bunkerdave

That's a good idea for the Geocaching Profile..>I might have to give that a try and see how I like it. I have made a few requests to Garmin for a future firmware update, one of which was to make it easier to move from the Compass screen to the cache description/hint/log screens. Right now, you have to go all the way out of the compass back to the main menu to get to the description, which is just a pain. I loved the 60CSx for this...you'd go from compass to hint to found in one click. Not sure why they got away from this in the OR and CO. Grrrr.

I made up my own caching name as I was sitting with pen and logbook in hand at my first geocache. My brother was with me, and as an avid chess player, already had a cool name "knightmare" chosen, which he went with. I had never really done much online, so I had nothing. I played basketball in college, but was not doing much with that anymore..the only thing I could really say I was "into" at the time was golf, but as evidenced by my double digit handicap, I was not much good at that, either. I decided to go with that, and considering the abundance of excessive strokes from the sand traps, decided that "bunker dave" was an apt moniker. In the months to come, I developed a tremendous passion for geocaching, and other new cachers in my area noticed how much time and effort I was investing into the game. Not knowing what the "bunker" part of my handle meant, some of them assumed that it had to do with artillery bunkers, and imagined me as an old, retired war veteran in shredded fatigues and combat boots out wandering the mountains and deserts of the West in search of geocaches. Clearly, the reality turned out to be less romantic, as three of them found when I arrived for a planned hike en route to my 100th find. Imagine their disappointment when instead of a bearded, grizzled, camouflaged old geezer in a rusty half-track I come rolling up to the trailhead in my adidas trailrunners and Subaru Outback. Mild mannered accountant and family man by day, suicidal geocaching maniac by night and weekend. It has all made for some entertaining stories, however you look at it.

Personally, I would recommend the Oregon line for paperless caching. I see the new Dakotas, but can't speak to that, as I have not tried them. I haven't used the Delorme units either, so I can't speak to that, either. I love the Oregon's paperless interface. It could not be any easier. And if you want to use GSAK, you can load almost unlimited caches in it. I have the whole state of Utah, and half of Idaho in it, with FULL cache descriptions and could take a lot more. (This is about 20k caches). You simply cannot overestimate the value of having such a large area of caches loaded, no matter where you are. Any time I have a little time to kill, I go find a cache. It just makes my life more fun, no matter where I am. I also got one of the GeoMate Jr. GPSs...it was only $80 or something, but I have used it on a few trips where I didn't have ANY data loaded, I was able to look up the nearest cache, and use my cell phone to get the data to put in my Oregon. I would not recommend the GeoMate as an only GPS tho. If you plan on using something else to carry your cache data, the 60CSx is a great unit. It actually is more capable than the Oregons, (more tools) but the workarounds (GSAK macros) for paperless caching still leave a lot to be desired. I usually used a PDA with my CSx, and that was good..but then you still have to update and carry TWO devices, instead of just one, as with the Oregon. Another possibility is to get a blackberry phone or iPhone. With a CSx and a smartphone/iphone with a Geocaching application, you have ready access to the database, which is even better than downloading data into a GPS like the Oregon. Downside, of course, is that you have to have cell service to use them, and the monthly fee for internet access. Personally, I use an HP mini, with wireless broadband internet, so I can download a Pocket Query from pretty much anywhere. The Mini was about $400 tho, the internet access is $60/mo, and of course the GC.com subscription (for PQs) is $30/year. When I first got the Oregon, I was a little annoyed at how differently things on it worked than on my CSx. As I have moved along the learning curve, however, I like it better. I think the CSx and the Oregon are about even now, in my mind. No matter which unit you get, I recommend getting very familiar and comfortable with GSAK and the accompanying macros database. 2000 caches maybe enough to get you around your area, but if you want to have real freedom to cache wherever, whenever, you will want to carry a lot more data. The GSAK macro is the only way to do that. Regarding your two questions: The Oregon has a compass screen (I can't imagine any ourdoor GPS not having this). You can navigate with a map or a compass. I've never seen a recreational GPS that didn't have these features. As for navigating to a manually entered waypoint, I am certain that the Colorado also has this. It is the same as the Oregon, just with a different interface (wheel vs. touchscreen). I do multi caches and field data input all the time with the Oregon. For example, I get a text message on my cell phone that a new cache has been published in my area, and by sending the GC code to 41411 via SMS, I get the coordinates, and put them in my Oregon, and off I go to (hopefully) another FTF. I assume from your post that this is what you were asking. I have tinkered a bit with the Colorado, and while data entry is more cumbersome with the CO than with the OR, I know you can do the same with it.

