Gamin Vista CX vs. Magellan 500 Direct Comparison

[Isaiah 40:31]

Being completely new to GPSrx's I had absolutely no clue what I was buying, so I initially bought a Magellan Explorist 500LE. After playing with it for a day or two, I THEN found this forum and saw on here that people preferred the Garmin products; I was also told by a sales guy that the GARMIN had more merits, as well. Garmin/Magellan? I had no clue prior to my purchase that there was any difference between the two, so this comparison is written by someone who is an absolute newbie with no prior experience and no prior biasis. I have seen a lot of banter back and for as to which is better, hopefully this perspective will help.

 

Before we begin some things need to be made clear: first of all, the Vista CX has a barometric altimeter and an electronic compass, whereas the 500 does not. Secondly there is a price difference. HOWEVER, if we can discuss this in terms of the Garmin model not having the barometric altimeter and electronic compass, then the price difference only becomes about $30 - 40 dollars, tops. Finally, what is the LE? Some may not be familiar with how this "Limited Edition" model compares to a normal 500. Simply put the only difference is that there is this plastic piece you insert into the battery compartment to allow it to accept triple 'A' batteries.

 

These observations are from the standpoint of a complete newbie, so please keep that in mind; I may not know exactly what I'm talking about, due to my inexperience, but it is simply MY impressions based on MY experience. On with the comparison:

 

Let's start with the batteries: I was hesitant in buying the 500LE because it would take a semi-proprietary battery (see the thread on using the Motorola batteries). BUT WAIT! It's got this nifty little adapter for using three AAA's, well that's better, isn't it? Hmm, well, they're still triple 'A's, not double 'A's so what will this mean to me? First of all, triple A's are much more expensive to purchase than double 'A's, also, I don't have any because virtually everything else I own uses double 'A's. As it should be (my opinion), most products operate on AA batteries. They're easy to find in almost any kind (Alkaline, NiCd, NiMh, etc., etc.) are very prolific (not to mention the huge range of capacities that can be had in AA format), and so are the chargers for them; this means any product powered by AA's is going to be cheaper to run than, certainly, AAA's, but also a cheaper initial start up cost than buying one of the proprietary batteries. The Garmin product uses two double 'A's, ok, so no extra cost for batteries. Oh, look at that, now the price has just about become identical between the two since I don't have to buy special batteries.

 

BATTERY LIFE: Ok, what about battery life, though? I powered the 500 with three (ugh, why must they use an odd number? charging hassles, for sure) 800mAh NiMh Triple 'A's while in the Garmin I used TWO 2500mAh Double 'A's. With the 500 I charged the AAA's two days prior and got about 20 - 30 minutes of GPS use out of the batteries with the backlight on high, you can actually WATCH the power meter draining. With the proprietary battery (which is 1300 Ah from Magellan) guys are getting 8 hours with the backlight on brightest. The Garmin got 10 hours, YES TEN hours on two 2500 mAh NiMh's with the backight at it's brightest setting (during the day - the night screen is somewhat dimmer. Well, that is to say there are more darker graphics, so my assumption is that darker graphics won't consume as much power). So, if I go away for the weekend, I'll need no more than 3 pairs of Double A's with the Garmin (about 20 bucks worth of batteries). But if I use the Explorist I'm going to either need far too many AAA's to count (and I'll have to be very mindful to dim it whenever I'm not looking at it) or I'll need nearly a hundred dollars in proprietary batteries (that I'll have to charge one at a time unless I spend the money on yet another proprietary charging system).

 

One more thing, the Magellan comes with a USB chord that also has a "Y" to input external 12V power. Garmin only comes with a USB cable, and it is not at all clear if I even CAN put external power to it, except from the USB port of a computer. That's a plus for Magellan, except that it is an unusual plug you will need on your cigarette lighter.

 

PHYSICAL ATTRIBUTES:

The two units are very similar in size with the following observations: The Magellan is a lot more rounded and sleek looking, it fits nicely in your hand; but it feels like it's going to squirt out of your hand like a wet potato if you squeeze it in just the wrong place. All the buttons are on the face of the GPS and stick up from the surface. It also has this weird "rocker" thing, they call it. (It's a mini joystick that you can also press down on to make selections). This rocker thing protrudes out so much that I'm afraid to put the GPS in my pocket for fear I'll end up breaking that thing off as I pull it out. The buttons didn't seem too bad to me, until I compared it to the Garmin. The Garmin is a little more boxy than the Magellan, not so tall, but certainly just a little bit thicker than the Magellan and not rounded. While the M (Magellan) was rounded and sleek, the G (Garmin) was a bit more stout. But immediately I felt much more secure with the G than the M in terms of sturdiness. The M is a complete plastic shell where the G is completely surrounded by a rubber shock protection on the sides, and most of the back is covered by it as well. I didn't think the buttons on the M were all that bad until I had a look at the G. The G had the buttons on the side, and it appears that the buttons and the rubber shock protection are one piece, giving the impression that it is completely sealed. Whereas the M has the buttons appearing relatively fragile protruding up from the plastic face, the buttons on the G are flush mounted. It seems that one handed operation will be easier on the G. Oh, the G has that crappy rocker thing, too, located on the front, but at least it is mostly recessed into the surface. Yes, I'm still somewhat concerned about shearing it off, but not nearly as much. The G seems very robust, and I'm not quite so concerned about dropping it; the M, I'm concerned that if I drop it, something is going to crack.

