BetaMan
-
Posts
112 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by BetaMan
-
-
Hey Rockin' Roddy, I wasn't implying that you were being biased either. I was simply stating that you are much more familiar with the PN-40 than the Oregon. I too have used both, but with very different conclusions. As I stated in another thread on this board, the drill you went through trying to cache with the Oregon WAS a nightmare! There again, it has to do with familiarity with a unit! I have my Oregon profile for GeoCaching set up so that the Main Menu has all the things I use most: "Map", "GeoCaching", "Compass", "Where To!", "Mark Waypoint" and "Waypoint Averaging".
All I have to do to navigate to a cache is, Select "GeoCaching" from the main menu, Select the cache I want, and hit "Go". It then navigates me to the cache via the road, turn-by-turn, then, once I park the Jeep, I click the "X" and select "Where To" and "Recaculate Off Road". Walla! I'm on the cache! I have already found over 1000 caches with my Oregon (561 in May alone!)
VERY simple. I found the PN-40 to be much more cumbersome to operate, with many more cons than pros.
That's one of the great things about living in a non-communistic society! Everyone has choices! I think if you tried the Oregon again and set it up to suit you (which only took about 2 minutes) then you'll find that it is much easier and more fun to operate!
-
Speaking again for the Oregon, the nightmare that Rockin Roddy described for trying to find a cache IS a nightmare, since he didn't read the manual (which I only gave a cursory view myself). I changed my profile for GeoCaching the way I like it, and set up the main menu to show the things I use most often so I can access them with a single press of the screen. That only took a few minutes to do!
It is actually VERY easy to navigate to a cache and then go to offroad moad. All you have to do is go to the "Geocaching" profile and select the cache you want to get. Select "Go" and it will navigate you via roads (if you have navigational maps installed like City Navigator, etc) and once you arrive at the parking area, Click on "Where to" and select "Recalculate Off Road". You can either walk to the cache based on the graphical depiction on the screen or close that and choose to use the Compass if you prefer. It's that simple! If you want to view information about the cache, close that screen and select Geocache and there is all the information about the cache!
It is VERY simple! I have found over 1000 caches with my Oregon so far (561 in the month of May alone!) If you still have questions about it, PM me and I'll give you my cell number and we can talk about it.
-
We want to go paperless!
We have used a Garmin ETrex Vista HCx and have really not been caching much, partly because we've been busy but also because it's a hassle to print everything to go out. Have been researching and have it down to the Garmin Oregon 400t (or the 300, if I can figure out the additional programming and maps needed to equal the 400) or the DeLorme PN-40. I have read the downfalls of each unit but would like clarification of the "steep learning curve" or the PN-40. My computer skills are pretty strong but don't want too much work setting up the unit. I just want to start using it with as little work as possible. We are planning a trip to the southwest in the fall and will be using the new gps to have some caching fun there...will need some good maps for backroading too. I know there are lots of strong opinions on Groundspeak...that's good1 All advice and input will be appreciated but we are strong on being paperless. Thanks, W & RThe steep learning curve argument is bunk, I owned a PN-40 and now own an Oregon 300 (not for much longer thankfully) and I can tell you the Oregon was more difficult for me to figure out. Read my thread here, in particular, the last post which will give my honest impressions of the Oregon vs the PN-40!
It would be just as seep of a learning curve for us Oregon users to have to pick up a PN-40 and try to figure it out on the fly while caching. We would ALWAYS like to stay with something familiar. Anything else is a pain. However, I believe if you started out on an Oregon and switched to a PN-40, you'd throw rocks at the PN and go back to an Oregon. I too, have tried a PN-40 and hated it. The smaller screen, short battery life, not touch screen, routing was strange, and the learning curve all left me wanting to drop-kick it into another time zone. The Oregon is the best GPSr out there IMHO. Nothing else even comes close.
But opinions are like noses, everybody has one! [
] -
Do you think possibly that the fact that you are used to the PN-40 might sway you some? The things you described about the Oregon, I haven't experienced with my Oregon 400t (other than the drift in earlier versions of the firmware). It puts me right on the caches. And I have had 7 GPSr units and this one HANDS DOWN is the easiest to use due to the touch screen.
The Oregon and the PN-40 BOTH use the same GPS chipset, so accuracy should be pretty even. I have used many GPSr's and the Oregon is EASILY the best unit out there IMHO!
-
Hi!
I think now Garmin is very busy with Dakota 20
Now I would like to have a NON BETA VERSION. I would like to have a real release
Regards
Actually, according to Garmin, they are different teams. They're still releasing updates for the 60CSx!
-
I noticed a system "hang" while switching profiles and trying to use the device afterwards. Finally had to restart the device and all was well. Happened 3 times yesterday.
Isn't it about time for Garmin to release another "Beta"?
-
When you say biking, do you mean bicycle (road or mtn?) or motorcycle?
Kinda what I was wondering...
-
Well, I can honestly say that I've experienced NO problems WHATSOEVER with the Oregon today! No unexpected shutdowns, No lockups, No arrow pointing in the wrong direction, no spastic tracklogs, no having to remove the batteries for any reason... It was absolutely NO problem at all!