Just wanted to watch this topic. I used the iQue 3600 for a while, but the battery life was iffy, and losing all the caches when the battery ran out was unacceptable. It's been in my glove box for two years now...collecting dust.

If you can get an Oregon (300 or 400) for less than $400, it might be worth the investment. I have had mine since January, and absolutely love it. DO get rechargeable batteries tho, and keep a set handy. It devours Alkalines with the perpetually necessary backlight, much better with NiMh rechargeables. That said, any GPS that accepts Pocket Queries for paperless geocaching is going to be very nice in the field. Also, I strongly advise getting acquainted with GSAK and the Custom POI macros. This allows you to load a virtually unlimited number of caches into your Oregon/Nuvi/Csx Unit, or any GPS that uses a micro SD data card. I have 20000+ in my Oregon and Nuvi right now. IF you only have $150 to spend, but want to go paperless, get one of the lower end Nuvi units. As far as I know, they will all accept Custom POI files, and while they are not the best for caching (they do not have a pointer/compass screen) they are still usable (Just use the "where am I" screen and follow the coordinates when you get close. The advantage of the Nuvi is that you can see the entire cache description, and it includes navigation maps. You can easily pay $100 just for CityNavigator to load into your Oregon/CSx/Colorado/Dakota GPS, and the Nuvi is just $150 (or less). It's ALSO very nice to have TWO units going...one to show you the turns/roads, and one to show you the terrain/TOPO maps. Personally, I like to have three going, so I can navigate to an ultimate destination, as well as to any caches along the way without having to keep re-setting the GPS. But I'm a little over the top. Oh..and Wherigo is a game you play with certain GPSs that is like a "guided tour" that someone sets up. Think of it like a "virtual multicache." Very fun.

Well, I have Verizon, so the email address to send a message to my phone number is (MYPHONENUMBER)@vtext.com. Or you can use (MYPHONENUMBER)@vzwpix.com (The VZWpix.com option allows you to receive more data. The alerts DO NOT include the coordinates, however, so you need to send a text message to 41411 with the following in it: geoc ?GCXXXX. That will send the coordinates back to your phone. Great for getting those FTFs. Also, you need to authenticate your cell phone number with GC.com. Look in your account for directions. Hope that helps. Additionally, you can use the following: geoc @GCXXXX to LOG a find (puts it in your fieldnotes) geoc XGCXXXX to LOG a DNF (did not find) geoc !GCXXXX to request the hint for the cache, if any available. If you wish to add anything to your log (travel bugs, comments, whatever, you can also add those after the GCXXXX and it will show up in your fieldnotes as well. Great tool, I use this ALL the time. I have an Oregon, but I prefer this, since it saves me having to plug the GPS in and upload the file.

I think the purpose of DNF is really more to alert the CO that there may be a problem with the cache. It's not really a question of "honor" to log a DNF, I mean, who cares if you didn't find it? I usually post a DNF if I want to rant about what a lousy cache I think it was, or to warn other cachers that the bison tube in the Russian Olive grove is a total waste of time and blood. Generally speaking, I only log a DNF if I am reasonably sure the cache is missing.

Since I started in 2001, I have "lost the thrill" several times, and I always come back. If you get tired of it, quit for a while. I suspect you'll return, as I have.