 

Both claim waterproof to 1m depth but it really doesn't look like the Magellan would do it, especially around the battery compartment cover; the gasket seemed insufficient and would come out of place easily. With the Garmin it looks VERY watertight, except for the plug they use around the USB port. Some people think the Garmin unit floats - only some Garmin units float; a reference to the Garmin website states that THE VISTA DOES NOT FLOAT!!!

 

Finally, I believe the screen size is .1 inches larger in both dimesions on the M. Regardless, it does appear to be ever so slightly bigger.

 

Ok, so let's turn it on:

 

SATELLITE ACQUISITION & DISPLAY:

 

Which one receives sattelites better? Answer: I'm not really sure. Sometimes it seemed like the M had the edge, and other times it seemed the G locked more. The M says it is a 14 channel rx while the G says it is only a 12 channel. However, I'm wondering if M is saying 14 because it is including the 2 WAAS birds in the 14? The G is definately a 12, but it also looks like it does WAAS IN ADDITION TO the 12, so maybe the two rx's are the same. The display of satellites on the M seemed a little more understandable than the G, and until you figure out that you can change that display to colour in the options you are left thinking the G display is not at all great in comparison to the M.

 

So I took both on a hike to see which would perform better in terms of satellite acquisition. I turned them both on when I left home, and they seemed to go back and forth as to which acquired more at any given moment. (The car was a convertable with the soft top in place (up). They seemed to go back and forth, one getting more than the other and vice versa at different time. But I do think the G did edge out a bit ahead of the M. When I got to the trail, about 20 minutes later, I was really ready to put the things to the test, I zeroed them out and started out. Again, they were both going back and forth, one time it looked like the M had acquired all of the visible birds, whereas the G almost never did get all of them, except for maybe once. However, the G did seem to get more birds more often than the M.

 

This was all great doing this "in the field" empirical experiment FOR THE FIRST 2 MINUTES. That's how long it took before I had totally drained the triple 'A' batteries in the M from the 20 minutes of driving with the backlight on high. So, really, I had no real comparison on the trail, and while the M lay lifeless in my pocket for the entire hike, I had the G with backlight on for the entire drive, the entire hike, the entire drive home, and the entire evening with the backlight on HIGH! I guess the M won't acquire too much with dead batteries, eh?

 

Both use an internal patch antenna, I find this much nicer than having a protrusion out the top of the units. Neither has an input for an external antenna...too bad. I did hear (don't know if it's true) that the orientation of the antenna in the M allows you to hold the unit flat, while the G requires you to hold it upright. It does seem more ergonomic to be able to hold it flat.

 

USER INTERFACE/SOFTWARE:

 

I had obtained the M first, and right away, from the moment I turned it on, it seemed easy to use, and relatively intuitive. I had it for several days before getting the G. The screens were bright (I'm referring to colour choice now), laid out quite well, and were simple to use. The G, however, was a different story. The screens were not quite so bright, but certainly not at all bad. However, I'm STILL figuring this machine out. Sure, I've got the basics down now, but there is so much, and so much of it is in menus that are sort of hidden. It's hard to remember where it all is. I'm out in the field and I'm like "Ok, I want to change this from course to bearing navigation." and then the panic sets in because I can't remember what screen I need to get to and press that magic menu button. Depending on my memory at the moment, or luck, or whatever, it can sometimes take several minutes to figure out how to change something I've done a dozen times before. I found the M to be much easier in this aspect.

 

But come on, the software in these things doesn't even compare. I won't do an exhaustive comparison in this aspect. They both will tell you when the sun is going to set and the moon is going to rise and all the stuff we can all take for granted in any GPS now: current speed, trip odometer, max speed, elevation, total ascent, etc. But one thing I saw on the G (I honestly am not sure if the M has it or not), but it has a moving time vs. stopped time readout. So if you're hiking, it will directly tell you how long the hike took without all the rest stops. Very useful indeed. I don't think the M had a calculator. The G has all the necessary stuff, and more: calculator, alarm clock, calendar, best fishing times, tides, skins! (that is, you can change the system wide colour appearance of the display screens), it will even dim as you go from day time to dusk (using darker colours at night so your eyes don't get blinded by a bright screen) and the list goes on and on. The G even has some games -seemed bizarre and gimmicky at first- but they do get you out running around in a field getting excercise. A definite asset on the GPS. There is so much more to customize on the G.

