MrRocketMan

We always have been. That is why it is called BETA. We are testing it.

I had this on my 40 about a year ago and it turned out that the cable had gone bad.I had to order a new cable. You might try cleaning the contacts on the back of the device real good, you might get lucky.

I have never received a reply. I believe that is normal.

I have it working for me. Cached with it Sunday finding about 27 with it and it seemed very solid. I found a few very minor bugs but that is to be expected with a beta.

Pull the sim card out that had my maps and gpx files, went from 3.61 to 3.74 and everything load perfectly.

Pulled memory card, loaded, and it worked fine for me.

My bet is the PN-40 is simply using its built-in accelerometer and notices that the unit isn't moving based on that ... and due to that it's ignoring the GPS entirely. If you tilted or otherwise jostled the PN-40 I'll bet it would take a new GPS reading, which would be off by some feet from the previous one. I don't believe the 62st has one, so it's displaying GPS coords all the time. I'm not sure how relevant this test case is to any real world scenario. I'm not likely to really sit, unmoving, at GZ for an hour. ...Sam Dude, I was just answering the guys question. He asked moving and static. That is what I answered if it was real world or not. And I did not say the pn40 did not change at all, it does, it just doesn't wander around as much.

I am determining accuracy by averaging a waypoint in the middle of an open field with each unit and marking th spot. I then use both units to find the waypoint. The pn-40 ALWAYs shows 2ft or less when at the marked point and will hold that reading (2ft or less) for the hour or so that I leave it there. The 62s will do the same thing but and show about 3-4 ft standing on the spot and if you walk around with it trying to zero it out it can have you walking around anywhere from about 10 ft from the spot or less. If you let is set on the spot it will drift up to 12ft or so but normally less. The pn-40 takes you to the spot and sticks. I have tried the 62 both flat and vertical.

I don't have a pn-60, but have done a side by side with my pn-40, and without question, the pn-40 is more accurate. I am hoping that since they both have the same chip set that the 62s will become just as accurate after the firmware matures but at this time without question the winner is the pn-40. The 62s seems to wander around while the pn-40 stays rock solid. Hope that helps.

Wouldn't silicone grease degrade and destroy rubber seals? I read that somewhere... I believe is just the opposite, silicone grease is what you are SUPPOSED to use on rubber.

2.70 is the regular version right now for the 550. It is not alpha.

I have both and use them only for geocaching. Hands down, the Oregon. I had the Delmore 1st, used it for about a 1000 caches and it is a very fine machine. But only holding 1000 caches (the 550 holds 5000), not being able to drag and drop gpx files to it and the big color screen make a big difference. The compass in the 550 is better also. It is extremely more easy to calibrate (even easier then the Oregon 300, my wife runs with one of those) while the Delmore makes you do a dance to calibrate. The Delmore is a hair more accurate and a bit more rugged but the pluses of the Oregon make it a hands down choice in my book.

I use the camera and the lens seems to be well protected. Now I have not dropped it but I would guess it would be just a durable as the rest of the gps.

2000 waypoints, + 5000 geocaches. "Go paperless with Oregon 550 by quickly downloading information from Geocaching.com for up to 5000 caches, such as location, terrain, difficulty, hints and description. No more manually entering coordinates and paper print outs. Slim and lightweight, Oregon is the perfect companion for all your outdoor pursuits." https://buy.garmin.com/shop/shop.do?cID=145...6875#featureTab

This is the first I have heard of not being able to store caching data on the external card. The Garmin website says, The Oregon 550/550t holds up to 5,000 geoaches*. The user is able to store all of the geocaches on the internal memory of the device or an external memory card. http://www.garmin.com/garmin/cms/site/us/s...arch_key=Oregon So this has really confused me.

Been running 3.12 for 3 days and bugs aside, I have very pleased with the gps engine. I have been testing it along side a PN-40 and it has been just as accurate while geocaching. It has not been close in the past. It is actually making a smother line to the cache then the PN-40. Very pleased. A little more zig zag with the PN-40.

