Jump to content

Quest/quest2 Vs. 60/76cx For Cyclist?


Recommended Posts

Greetings,

 

I am looking into options for a GPSr for my father to use. He does a lot of bicycle riding, but isn't particularly interested in hiking. He didn't really seem interested in the idea of geocaching, either, when I mentioned it to him. I have been thinking about either one of the Quest models, or a 60/76Cx. I own a 76CSx myself, that I use for hiking, but have never seen a real live Quest (2) unit.

 

From the Garmin website and the Quest manual (same manual covers both the Quest and the Quest 2), it looks like the main difference between the two Quest units is that the Quest 2 has additional voice languages, and that it has its City Select NT map in ROM (sort of like an enhanced 'basemap'), leaving its memory free for other maps (e.g., Topos). The base Quest model only has a regular basemap in ROM, so its memory must be used to load all detailed maps. With my copy of City Navigator North America v8, I have confirmed that the area where he lives and a fair bit of the surrounding states will fit within the Quest's 115MB of internal memory. I don't have Garmin's Topo maps, though, to check how much they would take up, but I believe it should fit as he doesn't really need all of the surrouding states loaded in detail from City Navigator. To start with, he probably won't even need the Topo maps -- Illinois is pretty flat after all.

 

My thinking on the Quests is that they have a larger screen, and it is landscape oriented, making the maps perhaps nicer to use while riding his bike than a 60/76Cx would be. The 20 hour lifetime of the internal rechargable battery will be more than sufficient, too. Although it looks like I'd have to get the AC charger accessory for it, as the web/manual indicates it only comes with a car charger. I would also get the bicycle mount accessory for it as well, of course. The car mount it comes with would be useful as well in case he wants to use the unit in the car when driving to a new bike trail, or going on a road trip.

 

Does either of the Quest units have the SiRF III chipset, or are they an older chipset? I have been very impressed with the receiption of my 76CSx, and some of the bike trails he rides are under heavy tree cover. From the manual, it looks like the Quest line is pretty similar if functionality as a basic GPSr, although I didn't see an option in the manual for it to average waypoint readings when marking a location. Has this averaging feature been left out on the Quest series, or is it something that a later firmware update added? Do the updated Quest firmwares also support the 60/76 features such as 'act as a USB mass storage device" and allow tracks to be recorded to memory for long detailed tracks?

 

In general, can anyone who uses GPS for cycling give any pros/cons to the Quest series vs. a 60/76Cx? Things I am overlooking that a cyclist would find important. (The cadence sensor stuff available for the sport training GPSr models is not of interest to my father, he rides recreationally.) He likes the idea of being able to find nearyby resturants, bicycle shops (in event of a flat while out riding, etc) and the 'Find Nearest' in general. He also likes the idea of the moving map, so he doesn't have to cary around paper maps and stop periodically to check them when riding through unfamiliar areas. The auto-route support I think will also be helpful to him in this regard as well. And finally, when he's riding through bike paths in a forest preserve/etc and has a problem, he can always relay his exact coordinates to someone by phone in an emergency.

 

Thanks for any insight! :grin:

Link to comment

I have the Garmin Quest and 60Csx. I don't ride a bike, but I have used the Quest for 1,000's of miles on my motorcycle and car. The Quest would more than meet his needs.

 

He can keep up with tracks off road and there is a "where am I?" feature. It is great gps for the car too.

 

Cindy

Link to comment
I have the Garmin Quest and 60Csx. I don't ride a bike, but I have used the Quest for 1,000's of miles on my motorcycle and car. The Quest would more than meet his needs.

 

He can keep up with tracks off road and there is a "where am I?" feature. It is great gps for the car too.

 

Cindy

 

I've used both on a push-bike (and motorbike and stuff anyway) and I agree with the above, the push-bike mount is cheep and it works etc.

In fact I'd suggest to try to find a Quest-1. There is just no point in spending that much on a top of the line model when you really can't expect to cover more ground than you can stored in the Quest-1, on a push-bike... unless you're going for something pretty extreme!!

I'd'v thought that most enthusiastic cyclists can get all their maps in the Q1, the 2nd had market seems lively right now and there are some 'end of line' ones around.

 

p.s.: @Cindy & Bubb...

Americans riding BMWs - cool!! Nice pic.

regards.

Edited by kyot
Link to comment

Take a look at the physical size of the units and his handlebars. I've got the VistaC, and it's a bit big but workable on the handlebars. I'd be a bit less thrilled about any of the larger units. Auto-routing is nice on the bike, but I don't find myself really missing voice prompting (whereas if I drive with the VistaC I can see how it would be nice). I bought this mostly for biking, and I've been very happy with it. I do know someone who runs the original Quest and is also happy with it, but he runs a real techno-shop on his handlebars, whereas I like a nice clean look. (If I'm just recording tracks and not routing, I actually just put the GPSr in a jersey pocket most of the time).

