Grinch & Gremlin

I know it's been a month, but no one answered this question. For those who may care, the answer is that neither the 60CSx nor the Vista HCx will record barometric data while powered down. I didn't need it, but it's a shame for those who did that Garmin dropped the feature in newer models.

The thing is, Gallet, that you are giving us some facts, but then you are mixing them with opinions and confusing the opinions with the facts. You are not the first person to own both of these devices and report on your experiences here. You have pulled the 60CSx out of its box and held it up next to the HCx for a day or so. I have also reported in detail on my experiences with the two, but I have used the 60CSx in the field for over a year and the HCx for a couple of months. There have been plenty of facts presented before and, while you have indeed added some additional ones that others of us didn't think of, your suggestion that our experiences are opinions while yours are facts is total nonsense. Your exact words were "there have only been opinions rather than objective facts" and that is really rather insulting given that many of us have spent a lot of time providing both facts and opinions to people trying to make a decision between the two. At least the rest of us understood the difference between the facts and the opinions we reported. So let's really look at what has been added and what hasn't. New Facts: 1. Your observation of the two units' reported accuracy in several different orientations. 2. Your quantifying the HCx setting that is as bright as the CSx 100% setting. Both of those are useful... good work. But that's about it. Everything else in your post has either already been posted and discussed at length or is pure opinion. Similar reception with slight edge to HCx... reported many times. Everything you say about which size and button placement is preferable is just your opinion. You can claim objective fact about what the sizes are, and where the buttons are, but your preference for one over the other is just... well, your preference. There's nothing objective about that. That the HCx has a stick and the CSx has a rocker is fact. That you prefer the stick is just your opinion again. I know it seems obvious to you that your preference is better... that's why it's your preference. But there's nothing objective about it. Personally, although I prefer the HCx overall, the stick is one of the things I don't like about it. I find the stick irritating in that it is easy to click it sideways when you meant to push enter. It's also in an awkward location. When I have two hands free, I can enter text in the 60CSx much more quickly than I can in the HCx. My left thumb runs the rocker and my right one hits enter. It's very fast. I'd rather enter text on the 60CSx, though I'd rather have the HCx in my hand while actually walking. It's not being politically correct to acknowledge that people have different preferences. People really do have different preferences. Yours aren't facts, they're just yours. The battery life question was an opportunity for facts, but then you didn't go there. Heck, since you actually measured the hours on the HCx I was surprised you didn't go ahead and measure the CSx too. That would have given us real numbers for both, but instead you just assumed the CSx would give worse than advertised battery life through some really twisted logic. Battery use isn't based on what percentage of brightness each unit is set to; it's based on the actual brightness. If the HCx is twice as bright at 50% as the CSx is at 100%, then the CSx isn't pulling more juice because it's at 100% as you suggest. The HCx is pulling more juice because it takes more juice to make it brighter. There's no magic about it. More light is more energy and more energy takes more from the batteries. The HCx gets better battery life because the chipset is more efficient, not because you have the backlight on 30%. The only other thing I'll comment on is your opinion that the CSx screen lighting being so bad as to be practically unusable. As I mentioned before, I've had the 60CSx for quite awhile now. I've used it to navigate vehicles, I've used it for geocaching, I've used it to navigate on foot and driving off-road in the African bush and I've used it to find my way back to my hotels while wandering the streets in China. That's a lot of time looking at the screen under a lot of different conditions and I have never been unable to see the screen clearly. Now that's not to say that I disagree about how much brighter the HCx screen is. (I repeated your test and agree that it's about 30%-vs-100%.) But your conclusion about the CSx screen being so bad is affected by the fact that you are only looking at the two side-by-side. I guarantee that, if you didn't have the HCx, you wouldn't give the brightness of the CSx a second thought. That's my personal experience and, if you don't believe me, then go back in these forums to before the HCx was released and see if you can find anyone complaining about the brightness of the 60CSx screen. It's only relative. So while you definitely have to give the HCx the nod for the brighter screen, that doesn't mean that there is anything wrong with the CSx screen, it just means the HCx screen is brighter. It's one more factor to weigh in on when deciding which one to buy. Okay, that's really enough. (Probably more than enough... please excuse my wordiness.) I'd just like to leave people who are trying to make this decision with a final thought. Both of these are excellent products and you really can't go wrong with either one. If you can, go to a store and hold both. Play with them and see which one feels better in your hand. Consider the screen issues, but also consider the handling, the button placement, and the HCx odometer bug, which is one fact that got left out of Gallet's review. Then buy the one that you think best meets your needs and don't look back. You will not be disappointed by either one (unless you really need the odometer to be accurate, which a lot of people don't.)

