Gpsmap 60 Vs Explorist Under Tree Cover

[+paulamur]

How does the GPSMAP 60 compare to an Explorist when being used under tree cover? I have an Explorist 200 it is a good unit, except I'm tired of keying in coords. So I'm wanting to upgrade to one with computer connectivity. Was thinking about an Explorist 210, but I see a lot of positive comments about the 60 series on this forum.

 

The only thing that makes me shy away from Garmin is that I hear they lose signals under tree cover much quicker than a Magellan unit. The main use of this would be for Geocaching, and most of the time I'm under some kind of tree cover when I'm caching. Any comments on this topic?

[+Renegade Knight]

Comparing a Sport Track Pro with a GPS V they were the same for reception under tree cover.

 

The Sport Track was able to cope with tree cover better. What that means is that you bounce around less due to the same averaging that caused the boomerang effect. The V would have me wander around more than the pro.

 

I've heard the explorists don't seem to have the boomerang effect the pro's did. I don't know if that means you wander around more under the tree cover.

 

What I can tell you is that Night Stalker upgraded from a pro toa 60CS and he did like the way his Magellan worked under the trees better than he does the newer 60CS. He wouldn't go back though.

[+paulamur]

My Explorist does bounce around quite a bit. The other day I was out caching and it had me going up to 50' away from the cache until it would settle down and then it would get me closer. Twice it took me about 60' past the cache then brought me back. I know there is no perfect GPSr, I just don't want to get one that I get mad at and want to though into the nearest bush.

[+bear&fox]

Here's my experience with Magellan:

 

I had the Magellan Sportrak. It was quick to find a WAAS lock (under 2 minutes), and seemed to almost always remain locked, unless I was under heavy foliage cover. What I did notice though was that most of the time my coords were a couple of meters off the posted coords of caches. And the tracks were not quite as crisp as one would expect from a WAAS lock - so you walk/drive the same route out and back, and the track doesn't match. Then the "averaging" feature seemed to average itself into a corner. Sometimes I'd get a feeling it was off, switch the unit off and back on again, and found different coords once it had received a lock. I just don't believe in the "averaging" feature.

 

So I bought a Garmin GPS 60. It doesn't tell me when it gets a WAAS lock, and the overall EPE doesn't seem to be as accurate as the Magellan claimed (WAAS=/<3m). But the tracks are crisp and far more consistent. More caches appear to have accurate coords (most folks around here use Garmin as well) and it never averages itself into a corner. All in all, the Garmin does give me better service. The only downside is that I doubt that the GPS 60 will handle water as well as the Sportrak did (with all the ports at the back, and their scant covers).

 

My opinion: don't like position averaging, prefer GPS 60's consistency.

 

Bear

[+geognerd]

Borrowed a co-workers GPSmap 60 and compared it head-to-head with my eXplorist 100 at one cache. At the cache, the eXplorist showed me as being closer to the cache (6ft) than the GPSmap 60 did (14ft), but I would've found the cache with either one. Then I tried driving home with the GPSmap 60 (not using the routing tho) and as I was driving beneath tree cover, the thing gave the alert about losing signal. Never would've happened with the eXplorist. Then I tried a cache with the GPSmap 60 alone with tree cover. It sent me all over, saying I was at ground zero twice. Found the cache the third time I zeroed out. Turned out the previous 2 times I zeroed out I was about 30ft away, which doesn't sound bad, but with the heat and bushwhacking I didn't appreciate being led on those wild goose chases. As for boomeranging the eXplorist, I've only had it happen to me once during a year of use. The eXplorist got a lock and provided coordinates faster, but they had high error. Once GPSmap 60 started providing coords, they had a lower error. But while it took only about 5 mins for the eXplorist 100 to get WAAS, the GPSmap 60 took about 20 mins. Just my isolated experiences.