When I set up my GC.com/Twitter/Facebook accounts to show the caches I have found as I find them, I found that I was getting a lot of texts as I was out caching. It's cool, because every cache hunt has the potential to become a discussion thread on my facebook/twitter page. I find one cache...and as soon as I post the Fieldnote, I start getting replied via facebook from my facebook friends..then before long we might be posting comments about things. It has certainly enriched my own caching experience.

I've done this. Usually if I am only doing 10 caches or so in a stretch, I will write something for each one. If I do something like, say, 200+, there is no way I'm ever going to even remember all of them, so copy/paste is really the best I can do. It has its place. That said, a LOT of urban micros really don't warrant more than "found it, thanks" for a log. I try to put as much into my log as they did into the cache. Seems reasonable.

I don't do a lot of multi caches, but it's mostly because the last few times I have tried them, I have come across missing stages. If you do something like this, it's helpful to make it known. You kind of have to promote them as "something special" and get some cachers out there doing it, then talking about it. It's a lot of fun to own a unique hide, because of the comments and feedback you get from finders, but you sometimes wait a long time between visits. If you want to spread them out over some distance, then you might even want to set up your own webpage to engage seekers a little more, if you have that expertise. I have seen some very cool adventures done this way.

I can completely understand the frustration here. I went on something of a crusade a few years back to try to limit the number of micro caches being placed, but it went nowhere, of course. Now we see the very foreseeable results of the rampant micro-caching. My advice to new cachers (most of whom I have taken out on cache hunts myself, rather than expecting them to figure it all out on their own) has always been to look for the LARGER ones. If I am with them, I can usually find a micro, and usually they are impressed both that I was able to find it, and with the clever hide. However, a cache not found it just plain frustrating, whether you have no finds, ten finds, or 10,000 finds. That said, all I hear from the OPer is the same frustration I have felt myself many times. What I hear from most of the rude respondents is defensiveness of our hobby. There is no call for this. Enough on that. I definitely echo the advice that has been given: Stick to the larger hides until you feel comfortable looking for more difficult ones. There is a lot more to geocaching than just knowing how to use a GPS. If you are good at finding them, you will have a lot more success even WITHOUT a GPS if you are savvy at finding the various types of hides people come up with. That can only come with experience. There are hundreds of different types of hides, and some of them you will never think of yourself. Most of the time I have only learned of these after calling someone else who had found the cache before me, and having them tell me where to look. It's not quite as fun as finding it yourself, but I still get a good chuckle. I really hope your experience, and this forum, has not completely turned you off to this. The fact that you thought enough of the concept to give it a go on your own tells me that you have the constitution of a great player, and we need more of those. I was fortunate enough that my first hunt was a rather large ammo box, and was not nearly as hard to find as your first one was. I think there was only one micro in my state at that time, and truly, I am not sure that if my first find had been a micro, if I would have caught on to it the way I did. Feel free to email me directly, or through the site, if you would like other ideas. I am always happy to help. Happy caching, bunkerdave jeepnski@gmail.com

I have a few GPS units, and Oregon 400T and a 60Csx. I am considering picking up an iPhone just because I would really like having the satellite maps of the areas I go to. From the sounds of things, the iPhone does a really nice job with that. I can get the iPhone for $150 through my work, but my only reservation is that I am with Verizon service now, and have heard unfavorable reports regarding the ATT coverage. So, there's that. I had hoped that one of the Verizon handsets would be able to do the satellite maps as well as the iPhone, but that is not the case, at least not yet. I also would like to be able to find caches whenever and wherever I go. I already have about 20k caches for my region loaded in both my 60CSx and my Oregon, but the data has to be downloaded. I think I would like the iPhone GC app just to be able to pull up the live cache data, on site. I am curious about how good a GPS the 3G model is, tho. I can't imagine it's as good as the 60CSx reception-wise, but there is a lot to be said for having the entire cache page handy.

