Base Map Comparison Garmin Vs Magellan

[+hogrod]

i have owned a few magellan gps and thought the base map was quite alright(two meridian golds & compared a explorist base map). i just bought a legend C and i am pretty disapointed with the base map. it shows 1/3 less hwys and even just stops some roads(major us hwys) where they intersect with others. guess this is a nice way to make people buy the detail map. at least magellan base map has all major hwys and some non major..... and if it shows a road it shows the whole length...... anyone else find the garmin base map sucks?

[+JohnnyVegas]

Most base maps are going to very limited, Buying a GPS based on the Base map is not a very good way to make a selection.

[+RJFerret]

It's not just a Garmin vs. Magellan thing, how much memory is dedicated to those base maps? (It varies by model...)

 

I know the amount of basemap memory in the 76c series (13mb?) is greater than the 60c (8mb?)) series and you can find screenshot comparisons of the level of detail. It seems the LegendC might also be 8mb basemap? (assuming 32 total - 24 for detailed maps = 8)

 

I gotta' say from CT to NY, NJ, DE, MD, VA, NC, TN, AL, KY, OH, WV, PA and back a month ago the basemap in my 60cs was fabulous!

 

There was only one spot in the NE corner of AL where the county route didn't align exactly w/sat reception. Everything else was flawless.

 

At home, there's only a couple highways near me anyway so detail maps are a must regardless--I just considered it part of the purchase price. Otherwise it's like buying a Ferrarri and filling it with low-octane gas--that's wasting most of the capability you invested in!

 

Enjoy,

 

Randy

[+IVxIV]

...another Garmin Vs Magellan (yawn)

 

Check out the basemap detail on the Lowrance iFinder GO2:

 

 

And this little entry-level GPSr cost only $86!! => here <=

 

How much do the Garmins/Magellans cost?

 

If you want to escalate the discussion to "best available maps".. well, the Lowrance TOPO's are amongst best in the consumer industry

[robertlipe]

I agree with all the answers above, but do have a little bit to add.

 

One big advantage that Garmin's basemap has is that it's routable; in none of the handheld Magellans is that the case. So if you're using it for street routing on a unit with limited memory and will be on a trip that's mainly interstates &state highways, Garmin's basemap could be a deciding factor.

 

 

Oh, and as soon as iFinder GO2 gets waypoint xfer, it may start getting more respect here than explorist [123]00 or Geko 100, until then this crowd won't much dig 'em.)

[+hogrod]

I love my legend C & I also love my meridian gold. I am in no way trying to favor one GPS over the other i am just trying to inform people of there flaws. i know differant gps have differant size base maps, but i was just wondering if others had noticed any differances like i had. I agree that the auto routing the base map on the legend C is nice, but it is very limited.

on the legend C, one US hwy in my area is just cut off where another less major road shoots off. so when i auto route in that direction it takes me off main hwy and up a county Rd. to the next major hwy to a non existent exit (in real life there is a over pass there). if the whole US hwy would have been shown, i would have had no problems. most of the time auto routing the base map is great, but there are a few instances where it isn't that great. so i decided to get the detail map.

 

I had the detail maps on my meridian, though it had all major roads and allot of county rds on the base map.... this is my first garmin and was just shocked at how limited the base map is in comparison. even though the base map on the meridian didnt show all roads(who could expect it to) you had enough info to to travel from place to place and almost alway be on a road, not out in free space.

 

ALSO: comparing base maps is good because at first most people don't have to money to throw down for software too. both brands of gps i have had, i started out with just base maps. I'm sure others are the same way..... heck i bet some people never buy the detail maps.

Edited August 12, 2005 by hogrod

[peter]

I love my legend C & I also love my meridian gold. I am in no way trying to favor one GPS over the other i am just trying to inform people of there flaws.

But titling the thread in terms of "Garmin vs. Magellan" is misleading since the basemap depends on which particular model is being compared. You compared the Meridian Gold to the LegendC and found the Gold's basemap to be more detailed. But someone who compared the regular (b&w) Legend to the basic Meridian (now disc.) would find the Legend's basemap to be superior.