 

Both will do the GeoCaching stuff. I haven't figured it out on either, but I think it's supposed to be a little easier on the M. M had taylored these units almost specifically for this purpose so there may be a bit more for those soley interested in GeoCaching in the M unit.

 

SUPPORT

Heard horror stories regarding both, heard good stories regarding both. I waited 15 minutes to talk to G and then another 15 or so to talk to the software guy I needed to talk to. He had all the time in the world for me once I did actually get to talk to him, though.

 

But as for outside support just take a look at this forum, you can see for yourself which units have more info and hints, tips, maps, etc.

 

Both units had a "Quick Start" guide, where as the G had a "complete" manual. The M said to refer to the website to download the complete manual. Ok, I know we live in the 21st century and I can get the manual online, but if I ever want to print it out (and I do want a hard copy) it'll be on my dime. Did M do this to save money? Maybe it saved them money, but I didn't see the savings passed on to me when I bought the unit (comparing the price of getting it going compared to getting the G going), and now it's going to cost me more to print it out. To be fair, Garmin did give a "complete" manual, and it isn't all that great! Ah well.

 

CONCLUSION

The G. is SOLID, I'm not worried about this thing having a short life, and I think it'll stand up to much more abuse than the M. The user interface is much more challenging and daunting on the G. but once I get it all figured out, it'll have so much more to offer. As for battery life FORGET ABOUT IT!! I couldn't even get the Magellan out of the parking lot without breaking the bank. It doesn't matter how good the unit is if it isn't on. Interface, sure the M is simpler to use and the screens are (ever so slightly) brighter and less cluttered, but I'll get much more out of all the customization I can do the the G. Support? I initially thought I couldn't add non-Garmin maps to the unit; I was wrong, but it is a bit of a learning curve to figure out the process of adding maps. But other than that, I am VERY confident I'll never have to worry about finding somebody who can help with any questions I might have with the G - or perhaps a feature that I wanted to implement that someone has figured out a way of doing.

 

The Magellan Explorist 500 is probably a great unit for geocaching, and will serve you well, very well indeed - provided you use one of the proprietary battery packs, make sure you charge it every day, and only use the brightest light setting when absolutely necessary. You won't have to worry about one GPS being better than the other in terms of satellite acquisition. The battery life on the Garmin is phenomenal in comparison. By the time you get an appropriate battery for the M you've spent about the same as a Vista without the barometer and the compass.

 

I'll sum it all up in this: You may love the Magellan; but if you get the Garmin I can pretty much GUARANTEE you will NEVER say "I wish I'd gotten the Magellan, instead"

 

I'm keeping the Garmin, the Magellan I returned to the store.

 

 

--Again I will say that I am a complete newbie with no prior experience with any GPS, so this is all my PERCEPTION and there may be features that I may not be aware of, or other things I have stated that may be in error--

Edited January 7, 2007 by Isaiah 40:31

[+Fred/Mary]

Great read! That's interesting stuff about the battery life.

 

Thanks!!

[+geognerd]

Good comparison. I have been wanting to know how the new color eTrexes compare with the eXplorists.

 

As an owner of 2 (used to be 3) eXplorists who wanted a Venture Cx but couldn't justify having a third GPSr, I'll make the following comments:

 

The eX500LE is a bad idea. One of the criticisms of the eXplorist was that it used a lithium-ion rechargeable battery instead of AAs. I don't think this is a big deal, as I get 18hrs battery life when the temperature is above 40F. I charge the battery while connected to the PC. But back to the 500LE. It was designed for use with the battery pack. The AAA clip was an add-on that came out two years later, and 3 AAAs is all that can fit inside the battery area. I don't know if the clip was an attempt to appease those who didn't want a battery pack or not. While the battery clip offers flexibility in power sources, the battery life has been reported to be terrible. This was a bad move by Magellan, as GPS newbies will buy it and be disappointed in the battery life. They won't know about the $5 Motorola cell phone battery they can buy.

 

About the receiver, the Garmin is 12 channel whereas the Magellan is 14. WAAS will eat 2 channels of the 12 and 14. The only time I ever use all 14 is out in an open field.

 

About durability, my Magellan looks nasty because it has been so beat up. I know it can survive under a foot of water for a few seconds, and I know it can survive getting run over by an SUV. I think durability of the models being discussed would be about the same.

 

About the antenna. As you said, both use a patch antenna. Patch-equipped handhelds should be used horizontally, screen facing the sky. So hold your eTrex flat, not vertical. I am totally with you about not having the antenna sticking out. That's why I prefer the GPSmap 76 series over the 60 series.