I have a Triton, and a CSx, and an Oregon. I've been using the Oregon for about a month now, and LOVE LOVE LOVE it. I also loved my CSx, and still do, for many things. The Triton...well...not so much. The main issues being that it doesn't hold anywhere near as many caches as I want to carry, and the buttons SUCK. I do enjoy all the extras (It's a 2000) so it plays/shoots videos, photos, voicenotes, etc. It has a cool touch screen, and I have satellite maps in it. I have the sweet cache pages in it too. It does a lot of great stuff, but those pesky buttons really slow me down. It's also not a very fast processor. A lag every time I press a button really gets to be a pain after a while. I know a lot of folks who use a CSx with an Ipod...and that sounds pretty cool. If you really want to just have ONE device tho, I recommend the Oregon. Most of the extras on the Triton 2000 are pretty irrelevant to caching. The Oregon really has everything you'd ever need, and nothing you are going to miss. I do like having the satellite maps in the triton, however, and there are times when I really would miss them.

I would echo BlueDamsel. She actually inquired with me as to which unit she should keep, and I pretty much told her just what she's now discovered for herself. The Oregon is the best GPS for Geocaching, hands down. For pretty much everything else (where you don't need a lot of information about Geocaches) get the CSx. YOu can, however do just about everything with the Oregon that you can with the CSx. One thing that I noticed the other day that might sway some: With the custom POIs in the CSx, I can do a filter by cache type. Then, using the "nearest containing" search I can further narrow it down by other criteria, such as container size. I took a friend out caching the other day with her kids, and wanted to only take them to REGULAR sized caches for the first few finds, and used the CSx to find those. This is another functionality that the Oregon cannot do. It is also rather cumbersome to search near a map point on the Oregon. You have to create a waypoint to do this, rather than just "searching near pointer" like the CSx does. Just a couple more things that might help. I still carry both units, at all times. I do use the Oregon 99% of the time, however, and the CSx is mostly for those sorting functions, and for doing multi/offsets and such. I just am more comfortable with how it does things, for now.

I have the Oregon, and I agree with you (for the most part). I went "from" a 60CSx to a 400T, and there are a few things that I wish the Oregon did. I use (still) the Custom POIs in the CSx because it allows me to search and filter caches by type, and by search for "nearest containing" can even filter the caches IN the GPS according to cache size, so I am able to do additional filtering in the field. The Oregon can't do this with the caches that are loaded, but it CAN do it with the Custom POIs. Also, there is the question of waypoint averaging. CSx does it, Oregon doesn't. Not a huge issue, but I am a stickler about averaging coordinates when a cache is placed. I routinely use three or more units when placing a cache, so that's important to me. The last thing I wish the Oregon had is a screen like the 60 series units have that have a button to take me to the hint, the description, and the compass. It's a PAIN to go from the compass screen to the hint or description pages while on a hunt. I am sure this is something that will come, but no telling when. The CSx is the more robust, more powerful unit for all around caching. If I were only to have ONE, it would be the CSx. The Oregon is my primary caching GPS tho, and when I need the more advanced features that only the CSx provides, it is always handy. Love them both.

Looks like I missed this one...but I did get my Oregon 400T for $217. Already have a CSx, but I paid a LOT more than $160 for it. Welcome to the club, new CSx-ers. Time to take off the training wheels.