 

For some reason Garmin uses a less detailed (8MB) basemap in their 60 series and the LegendC/VistaC than they do in their other mapping models. Even their old III+ had a more detailed basemap (albeit not routable) than the 60/LegendC/VistaC models.

[+northernpenguin]

In Canada the Garmin basemap is a better product than the Magellan basemap, unless you happen to be driving a train. There is very minimal highway coverage on my eXplorist 600 at all. I actually miss the basemap on my old eTrex compared to this thing. Now the detail map on the other hand, Magellan blows Garmin clear out of the water in Southern Ontario.

[+briansnat]

...another Garmin Vs Magellan  (yawn)

 

Check out the basemap detail on the Lowrance iFinder GO2:

 

 

And this little entry-level GPSr cost only $86!! => here <=

 

How much do the Garmins/Magellans cost?

 

If you want to escalate the discussion to "best available maps".. well, the Lowrance TOPO's are amongst best in the consumer industry

The Go2's base map doesn't have close to the detail of Garmin's base map. I compared them side by side. The Go2 was missing many major roadways that appeared on Garmin's base map. Your photo is zoomed waaaaay out. Any base map will look good from that zoom level. Zoom it in a little and you get this (note this is is in the middle of a metro area, not the Adirondacks):

 

Edited August 13, 2005 by briansnat

[+IVxIV]

Well the GO2 only cost $86, and for that I feel "any" amount of basemap detail is a bonus And in that photo the scale was at 30 miles, seems reasonable to me.

 

You know what would be a great "tie breaker" is if someone has available a Garmin, Magellan, and Lowrance GPS. IF they could snap a photo of all of them displaying the same location at the same scale it would be an interesting comparison. BASE MAPS ONLY!! I know the result could be skewed by scrolling to an area that one particular model has better coverage than the other(s), but still it would be an interesting comparison.

[+apersson850]

Older Garmin models often have more detailed basemaps.

 

If you look at the basemap of an eTrex Vista and the new GPSMAP 76CS, you'll find that the level of detail is equivalent. The Vista's basemap is 8 MB, but the same map requires 13 MB in the 76CS.

That's due to the added routing information in the 76CS.

 

In the new Vista C, Garmin has taken the option of reducing the level of detail, in order to have space for routing information for the remaining roads. Still 8 MB, but autorouting on real major roads only. This was to allow the user access to 24 MB, for detailed maps.

The old GPS V took another approach. That was a 32 MB model too, but it still had the 13 MB basemap, thus giving only 19 MB to the user.

 

So for the 32 MB and 64 MB versions, you get 8 MB basemaps, while units with 128 MB (76CS, US Quest) or 256 MB (European Quest) have 13 MB basemaps.

 

There are more models to choose from, but this is an example.

[+wickedsprint]

Well the GO2 only cost $86, and for that I feel "any" amount of basemap detail is a bonus And in that photo the scale was at 30 miles, seems reasonable to me.

 

A Garmin GPS V can be had for 220 bucks..BUT it comes with City select software worth about 120 dollars, so essentially the GPS V is around a 100 bucks... with a far superior basemap..autorouting..fully waterproof as well as a much better interface witht he computer. Zoomed at 30 miles is kind of misleading, all basemaps will look good, take a rand mcnally road atlas..witht he large pages..the Garmin V has the exact same detail as these pages.

[peter]

A Garmin GPS V can be had for 220 bucks..BUT it comes with City select software worth about 120 dollars, so essentially the GPS V is around a 100 bucks... with a far superior basemap.

The GPS V vs. GO2 comparison illustrates another problem in comparing basemaps. The GPS V allots only 13 Mb to the basemap and some of that is auto-routing data so it's equivalent to about 8 MB without the routing. The GO2 claims to have 64 MB of memory for its map, yet comparing road detail of the two shows many roads on the GPS V basemap that don't appear on the GO2. OTOH, the GO2 shows rivers and better shoreline details than the GPS V and it includes NAVAID (bouys/markers/lights) data that's not included on the V. So for many marine applications the GO2 basemap would be considered superior whereas for land navigation I'd prefer the basemap of the GPS V.