Fry's, Bass Pro Shop, Cabela's. Not sure what else.

Need a little more info. How are you downloading them to the device, what folder are you putting them in and what do you mean by only getting the basics.

Thanks, that is exactly the info I was looking for.

I have a hand held for when I get out of the car. The way I cache is drive while looking at the nuvi, finding the spot were a cache is, park and use the handheld. I would like to get a larger picture while driving by increasing the distance I see around the car.

I currently have a Nuvi 650 and it works well. I have the alert distance set about 1500 meters. I would like to expand that, but if I go higher, the processor can't handle it. I was wondering if some of the newer models can handle this better. I cant find any specs on the processors on them.

Hands down the best bang for you buck. It is worth much more to me then I even came close to paying for it. It is cheap considering what you can do with it. Pull the trigger, it is a no brainer.

Well, I have both. I use the PN-40 and my wife uses the Oregon. The differences as I see them are these. The PN-40 is more accurate specially in the woods. Not more accurate by much, but 10-15 feet in heavy woods is a big deal when looking for a hidden cache. The PN-40 will zoom in further with is very helpfull. It will zoom into 10ft level as the Oregon will zoom to the 20ft level. This does make a diffence when you are close to GZ and don't know what direction to move to get closer. The PN-40 is more sturdy. I have dropped it several times 10ft on concreat and it took it like a champ. I can't even imagine what would of happened to the Oregan. Using cabs battery, the battery times in both are about the same. Being able to charge the battery while it is still in the unit (PN-40) is nice. Now the Oregon is much easier to use. Has the wow factor. You can hand it to a newby and they can pick up on it very quickly. The Oregon poorly lit screen is not a factor for me. It really is not that bad. It would not keep me from buying one. This to me is where the biggest difference is between the two. It is a LOT easier to put caches on the Oregon. A lot. The PN-40 will only hole 1000 caches and must have a plugin or program to add caches. That is a big deal when you live in an area that has a lot of caches. The Oregon will hold 2000 and you can put an unlimited of caches as POI,s. This is done by just dropping the file on the gps, not software needed. I can load a total of 6500 caches on it in less than 45 seconds. In other words you can load it up with 2000 caches and then load you whole database on top of that and they are all on them. Now you can;t log them if they are a poi, but you still get all descriptions and logs. The PN-40 can't come close to that. Now some will say that with the TOPO software that comes with the PN-40 you can do some map layering and such to make it work. It is complicated and time consuming. Like I said, I can load the Oregon in less than 45 sec. For me, if they ever get the Oregon as accurate as the PN-40 I am jumping ship. It will be a no brainier then. It is very frustrating when I am caching and we get out of the PN-40 foot print of caches and my wife is having to feed me coordinates so I can play also.

Actually they are the kind of the same, so the answer you looking for is 1000. They are combined with each other. In other words, the total of waypoints and geocaches combined can't exceed 1000. For example, 800 geocaches and 200 waypoints and it is full.

I have both, I use the pn-40 and my wife uses the Oregon. Right now, I would recommend the Oregon over the pn-40. I truly believe the pn-40 is more accurate. I know they both have the same chipset but I believe the antenna is better in the pn-40. That being said, only being able to load 1000 caches in the pn-40 compared to the 2000 I can load into the Oregon, drives me nuts. The Oregon seems easier to use in the field, can put logs in faster with the touch screen. The pn-40 seems to be more sturdy then the Oregon. So if you think your going to be banging it around you might look at the pn=40. The compass in the Oregon seems to be more stable the pn-40. While caching getting in and out of the car, it seems I have to recalibrate the compass every 3 hours or so. (Yes I tried resetting the accelerator) The compass in the Oregon seems to be fine untill the batteries are replaced. They are both very good units, but 2 more times the caches, bigger screen with the touch screen, and compass stability would lean me more to recommend the Oregon. If you want accuracy, sturdyness and a cheaper price, I would go with the pn-40. I only use these for geocaching by the way.