1. Yes, that problem still exists with the latest HCx firmware. 2. If there is a difference, I can't tell from using both. The software in each is very similar and when I have set up routes side-by-side on both, they have given me the same results. 3. Sure, the CSx doesn't have the odometer bug. Other than that, it's really a matter of personal preference. My wife likes the button placements (and labels) on the CSx better. She says it's easier to remember which button to push and she prefers the single-push buttons on the CSx to the single-push/push-and-hold buttons on the HCx. I like the HCx better because my preferences are the opposite. I like the one-handed feel of the HCx. There's no right or wrong here (except for the odometer bug if you need that feature); it's about what you're more comfortable using. They're both excellent products and you really can't make a bad decision.

Man, this one drives me crazy. I've told it in setup that I want the backlight on at 100% by default and that I want the timeout to be one minute. So why this on/off business at startup? What it should do is what Prime thought it did, turn the light on when the unit turns on and start the countdown to backlight off. So, in my case, the light should come on when I hit on and stay that way for one minute (if I don't touch anything). How hard is that to figure out?

In theory, the 60CSx should be able to receive a good signal in almost any orientation because of the quad-helix antenna (even hanging upside down from your neck), while the HCx is supposed to need to be held horizontally because of the patch antenna. While I have never put them through any type of formal test, I often carry the HCx in the Garmin holster on my belt for long periods of time (so it's oriented vertically) and I've never lost a signal for that. I've also dropped it in a front pocket and carried it however it happened to be sitting, again with no problem. So I'm not really sure the antenna is an issue in practice. If the odometer isn't important to you, especially given your attempt to lighten up from the Rhino, then I'm not seeing much reason not to go with the HCx. The altimeter thing was based on a single article online and I admit it did concern me when I read it, but after discussing it in the forum I came away believing it was really a different issue. I think the limitation is that, the original Vista and Vista C would continue to record altimeter data when the unit was off. The HCx doesn't do that; it must be turned on to record elevation. While I can sure see how they could be an issue for someone who needs that, I decided it wasn't an issue for me because I usually leave my unit on while I hike. But that could be something for you to think about if it matters to you.

That just shows how personal these things are. My wife likes the feel of the 60CSx better too, but I like the HCx better. I have used the 60CSx with one hand, but it just feels awkward to me so I almost always use it two-handed. Still, that brings to mind another piece of advice for people trying to make this choice... try to find both models in a store and hold them yourself to see which you like better. (I see the OP has already done that. Good move.)

Well, we have a professional Trimble unit at the college I teach at that is accurate to less than 1 meter. Of course, it costs around $7,000 and has a dedicated antenna that sticks up out of a backpack over your head so it's a little more trouble to carry around than a Vista. Also, it's hard not to attract the attention of muggles. Seriously, though, I've never used it for geocaching, but I think you're seeing a pattern in the replies to your question. Consumer units just don't get more accurate than 3-5 meters and, as others have commented, even when you seem to go right to the spot, it's really just chance that put you there and not 15 feet away.

