 7 years, my formed opinion is that they have junk, disposable hardware. You can get maybe a year or two out of it until it wears out or breaks. I wore out the power button in 60CSX. I only buy Garmin because they are no viable alternatives. The alternatives are as bad or worse. Smart phones don't offer all the functionality of GPS units. Their business model is sell, sell, sell more disposable Asian-made stuff that will break within a year, and not cheap. This thread is proof positive of that.

Panasonic Eneloops give you the most recharge cycles and the best longevity. Lithium AA cells will give you best runtime.

I am in the same boat. Have a Montana 650T and wondering if I should upgrade to Monterra. Thus far I am inclined not too. I am waiting for something a little better. The thing that will sell me is a higher resolution. Any Garmin device looks awful compared to even a low-resolution 'smart phone', let alone a High-Definition smart phone. Garmin really needs a higher DPI. Montana is a huge upgrade from 60CSX but still has a way to go. I am surprised Monterra did not upgrade the resolution. And possibly a larger screen. Larger battery drain notwithstanding.

The fact of the matter is, I was within one year of purchase and Garmin said that screen is NOT covered under warranty. I paid $200 for a replacement unit, not refurb, but new. Still, I am disappointed. Stuff like that should not happen and if it does, should be covered. It's not. If you drop it at just the right angle and hit something, it will break the screen and disable the unit. the glass is junk, plain and simple. They need gorilla glass like what's found on the latest Android phones. The hardware is just junk that you should expect to go bad within a year or two. This is not the first time either. I wore a 60CSx, the power buttons.

connected to the device, montana 650 and the BaseCamp shows all these straight lines. How do I not show them? The view/Data filter does not do anything.

I had exact same thing happen to me. Dropped it and the screen cracked. Had to pay $200 to get a replacement unit. The Montana screen is fragile, easy to scratch or break and not covered under warranty.

BTW, what is that "battery save" feature in the 650T?

Re: Eneloop XX - it seems they gained runtime (capacity) at the expense of recharge cycles. The lower the capacity, the longer it stays good, and the lower is the self-discharge rate. The higher capacity AA NiMH cells are great if you constantly use them. About 6 years ago, I got both Maha Powerex 2700 mAh AA batteries and also Sanyo Eneloops 1900 mAh capacity. The Powerex cells have died 3 years ago while the first generation Eneloops keep going. So you get more bang per buck. Undoubtedly, the capacity has been reduced over the years. Some get hot while charging. I recently got the latest color-coded Eneloops and will see what kind of runtime I get with these.

Montana 650T: Elementary math suggests that the stock Li-Ion battery rated at 2,000 mAh and 4.2V (full) results in 8400 Watt-hours, while 3 Eneloop AA NiMH cells, arguably the best rechargeable AA cell, stand at 2,000 mAh * 1.3V * 3 = 7800 Watt-hours. My experience suggests that you get better runtime with Eneloops, or maybe my Li-Ion cell has lost some capacity. Can anyone substantiate this observation? In actuality, some of this math is wrong, as the Eneloops drop very quickly to 1.2V (while being as high as 1.5V off the charger) and the Li-Ion cell is closer to 3.7V. Either way, it looks fairly equal on paper runtime-wise. I realize of course that you get the best runtime via Lithium AA cells (Energizer), but that is also the most expensive option.

In addition to being routable, 24K is much more accurate.

I got a regional 24K topo which I find a lot more accurate than default 100K topo that 650t comes with. I wonder if there is a better 100K topo that's installed on the device. Is that the same map that's on the Garmin web site?

> If the waypoints are on the internal memory, you are out of luck if you can't turn the device on. I got a work-around... I managed to download all the waypoints from the Mapsource software. Which is weird, because I remember I tried that a year ago and could not get it to work. It said something about format not being compatible. Since then I broke the screen on 2012-vintage 650t and Garmin sent me newer one, presumably with newer settings. I connected it, Mapsource saw the device and saved all the waypoints right away without any complaints.

Right, the 60CSx card was internal and non-removable, you have to take apart the unit to access it. I actually have all the 60CSx waypoints backed up to the computer, via the software that came with Garmin 100K topo. I tried to download them to Montana without any success, it does not like the format.

I installed. 650T booted up just fine but it does not recognize any of the waypoints I had saved on the 60CSx. It's as if the MicroSD card was not even there. Weird. I think it's because the format of waypoints was different in 60CSx than Montana.