It's as if I never even turned the thing on! (oh wait, that's it! I didn't!)
(Useless post, I know, I'm just VERY frustrated with Garmin and my Oregon. Some days I brag about it and other days I want to pitch it off a HIGH cliff onto some huge rocks with rapidly moving water running through them so even the pieces are swept away!)
I've developed a love/hate relationship with it...
-
I went on a long drive down a Jeep trail to get a cache (approx. 4.65 miles 1 way.) When I got back to the main road, I checked the tracks and noticed that in several locations they were off about 70 or so feet, even though I never moved off this VERY narrow road!
I've been reading a little in the PN-40 threads and they are bragging that their GPS is INCREDIBLY accurate! Since they have the SAME chip, why can't Garmin get their act together?????
Are their programmers just "hobbiests"?
Sorry, just a little let down...
-
Actually, I have an Oregon 400t and it DOES pickup the new coords. I've already done it many times. Never knew this was a feature. Thought it was supposed to do it.
-
Installed it on my 400t Friday and went out and found 1 cache and the unit shut down 3 times for no apparant reason. I entered the coords in manually, since GC was down and a friend told me the coords over the phone. Maybe it didn't like it that it was navigating to a waypoint instead? (doubtful). I am using GARMIN'S car adaptor made specifically FOR the Oregon while in the car. Have a new set of Everedy Lithium batteries in unit and it is set to USE Lithium in the setup screen.
Kinda gripes me some.
On a good note however, the cache was down (and up and down and up) a Jeep trail and the final destination of the cache was in dense woods and the unit took me straight to it. (within 6 feet). The hider used a Colorado 300.
-
Well, I switched back to 2,98 with no ill effect. Maps are OK. Just wish that Wherigo's worked and accuracy was better...
-
I switched back to 2.98 yesterday. Got tired of the "update" issues...
-
Well, the "Wherigo" function is just as crappy as before. No difference here. Tried it again today at a Wherigo I've done previously with my Colorado (which worked perfectly on it) and it locked up repeatedly! NO DIFFERENCE! Not sure what they "fixed" on it, maybe a mispelled word or something, but it still doesn't work AT ALL!
-
I have an Oregon 400t and have noticed NO problems with the updat either. Works pretty well. I will give it a better test today.
-
Installed without issue. Did notice when you shutdown that my screen also doesn't turn off right. After waiting a few minutes though, all is well.
-
I'd go with the Oregon hands down! In my book, there's not even a close 2nd! The the ariel maps are cool but you have to suscribe to a service and download only parts at a time.
I'd efinately go with Oregon!
-
I used my Oregon with 2.98 in heavy tree cover and found 4 geocaches pretty easily. Took a second for them to finally point in the right directionm but it finally did and I was able to get all 4 FTF's.
Still waiting for the next beta or better yet, release!
-
2.97b would just turn off my unit for no reason several times an hour. Alos, the map would freeze up for no reason, resulting in having to take the batteries out and back in and restarting the unit.
I HAVE had 2.98b turn off for no apparant reason a few times, but other than that, it's worked pretty well.
-
With a hint of a new Garmin coming out, the Garmin Dakota, I hope Garmin doesn't abandon the Oregon any time soon like it appears they did the Colorado!
Ready for an update!!!
-
ALL of my GPSr's have been Garmin: 60CS, 60CSx, Colorado 300, Oregon 400t
HANDS DOWN, the Oregon is my favorite of all time! 60CSx would be 2nd (over the Colorado even).
-
I LOVE the name "Dakota'. Sounds more cool than "Oregon". However, I love my Oregon and won't be changing to a Dakota unless it has a much better chipset in it, with more accuracy and works under tree cover.
-
Great review, Maingray!
Isn't it about time for Garmin to release a new firmware? I'm ready to try the next attempt out the chute!
-
I really love my Oregon 400t as well. I have found over 450 caches with 2.98b and the accuracy has been reasonable on some, dead-on on most. Even in the woods, it has done pretty well. I have noticed a drift several times which is corrected by a power cycle. All-in-all I believe it's the best Paperless GPS out there!
I have and would recommend it to others!
We have used a Garmin ETrex Vista HCx and have really not been caching much, partly because we've been busy but also because it's a hassle to print everything to go out. Have been researching and have it down to the Garmin Oregon 400t (or the 300, if I can figure out the additional programming and maps needed to equal the 400) or the DeLorme PN-40. I have read the downfalls of each unit but would like clarification of the "steep learning curve" or the PN-40. My computer skills are pretty strong but don't want too much work setting up the unit. I just want to start using it with as little work as possible. We are planning a trip to the southwest in the fall and will be using the new gps to have some caching fun there...will need some good maps for backroading too. I know there are lots of strong opinions on Groundspeak...that's good1 All advice and input will be appreciated but we are strong on being paperless. Thanks, W & R
]
Beta Software: Oregon 400t, Ver. 3.15, Beta as of Aug 18, 2009,
in GPS technology and devices
Posted
I went caching Sunday with this new version of firmware and it performed like a champ! No issues for me at all.
Now I wonder if they will fix the Wherigo feature.....