That sounds like a good call to me. There is NO difference between the 300 and the 400T, other than internal memory capacity and the Topo maps. I am not sure if the 300 does shaded relief, which I admit is mostly cosmetic, but looks REALLY cool. Not sure it's worth an extra 100 bones tho. I have had my 400T for a month, and have found well over 100 caches with it now. While the CSx is a real workhorse and still sees some good use (mostly because after 4 years with the 60 series, I am still more comfortable with how it does the more advanced functions than I am with the same features of the Oregon (I finally had to use the Oregon to do a projection on Saturday for a multi cache, and it was actually VERY slick for it). It's all about the learning curve, really. The CSx with custom POIs is all the GPS anyone will ever really *NEED* but the Oregon with paperless caching is really REALLY sweeeeet. It's even made GSAK obsolete for me, since I have wireless internet on my laptop...I can instantly get any data I want in my Oregon in less than 5 minutes, straight from GC.com. Why mess with updating GSAK? I just let GC.com do it for me. I hope you love it....get the topos, and a Micro SD (I got an 8GB on ebay for $40) and you will have all the 400T offers, and more. (minus, I suspect, the shaded relief) Happy caching!

I recently got a 400T, and am very happy with it. However, I am also very impressed with the mapping capabilities of the PN-40. It would surely be a nice unit to have along, just with those satellite photos. I have wireless internet on my laptop which I use often to access Google Earth while on the road, but I can't take it with me on longer ventures from the Jeep. That said, I have never had a lot of problem GETTING to the cache site...the thing that I have said MANY times is that I wished I had more cache information, and the Oregon delivers just that. It is always fun to be able to see the area I am in, but to me, it's much more important to know if the last few people to hunt for the cache were successful, and to have access to any notes or hints they might have posted in their log. That said...I will have to check out the PN-40 and see if I might not want to add that to my arsenal. Could be fun. What I really hope will happen is that Delorme will give Garmin enough of a run for its money with this delightful functionality that Garmin will integrate that kind of flexibility in its own units. Ain't capitalism great?

I thought the same as Grasscatcher, and to an extent, still do. That said, I've have my Oregon 400T for a few weeks now, and have migrated almost exclusively to it for caching. My 60CSx is never far away, however. To me, the real high point of caching is finding new places, and having all the cache information from GC.com makes that a richer experience. The CSx can't give me that, in a single device. However, the CSx *IS* a "better" GPS unit, and if I were only to have ONE, it would be the CSx, hands down. The only real value of the 400T over the CSx is its ability to display all that cache information, for everything else, the CSx is better. Oh..and the maps are prettier on the 400. Shaded relief is B-E-A-utiful! I have never enjoyed caching more than I do now, and I credit the 400T with that. Even those lame urban nanos can be interesting to me now, because I know why the spot was interesting to the person who placed the cache....or not.

For what it's worth, I've had 5 GPS units, including a new Oregon 400T, two Garmin 60 series, a Magellan (my first) and a Garmin iQue. If I could only have one, it would be the Garmin 60CSx, especially for all the stuff you are talking about. I love the Oregon, but the CSx is THE workhorse and the most versatile GPS out there, bar none. At least that's my two cents. You can also get a CSx for well under $300 these days. Check eBay for deals on the CNNA maps, and you can get all the Topos you will ever need for free online. Happy hunting!

This is interesting.... Here in Utah, we recently opened a rather long and useful stretch of highway called the "Legacy Parkway" that I am using quite often. I would love to add this road to my navigation maps. Is this something I could do with this map editor, and have my GPS route me using this added segment?

I set everything up last night, and did a test file of about 700 POIs in my new Oregon 400T. That worked well. Then I generated a file of about 18000 POIs, and tried to load that. After a few minutes of "working", it just stopped, and went to a "not responding" error message. Is there some limit to how many POIs I can load, or is there something that I am doing wrong? I have run over 30000 into my 60Csx, but I understand that that is a much smaller file, since it doesn't include the entire cache page. Very nice tool, Pilotsnipes. I can tell you put a lot of work into this. Other than crashing on the large file, it works very well in the 400T.

Switch to spanner mode and it should work. Bingo! Thanks! That will save me having to change out the rechargeables quite so often..and probably make them last longer. I heard you can load the Custom POIs in the Oregon, like you can with the CSx. Anyone know how this is done? The only macro I have found for GSAK so far just loads them in as geocaches, but I think it's limited to 2000.

Man...I hope I don't have THAT problem!