I have both units and have compared them side-by-side. Here are some things to consider. 1. I can see you leaning toward the HCx because of your comment about weight. Your Rhino weighs 10.3 oz, the 60CSx weighs 7.5 oz and the HCx weighs 5.5 oz. If weight is the big thing, then the HCx certainly gives you the lightest option. 2. For my own two units, the HCx has been slightly more sensitive than the 60CSx. However, others have reported near-identical sensitivity so you should take my results with a grain of salt. It may just be something about my particular units and I've seen no one else report the same thing. 3. The screens on both are fine. The resolution is nearly identical in terms of total pixels with the 60CSx having more pixels high and the HCx having more pixels wide. Because the 60CSx screen is slightly larger it can feel like you're seeing a bit more with it even though you're really not. Really, the resolution thing is simply not something you're even conscious of when using the two devices. When I look at the two side-by-side, I certainly do not notice any difference in sharpness or readability. One nice thing in the 60CSx is that the status bar is on-screen the whole time, showing battery status and such. You have to press the on/off button on the HCx to get that to come up for a few seconds. 4. The HCx screen is brighter, but you honestly wouldn't think the 60CSx screen wasn't bright unless you were holding them side-by-side. While testing them, if I had the HCx in its holster and was looking at the 60CSx, I certainly wasn't standing there thinking it was dim. It looked nice and bright and clean. But then when I'd get out the HCx, it would startle me and I'd find myself muttering, 'wow, it really is brighter.' Ironically, there is one aspect of the brighter screen I don't like. I use the Topaz color scheme on the 60CSx because I like muted earth colors. When I got the HCx, I started to set it to the same thing, but what is a very pleasant tone of light mustard on the 60CSx is a garish and harsh yellow on the HCx. Not that you'd make a buying decision on that, but I thought it was worth noting that everything is a tradeoff. If you will be using your GPSr in bright sun, the brightness might be an issue and you'd probably prefer the HCx. I use mine in forests and it simply doesn't matter. In my opinion, the characterization of the 60CSx screen as 'inferior' is unjustified. They are just different. 5. The 60CSx feels good in the hand, doesn't feel unreasonably large, and is easy for a novice to operate with more and labeled buttons. The HCx is smaller and less obtrusive when hiking and although you have to remember what button does what with single presses and press/holds, etc., once you know it, it's really nice to be able to use it one-handed. The 60CSx is more awkward one-handed and is really designed for pressing buttons with the hand not holding the unit. I like the feel of the HCx better. 6. Both feel rugged so that shouldn't be an issue. 7. You do need to consider the odometer bug and simply decide how much, if at all, it might matter to you. My answer to Gallet's question is... no, it would not be foolish to buy the 60CSx to avoid the odometer bug if that feature is important to you. Garmin has known about that bug at least since July and they still have not successfully fixed it so you can't know that they ever will. For whatever reason, several people in this forum have decided that since the bug doesn't matter to them, it must not matter to anyone else. That's simply not true. My advice is to read about the bug and decide whether it matters to you. It obviously didn't keep me from buying an HCx, but that's partly because I can take the 60CSx when I know I'll want to keep track of distance traveled on the trail... and I really do think that Garmin will fix it eventually so I took the chance. Overall, both are excellent devices, you can't really go wrong with either one and neither choice would be 'foolish'. I'd favor the HCx as better overall if not for the odometer bug. But the bug does exist so, if I could only have one or the other, I could go either way depending on how important I thought that feature would be to my navigation.

Why yes, I did, but let's not just pick and choose. Let's keep it in context with what you said before and after that. Your preceding that by the 'much ado about nothing' and 'big deal' comments, and following it by characterizing people who do complain about it as laying awake at night wringing their hands and grinding their teeth over the issue was disrespectful and expressed contempt for people who are trying to get it fixed. That's what I have objected to all along. Anyway, I've said what I have to say. Miragee gets exactly what I'm talking about and I'm sure others do too, so there's no point beating this horse any more dead than it already is. I'll not reply again in this thread.

The odometer provides one more piece of information that is useful in making good decisions while doing exactly what -- it turns out -- you also do. If you were less set on trying to prove a meaningless point and would just stop and think about it, you'd realize that it would also have been a useful tool for your trip in Yellowstone. Not a critical, life-or-death thing... just one more piece of information that can be useful in making decisions. I can recall many times outdoors wishing that I had more information; I don't remember ever wishing I had less. Perhaps you just don't see the potential because 1) your odometer didn't work on this trip when you did keep a route, and 2) your usual method of turning the GPSr off most of the time negates the value of the odometer. In any event, I stand by my original statement. You are in no position to tell me what my needs are and have no place claiming they are not valid simply because you don't share them. If the manufacturer of the device claims it does this thing, and I say I need it, then that in itself is a legitimate reason for complaint. It is not much ado about nothing, it is a little ado about something. Normally, I wouldn't waste my time arguing with you about this, as I really don't care what you think of how I use my GPSr or my dependence on technology. (Freeday makes a good point on that!) But since there seem to be several of you trying to shut the rest of us up, it actually becomes a problem that requires a response. The only way that Garmin will devote resources to fixing this bug is if they feel that it is causing a problem with their user community. If everyone listens to you, and shuts up about it, then they will assume we're all content and we'll never get it fixed. So we're not going to do that. On the other hand, if we are successful in getting Garmin to fix this bug, then it costs you exactly nothing and you are no better or worse off than you are now. As they say in this part of the country, you have no dog in this fight. So how about giving us a break and, instead of complaining that we're trying to get a bug fixed, either support us (the civil response) or at least stop trying to convince people that it doesn't matter. Individuals can decide that for themselves.

That's more than half the price of a new Vista HCx (as low as $232 shipped on PriceGrabber). Given the new features of the HCx over the original Vista, it doesn't seem worth it to pay that much to repair the old one.

That's an interesting article. I hadn't gotten to this yet when I wrote my last reply. While the two seemed to me to work well for regular hiking, and for testing the elevation at a known point, this article brings up some issues about how the HCx works that are worth looking into. I may have to read it through carefully and do some of my own tests to see what works well and what doesn't.

