dogwalkers2

Ya, in the mouse over, it mentions the Rino series. If you go to the whole article (which is just as short as what shows up on the mouse over), it lists all the units it applies to and basically includes everything that has the sensors (Vista HCx, 60CSx, the Appropriate Rinos, etc.)

OK, just to add to the mix. I ordered a shield for my Vista HCx on 25 September (before they updated the site). I ordered the Vista Cx Shield as it was the closest description at the time. I recieved it today (for those wondering how long it takes - I should add that I live in Canada) and it came labelled as "Garmin eTrex C Series." It fits perfectly, perhaps even slightly (1/8 inch) small relative to the bezels (top to bottom). Not enough to worry about. Either they fixed the issue or they have inconsistent sizing. My bet is the former.

The were from the Garmin support website and apply to all models with sensors (60CSx, Vista HCx, etc.).

I'm not sure about the track log, but Garmin says the following with respect to the trip computer: I haven't tried it, but it stands to reason that they may not record it in the track log either. And another caution: Experience shows that the Track Logs saved on the card are considered active logs and do contain the elevation information. Again, I don't know if they do when in "fixed" mode.

2GB card with 1985 segments of TOPO 2008 is 981.x MB. Looks like I'm limited to a 3-4 state area if I want to load CN, but I'm just guessing. Area for area, is CN smaller, the same, or larger than TOPO? With a few exceptions, CN NT is divided into one segment per state/province. All of CN NT, including all of the US, Canada and Puerto Rico is only 64 Segments and 998.5 MB.

Compression is all that I'm aware of. Garmin actually states that they have the same info.

I have plenty of experience with map and compass (over twenty years professionally and over ten years personally prior to that) and agree with you completely on needing to be able to use them. However the GPS is a great tool for more than just something to use "when in doubt" of your position. That would be a very rare event for anyone with experience with map and compass work. The GPS greatly expands capabilities and also helps to speed up things. However, my point was that different people have different requirements and a broad brush statement that power consumption is not important doesn't quite cut it. A friend of mine spends two weeks to two months at a time in the wilderness assisting with mine/mineral exploration, with all sorts of requirements to have the GPS on the whole time he is working. If you go by some of others comments on the board here, there are many that want to precisely track where they go and when for many reasons. These reasons will vary from person to person. But to have that capability, you have to leave the GPS on. Like I said earlier, given the way you operate with your GPS and for other reasons, it may not be as important as other features to you. However, it is a factor to consider and the individual must weigh its importance based on his use of the unit.

Although I would agree that the best bet is to take all the things said into consideration and that, for the most part, it is a form factor issue, a broad statement not to base a decision on power consumption may not always be reasonable. It is indeed a factor that must be considered. If the individual is going on multi-day trips into the wilderness, they won't be able to recharge their batteries. Thus power consumption becomes a significant issue. For example, a week long outing would require 14 batteries at a consumption rate of 25 hours (I would bring a few more along). At 18 hours battery life, the same trip would require 18 batteries, plus spares. Obviously, this is assuming the GPS stays on for the whole day and you could likely half that number. It could amount to a significant difference in the number of batteries you need to lug around. That being said, if it is only being used for geocaching and short day trips, then power consumption is not as much of an issue. So, to sum up, I believe that performance-wise the three are similar. The suggestion to see how each feels and how you like the interface (buttons) is quite sound. Factor in power consumption using the appropriate weight based on how long you may be away from a plug-in.

This ought to work. You can also tell it your rough (within a couple of hundred km) location via the map (after selecting "new location") or have it do it automatically. Telling it the new location helps a lot. I've never had to select "Use with GPS off" when I've changed the location, but I guess it can't hurt, as long as it gets switched on again. Going from Europe to Malaysia is a long way and the GPS is looking for the satellites that would be in view in your last known European location (assuming that was where you last had a fix). It needs to figure out what satellites to look for in Malaysia, so you need to tell it that it is in that area. Otherwise, it will take quite awhile to find the right satellites, since it has to search the sky. Also, if it has been quite awhile since you had it on, it will have to download a new almanac, which takes on the order of half an hour.

CN works really well for me. The maps in my area are very up to date, including some road rerouting that was just completed last summer. There are also street level maps for many of the very small communites in the area (i.e. ones that have six streets total) and all of the rural roads. That being said, there are others that say that their areas are missing some roads that have been there for several years. The data source for the Canadian data (DMTI) is different from that of the US data (Navteq) and may be on a different (not necessarily better or worse) update schedule. However, I think that overall, people are happy with CN. I can't really compare to Verizon, since I have never seen what you have. You could try looking at your travel area on Garmin's coverage viewer on their website. Find an area that you know is relatively new and see if it is included in the maps.

A quick Google search for "total area of Canada" and "total area of United States" shows: Canada: 9,984,670 sq km US: 9,826,630 sq km Difference: 158,040 sq km Larger yes, but not all that much more in a relative sense.The US is a hair over 98.4% as big as Canada. My point was not to get into a "mine is bigger than yours" contest. Maybe I shouldn't have said "a lot" and used something more like the CIA's World Factbook's "somewhat larger than the US". I wasn't trying to be precise. I apologize for offending you. My real point was (as identified in the rest of my original post and then repeated): I only offered a possible baseline, given that I have no idea how the data is broken down in Topo US. Other variables would inclde the fact that Topo US is based on 1:100,000 data, while Topo Canada is primarily 1:50,000 with some 1:250,000 in the sparse, flat Arctic areas thrown in. Not an accurate comparison, but enough to say the segment issue is the biggest one.

