Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Grasscatcher

  1. Not my opinion......Garmin's own words.....they say the WAAS "problem" is caused by"antenna design"....and since nothing(brand or model) with that chipset (Cartesio) gets WAAS reception worth a durn, I'd say it must be included .


    Where did you see them say this?

    Thank you for contacting Garmin International.


    Thanks for the response back. We have received an answer concerning this issue from our engineers. Basically, they explained that the Oregon

    models and our older models, such as the 76CSx, when acquiring

    satellites and WAAS have a completely different design. Both are able to acquire WAAS, but will may perform better or worse in certain situations due to antenna design. Therefore, as long as the unit is within the 3 to 5 meters, then they units are within range and normal operation.


    I hope this helps and please let us know if you need any further



    Also read this other response........ keeping in mind that Garmins own info says that with WAAS corrections the user should expect <3 meter accuracy.


    Thank you for your reply. When you are making he comparisons, can you

    tell me what the accuracy is of both devices? Keeping in mind that

    without Waas information, the best that you would home for would be 15

    meters, which is approximately 45 ft.


    If you're getting less than 45 ft of accuracy the Oregon is receving

    Waas information, regardless of what's happening on the display. If

    it's not showing this information correctly, we can certainly try to get this taken care of.


    It appears that they don't even know how their own units are supposed to function.

  2. My observations are based on info that is already out there from Garmin.

    Essentially 76 form factor, with same screen size (as 76), and buttons , instead of larger touch screen. More memory.


    Remainder of specs just about exactly duplicate the 450, which make me think the innards will be essentially the same.


    Comparing wording on Garmins site about quick acquisition and "maintains position in heavy cover and deep canyons"......that's all word for word. (and nearly false advertising)


    Yes, pure speculation and definitely "unqualified observer" but if you do your own comparisons, I think you'll come up with the same conclusions.

  3. I've seen no evidence that the Oregon antenna is inferior. The chipset firmware has improved dramatically though yes, it still has WAAS issues.


    Not my opinion......Garmin's own words.....they say the WAAS "problem" is caused by"antenna design"....and since nothing(brand or model) with that chipset (Cartesio) gets WAAS reception worth a durn, I'd say it must be included .

  4. No Quad-Helix antenna?! I bet 62 keeps the old familiar form factor. :anicute:


    EDIT = Plus, the 78 can still only have 2000 waypoints/caches. That's lame. The Magellan Explorist GC is said to handle 10,000 caches! I'd want that many in the new Garmin for sure, or maybe 9,999 to leave one open for MOB... :)


    Freeday, Why the frowny face on screen resolution? Same screen apparently as the 76 series (160X240) which is already brighter and clearer than the Oregons which have more pixels (240X400) .


    Nuther possibility is that the 78 Series is INSTEAD OF a 62 series.


    Hey the 76 series had/has a quad helix antenna


    2000 vs 10,000....yeah, but its a Magellan

  5. Those are UTM coordinates


    Zone 13 245590 Easting


    4131613 Northing


    Be sure which Datum the coordinates are in.


    The Lat/Lon coordinates you posted (37,16N-107,53W) are in the south part of Durango. Just NW of there , there is a Green Mountain Cemetery.


    The UTM coordinates you posted are in the North part of Durango. There is an Animas cemetery SE of that location.

  6. Oregons / Dakotas only rarely get a WAAS lock, and even then won't maintain that lock. Sometimes, when trying to obtain a lock, the units seemingly don't have a clue about what they are looking for or what they are supposed to do with it when they eventually stumble across it.......


    If compared to 60 / 76 series units, the Oregons don't even come close to being a "WAAS capable unit",........as they are advertised.

  7. I'm beginning to think that the 78 series is essentially a repackaged Oregon 450.


    Essentially same form factor as the 76 series- with serial port and ext antenna port, same screen size as 76's


    Operational buttons and brighter non-touch screen replaces visibility problem touch screen .


    More internal memory than O 450 but remainder of specs about the same, with no games


    Better battery life probably due to different screen.


    Have to wait and see which chipset and antenna........sure hope it's different than Oregon or else it will be just another Garmin model that doesn't do WAAS

  8. Hello all. I have a Garmin550t. I am using Mapsource. I am trying to transfer my tracks and routes from the garmin to Mapsource. I have followed the directions but nothing seems to be transferring. I click on the receive from device button and it sees my Garmin and I tell it to transfer. It says it has transfered but then nothing shows up in Mapsource. Does anyone have any experience or insights on this? I would appreciate any help.



    I believe the newer Oregon units (550 and 450) require Basecamp...have you tried that?


    I have a 550 and data transfers fine using Mapsource..........


    I'm using Mapsource v 6.15.11

  9. Specs say that it does have Sun & Moon page......


    This is a puzzle to me..... Specs say "no camera" and no photo viewer, but that it can navigate to geotagged photos......


    I guess just to the coordinates of the spot where photo was taken by another camera and that data was transferred to the 78 ???? That would be just like navigating to any other waypoint wouldn't it?


    Or, maybe viewer to be added later? Anyone got any other ideas?

  10. Kinda like me WANTING WAAS to be working better so much that I think that it IS every time an update comes out ....but then reality sets in and....NO, not yet....

    ...and I don't think they will get it (WAAS) working correctly until they change chipsets and/or antenna. THEY say it's "antenna design"... I don't know, but that's the basis for my first questions on the 78 series.

    ? Chipset ?Antenna

  11. Another note -- Interesting that they didn't bump the resolution (though they did go from 256 colors to 65,000). Looks like the market is going to (at least in part) be for those wanting a very bright screen.


    Just a comment along those lines..... what the useful purpose of being able to have multiple maps, GB's of data and such if you can't see it? That's the problem with the Oregon/Dakota series.

    Yeah, users can "get by" and they can "make do" because of all the other features, but screen visibility definitely needs MAJOR improvement.


    I'll have an Oregon 550 that will get sold or traded in a heartbeat!

  12. I tried turning my manual on but it never even got excited.....


    Oregons, Dakotas,etc are SUPPOSED to support WAAS but they DON'T and NEVER HAVE. Unreliably they will occasionally lock onto WAAS sats and display Ds on the other sat bars but will not maintain lock, and almost never display WAAS accuracy levels of <3m. (Garmin's own description )


    Reluctantly Garmin has finally admitted that there is a WAAS reception problem with all those units, and that "they are working on it".

  13. Another solution is to go into the active route, select point # 1 and tell it to navigate to it. This should work fine and the navigation should proceed to the next point in the sequence once you arrive at point # 1.


    RMB, Good Call ! I believe that will work!

    That eliminates the need to create a duplicate point. Now we'll see if the navigation will automatically progress to the next point as you said.


    Something odd though, ......as I said, one of the data fields on my map page is "waypoint at next", and doing it your way, that field never identifies that I'm navigating to P#1. I AM, but the data field just stays blank. I'll see what happens when I physically get to P#1, then hopefully P#2 will come up in that window.


    U dun GOOD! .........Thanks

  14. Not meaning to sound argumentative, but I don't see how it would be unique in the least. If the user creates a route from Pt A to B to C shouldn't that be interpreted to mean that the user wants directions to each point, not just some of them? Unless they are always "AT" the start point.


    With Garmin's philosophy, why even have a first route point? They could easily "fix" the problem by designating the first Route Point in a route as the "Start Point" as they do with Tracks.

  • Create New...