No, it's not much ado about nothing... it's only nothing to you because you don't use it. For others, such as those who head off-trail, it can be extremely helpful to know how far you've traveled in a given length of time. If you're bushwhacking through brush and trying to make a decision about whether you can make it to a particular point by sundown (for example), knowing how quickly you're covering ground is valuable. Once I'm home to upload tracklogs, I'm past needing to know how far I've come. By then, it's trivial but while I'm on the trail it's important. Perhaps you only do caches that are close to the road, but lots of us actually combine caching with significant hiking and for us the trip odometer matters. Honestly, I'm content that Garmin is working on this and will probably fix it, but I'm getting really tired of people who have no need of the odometer proclaiming that the concerns of those of us who do are not legitimate. On the original barometer question, while I haven't done any tests or measurements, my subjective impression is that the barometer on the Vista HCx is working pretty much the same as the one on my Vista C did. I admit, though, that I focus more on how accurate it is when I cross a known elevation after calibrating it at the beginning of the day than on how frequently it updates. I take it that it seems less frequent to gratefulhike. On my next hike, I'll carry both and compare them. I agree in principle that I'd rather have the feature work well at the old battery life than have longer battery life but poor information to work with while hiking.

I too would like to know how to put multi map products on a card. I just bought a 2GB microSD card yesterday for my Legend HCx. You just have to select them all at once and download them at the same time. In MapSource, choose one of your map sets and select the segments you want download. Don't do the download yet. Then use the dropdown menu to choose the other map set and select the ones you want to download. You'll see all the map segments you've chosen from both sets in the maps list. Now choose 'send to device' and it will build a single image file with all of your map segments from both sets and download it to your GPSr.

In my opinion, that's a bit overstated. The screen resolution of the HCX is 176x220 (38,720 px) and of the 60CSx is 160x240 (38,400 px). As you can see, they are almost identical in total pixels with one a touch higher res horizontally and the other a touch higher res vertically. The 60CSx screen is a bit larger but that just means that is looks exactly the same when held an extra inch or two from your eyes. In fact, one nice thing about the larger screen is that they use part of it for a permanent status bar and it's nice to have that information at a glance rather than having to press the on/off key to bring it up. Anyway, I have and use both and can say that you are never aware of the resolution difference or different aspect ratios when using them. The HCx screen is definitely brighter, but even that's something that will only matter in certain circumstances. I have never, ever been unable to clearly see my 60CSx screen and would never think twice about the brightness unless I was standing there holding it up to the HCx. However, I can see the possibility that if you hike in the desert or other places with lots of bright, direct sun, it's possible it could make a difference there. On the bug, there seem to be two contingents around here... people who use the trip computer and think it's a problem and those who do not use it and, therefore, do not think it's a problem. You will have to decide for yourself whether or not it matters to you. You cannot assume they will fix it since there is no guarantee they'll be able to. I think the odds are good, but you should be willing to live without the fix if it turns out that way. All-in-all, I don't think you can go wrong with either device. I'd just pick the one that you like the design of better.

If you're uncertain of the coverage of the National Parks topo, then you can go onto Garmin's web site and search the map live. I had never bought the National Parks East maps because the closest covered places listed on the label are Shenandoah NP and the Great Smoky Mountains NP. Both close enough to get to, but not my regular spots. But then I looked online and discovered that it also does the entire Appalachian Trail even though it doesn't list that in the description, which was great because that means it includes most of the places I hike. I'm really enjoying the higher resolution maps now and am just sorry I didn't look earlier. the moral is, if you hike in any type of national park, forest, recreation area, monument or seashore, check out the live map to see if the places you hike are included.

Has anyone compared the topo 2008 with National Geographic s Topo program? How would you compare them? I have, and use, both and each has its strengths and weaknesses. The NG Topo maps are images of maps of five different sizes. They are more realistic than the Garmin Topo, and show more detail. You can't load the maps on your Garmin and it can sometimes be hard to make things out on it, but it makes a better overall map. I use it for printing out my paper maps to carry with me. Garmin Topo maps are vector-based so you can continue to zoom in as much as you want and they will load into your Garmin GPSr for use while navigating. Although they have less detail than the NG Topos, I sometimes find that to be a good thing. Sometimes it's hard to follow the track of a trail with NG, but with Garmin Topo, it either has as particular trail or it doesn't. If it's there, then it shows at any resolution and it's easy to follow.