The latest version of CN is 2008. I would suggest getting the NT version. CN 2008 NT takes up about 1 GB, covering all of the US and Canada. I do not know how much space Topo US takes up. However, there may also be an issue with the maximum number of segments. You can only upload 2025ish map segments to the GPS. Again, I don't know how many segments are in Topo US (there are way more than that in Topo Canada), but there is another thread on this forum about how to reduce the number of segments. I have all of CN plus topos covering from the Manitoba/Saskatchewan border to (and including) Nova Scotia, south of about lat 50N (except in Manitoba where it is south of 55N) and it takes up 1.5 GB on my 2 GB card and consists of 1468 map segments. This is the area where I will most likely travel. I will change the topos coverage if I head any further north or west. It is certainly more convenient to have everything you need on one card. For what it's worth, there are only 64 sements covering all of NA in CN, which would reduce to 50 if you get rid of Canada and Puerto Rico and Hawaii (they are pretty much on State/Province borders, with a few exceptions). The biggest issue will be the number of map segments in Topo US (Topo Canada is 7316 segments using 3786.3 MB, but we do have a lot more land).

Have you calibrated the compass lately? Are you holding the unit level? If out of level, it can't measure the magnetic field properly (just like if you had a normal magnetic compass).

Page 38 of the manual: To view information for the microSD card: Press MENU prior to opening the USB Mass Storage page and, select Card Info In other words, Main Menu>Setup>Interface>Menu Button>Card Info It shows you % Full, MB used by each of Maps, Tracks and Miscellaneous, Free Space (in MB) and Total Used (in MB).

I think when you reload with POI loader, you have to send at least one POI for it to rewrite the file, so you can't delete them all. Additionally, I know you can rename the POI files on the GPS itself, so you may want to try deleting that file using the GPS as a storage device. That should get rid of them all.

Google Earth will open a gpx file.

According to the manual on page 24, hit mark, [select the data field you want to change (name, coordinates, etc.) hit enter, change the data, hit enter], repeat steps within [] as required, then hit mark. If you got the unit second hand and don't have the manual, it is at http://www.magellangps.com/assets/manuals/gps_310_315_en.pdf

Go to Trip Computer and select the menu. Select reset. Deselect everything, then select all waypoints, apply and then OK when it asks if you are sure. - page 52 of the manual, right side of page.

Are they both set for the same datum? Preferably WGS84.

Also, the CS is discontinued...see Garmin's product pages. The current products for this line are the 60, the 60 Cx and the 60CSx. Everything said above about the letters is correct, but I would add that the C (colour) versions have the high sensitivity receiver, while the B&W version doesn't.

If you have auto-calibrate on, it is GPS-assisted barometric altitude. Otherwise, it is barometric altitude, based on your manual calibration. Hmmm, I had never heard of that and so was just looking in my 60CSx for something like an auto-calibrate function for the barometer. Couldn't find it anywhere. Could you tell me where in the menus that is? Thanks! Main Menu>Setup>Altimeter. There is a drop-down box for Autocalibration. Select On. You also need to select variable elevation in the other drop down box to get an altitude plot. This is on page 76 of the 60 CSx manual.

It's also just one dealer's view based on its sales and the number of times people have looked at the reviews. Supposedly forum mentions factor in, but their forums are pretty thin, so I don't think that would have much input. As a matter of comparison, here's another dealer's view for top selling handhelds: 1. 60CSx 2. Vista (B&W) 3. eTrex (plain yellow) 4. 76 CSx 5. Vista HCx 6. 60CSx with 1 GB card 7. Legend HCx 8. 60Cx 9. Summit HC 10. 60 It's odd that the top non-Garmin one comes in at number 17 (being a Lowrance H20). By the way, number 140 on the list (last place, supposedly) is the Rino 530HCx. Basically, any list like this is indeed useless because it is based on the market the dealer is selling in and has nothing to do with the capabilities, etc. of the GPS....Onion rings will show up high on A&W's top seller list, but won't even be on MacDonald's.

If you have auto-calibrate on, it is GPS-assisted barometric altitude. Otherwise, it is barometric altitude, based on your manual calibration.

There IS an SD slot on the HCx. Yes, but the unit does not come with an card, you have to buy it separately. With the CX, it comes with a card. With respect to the OP, I figure it is like the others say. The CX was around for a while, then they started to produce the HCx. There is probably still significant stock, so they still sell the CX (with the bonus of a, albeit small, microSD card). It will likely be discontiued soon.

The Garmin case with the plastic window does fit the HCx models, convering only a bit of the screen. That being sid, however, the "window" really reduces the readability of the screen - at least on the old B&W versions - so much so, I stopped using mine. I just tried it for fit on the HCx, but don't use it. I've got an Invisible Shield on the way...