Keith

Link to comment

Three votes in a row for the Quest. The Q1 includes almost everything needed, including software, for under $350 the last time I looked. That also includes a 110v power charger. I think the only extra thing needed is a bike mount (I'd recommend the RAM system only because it works so well; I don't know anything about the Garmin mount although I have read of a problem of some sort with it).

 

The Quest does waypoint averaging (although it's buried in the menu system a bit...this is a helpful site). I did a POI search for "bic" and got a good list of the nearest bicycle shops. It has a setting to calculate routes for bicycles (i.e., avoid interstates and other skeery roads). In general, I think you would find the Quest to have a better feature set for what you are describing.

 

Here is a detailed review of the Quest/Q2. It includes a description of the Garmin motorcycle mount design flaw (I don't know if that applies to the bike mount, or even if they are the same thing or different).

 

My one crit/hesitation about the Quest for your described application is that I have not found it to be good for reception under tree cover. I use it all for road use, and I often find it will lose lock if driving under tree-covered back roads or trails. This is not usually a problem, as the road tells me where to go and eventually I get to enough of an opening to get a position fix. The 60/76 models would do better in this regard, but I think the Quest wins on all other counts.

Link to comment
Three votes in a row for the Quest. The Q1 includes almost everything needed, including software, for under $350 the last time I looked. That also includes a 110v power charger. I think the only extra thing needed is a bike mount (I'd recommend the RAM system only because it works so well; I don't know anything about the Garmin mount although I have read of a problem of some sort with it).

RAM mount for cycling (as in push-bike)? The Garmin handle bar mount is probably sufficient - unless the dad has a really stiff neck!

 

Sure, the precision and 'under tree cover' isn't as good on the Quests as the new boxes - but I'm pretty sure it's good enough for cycling...

... and unlike the GPSMAP60SCx (current s/w release) you can down load proper routes with directions to the Quest, which it will remember and replay. Might be important for a cyclist where avoiding a hill is more important that fast roads / shortest distance.

Link to comment
Three votes in a row for the Quest. The Q1 includes almost everything needed, including software, for under $350 the last time I looked. That also includes a 110v power charger. I think the only extra thing needed is a bike mount (I'd recommend the RAM system only because it works so well; I don't know anything about the Garmin mount although I have read of a problem of some sort with it).

RAM mount for cycling (as in push-bike)? The Garmin handle bar mount is probably sufficient - unless the dad has a really stiff neck!

 

Sure, the precision and 'under tree cover' isn't as good on the Quests as the new boxes - but I'm pretty sure it's good enough for cycling...

... and unlike the GPSMAP60SCx (current s/w release) you can down load proper routes with directions to the Quest, which it will remember and replay. Might be important for a cyclist where avoiding a hill is more important that fast roads / shortest distance.

 

I've thought about the RAM mounts for the bicycle - I would like improved vibration resistance over the Garmin mounts. However, I don't like the long arm of the mount (too bulky for my tastes on the handlebars), nor am I wild about the rail mount itself. It's a single narrow steel clamp I think could be problematic on a light bicycle handlebar - I would worry about cracks or other issues with the lightweight aluminum and carbon fiber handlebars.

 

As far as the Quest and routing goes - are you saying that the Quest does not recalculate from Mapsource calculated routes? If true, I wasn't aware of that. I have heard that they have a few additional routing features that the 60csx and other models don't have. However, IME, good bicycle routes on a GPS require lots of via points, regardless of whether calculated in Mapsource or on the GPS itself, and also a lot of information about what the rider is looking for in a route which is well beyond what any device can deliver automatically.

 

Keith

Link to comment

As far as the Quest and routing goes - are you saying that the Quest does not recalculate from Mapsource calculated routes? If true, I wasn't aware of that. I have heard that they have a few additional routing features that the 60csx and other models don't have. However, IME, good bicycle routes on a GPS require lots of via points, regardless of whether calculated in Mapsource or on the GPS itself, and also a lot of information about what the rider is looking for in a route which is well beyond what any device can deliver automatically.

Agreed. Even for the less exacting demands of automobile routing, the Quest does what I consider good, but not excellent routing on its own.

 

You can create via points for route shaping on the Quest itself, but it's a bit laborious to do a few per route abd downright cumbersome to do a bunch. It's a snap to create a route with multiple via points in MapSource, and the route transfers intact to the Quest. If I understand what you are asking, this contrasts with how Magellan's MapSend DirectRoute worked, where you could create a convoluted route on the PC but only the start and finish would transfer to the GPS, which then created a new route on the fly when activated (dropping all the via point data).

 

BTW, I've been posting a link to a good Quest review I only came across recently.

Link to comment

Does either of the Quest units have the SiRF III chipset, or are they an older chipset?

 

Older, see my thread here.

 

I have a feeling that it may be updated soon to match other units update (SiRF and removable media) but how soon it is is unknown. It may be next month like just before Christmas.

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...