Can you tell me if you can see anything different? I am on ver. 3.43 There's your problem. Topo! 3.x doesn't support USB connections to a GPS, but your Vista HCx (which is different from the Vista that you see in there) has only a USB connection. You'll need to upgrade to Topo! 4.x. I started with 3.x too and then discovered this shortcoming. Rather than upgrading the original product, I bought the less expensive 'Streets and 3-D Views Expansion Pack' which upgraded me to v4.x and added several new features including street overlays, 3-D fly-throughs and USB support.

I have no personal experience with this particular store, but this sounds a lot like common scam with cameras and many other expensive electronics. They'll advertise a great price, then tell you to call to confirm your order, verify your credit card, or whatever gets you on the phone. Then they'll hard-pressure you to buy a whole bunch of extras... warranties, cables, chargers, etc., many of which are actually included in the box from the manufacturer in the first place. In the end, you end up paying more than if you'd gone with a reputable dealer in the first place. Then, if you don't buy all the extra stuff, they'll sit on your order and not ship it. When you call they'll suddenly be back-ordered and eventually you'll cancel the order. They don't really want to sell you the product at that ultra-low price so if they can't get you on the extras, they want you to cancel. Just look at the comments by their customers on resellerratings.com, where they have earned an amazingly low 1.0 out of 10 rating. If it were me, especially after reading those horror stories, I'd cancel my order immediately.

In my book, that's a good thing! If Garmin doesn't think it might affect sales, then they have no incentive to fix it. Since you're happy with the unit the way it is, and have nothing to lose by having them fix it, then why not cheer on those who are making a lot of noise about it to Garmin? You lose nothing, we recover a feature we already paid for and Garmin sells more units because they have a better product and have demonstrated a strong commitment to their customers. It's win-win-win. BTW, don't feel sorry for me. I knew exactly what I was buying when I bought it. In fact, that's my point... thanks to the people on this forum, I did know what I was getting. I would have been upset, though, to have found out after buying it that everyone else knew but decided not to mention it because they were afraid it would hurt Garmin's sales.

I think most of the time you use Mapsource to transfer many waypoints to your GPS. I prefer doing that using Mapsource so I can see the waypoints on the map and trim the ones I won't get near. You can also download a single waypoint to your GPS directly from the cache page. Yeah, I definitely have workarounds. I sometimes download directly from the web site, use GSAK or NG Topo, but sometimes, it's just a pain to have to open an entirely different program simply to move a single waypoint onto the GPS. I imagine it would take about a day to add that functionality to Mapsource, and it wouldn't remove the ability to do anything you can do now, so I just wonder why they would miss that obvious a feature. To me, it's the equivalent of your not being able to bring a single page from Word. Sure we could all delete everything else before printing, copy the page to another document or open it in another program, but you'd still be sitting there shaking your head wondering why they didn't just let you do it directly. That's all I'm saying, and I was really just trying to be sure that I wasn't missing some obscure command that would let me do it. Apparently, I was not. Thanks though!!!

Regarding the "errata" on the Vista HCx, I think there's just a few people making a lot of noise about really one trivial outstanding issue: the odometer/trip computer doesn't track slow movements. There was only two other annoyances (WAAS sometimes becoming disabled and the "calibrate compass" popup), both of which have been corrected with the latest firmware update. It's a great unit; if you can't resuscitate your Vista I'd recommend upgrading to it. Hard to beat for ~$250. It is a good unit and there's nothing wrong with recommending it. But all of you saying the odometer bug is trivial are just assuming that everyone else's needs are the same as yours. It may be trivial for you, but for those who need the feature, it's NOT trivial. It IS a bug and it is NOT acceptable. There's no conspiracy... they're not incompetent... they're working on it. BUT it is also unreasonable to suggest that we should forget about it or not mention it when people ask about buying the HCx. You don't know whether or not it will be trivial to someone else, so let them read "the noise", consider their needs, and decide for themselves whether or not it matters enough to postpone their purchase or buy something else. In the meantime, I'll go on record as saying that I very much appreciate those who have been making noise about this bug. It is a feature that matters to me and their posts were extremely useful in helping me decide whether, and when, to buy the HCx.

I'd be careful there, checked the price and site, and am not convinced that isn't the upgrade. No, it's not the upgrade. That's the exact one I purchased last week and it's the regular, full version.

Okay, my new Vista HCx and Garmin holster arrived today and I have no idea what the reviewer on Amazon was talking about. The HCx fits the eTrex holster perfectly. I have really loved this case with my older Vista C so I'm relieved it also fits my Vista HCx. Those looking for a case solution for an HCx (or any eTrex) should definitely consider this.

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!