 

You wrote:

I'll sum it all up in this: You may love the Magellan; but if you get the Garmin I can pretty much GUARANTEE you will NEVER say "I wish I'd gotten the Magellan, instead"

 

I think I agree with you. I like my Magellans, but I am always intrigued by the Garmins. If I were to start from scratch today, I'd buy a Garmin.

[Isaiah 40:31]

Good comparison. I have been wanting to know how the new color eTrexes compare with the eXplorists.

 

I get 18hrs battery life when the temperature is above 40F

 

But is that 18 hours with the backlight at it's brightest setting?

 

The AAA clip was an add-on that came out two years later, and 3 AAAs is all that can fit inside the battery area.

 

That "clip" is just that, a clip. You have the option of using it, or not. At least if your Motorola (or other) pack conks out, you could use AAA's as a backup.

Edited January 8, 2007 by Isaiah 40:31

[Vlad]

nice review - welcome to the forum

[Isaiah 40:31]

Thanks, Vlad. When you spend so much time trying to give valuable input it's nice to know that it's been useful.

[Isaiah 40:31]

I also forgot to mention, the G will zoom in to 5m. Unless I'm mistaken the M would only zoom in to something like 80 or 120 feet. I really like the ability to zoom in so much.

[+Roaming Empire]

Great Name!!! I like Psalm 139:14, actually I like Genisis 1:1 to Revelation 22:21 ( it's all good!) welcome to geocaching...thanks for the info...I have an explorist 210 and love it. Costco sells the 500LE for $179 with the topo software, and I have been reccommending it to other cachers based on it's price and my 210 experience. I will no longer do that!!Excellent Post!!!!!!!!!

[vagabond]

Here's a battery test I ran almost a year ago on my then 7 month old exp 500.

with the Li-on battery

 

6:00AM disconnected from battery charger backlight on high

9:58AM battery meter showing approx. 40 to 45% left

1:05PM low battery warning comes on

1:34PM 500 shuts down backlight on high for full test

The battery meter seems to show more usage during the first 3 hrs or so.

I ran a test a couple of weeks ago using med backlight and low backlight and got a little over 14 hrs of use from the 500.

 

The original battery is now almost 2 years old and has been charged almost every day. On med. backlight it will last about 10 hours now

My choice would be go with the Li-on battery I do have a 12 volt charger so I can charge it while on the road, and you can buy after market Motorola Li-on batterys for about $10.00 each

[Isaiah 40:31]

 

About the antenna. As you said, both use a patch antenna. Patch-equipped handhelds should be used horizontally, screen facing the sky. So hold your eTrex flat, not vertical. I am totally with you about not having the antenna sticking out. That's why I prefer the GPSmap 76 series over the 60 series.

 

To quote from the eTrex Vista Cx Owner's Manual, Page 5: "Hold the unit in front of you with the top tilted upward. While the GPS receiver is searching for the satellite signals, a "Locating Satellites" message is replaced by an "Acquiring Satellites" message until enough signals are acquired to fix its location."

[The_Brownies]

Garmin or Magellan???

 

That has been the question since geocaching began and the battle rages on.

 

Personally I still have my Magellan Meridian Gold that has the altimeter, a compass and expandable memory upto 2 Gigs. Yes, I paid around $280 dollars for it in 2002, and the price really hasn't changed that much. It's has a monochrome screen but for what I use it for, it continues to rise to the occassion and I when it gives out, I most likely will purchase another Magellan but it would not be the explorist 500. More likely it will be a 600 or someother Magellan GPS -- Why? Because of the Magellans navigation system allows you to access the Magellan via windows explorer i.e. it treats it as a portable storage device, and the fact Garmin still does not have expanded memory. If I want to add maps to my Magellan, I simply load them into a SD card. Good luck doing that with a Garmin.

 

The article presented a good case for Garmin's battery life, and I'll have to agree with you that the battery on the LE 500 is not that great. However, you can replace the AAA's with a lithium rechargeable battery and that tends to resolve the issue.

 

Again, the only main difference I can see between the two is expandable memory. Magellan has it, and Garmin Doesn't. They both have color screens, and they both have a few bells and whistles. But do you need them? We are talking geocaching here. Plug in a coordinate and walk to the cache.

 

Also try not to judge a book by it's cover. Trying to say one GPS is waterproof or not just by looking at it's case is not a good test. Ask someone who knows weather this is true like the guys at Consumer Report. They are a non-biased party that are paid to test this stuff.

 

Honestly, for geocaching, any GPS will do. The real question is how much do you want to spend, do you want the screen in color, does the thing have expanded memory, and how good is the battery life?

 

Here's one more thing to think about. Accuaracy... How accurate is the Garmin compared to Magellan. Unless you know a land surveyor with some heavy duty GPS equipment this question may go unanswered for a very long time. Personally I belive Magellan is more accurate, but I have nothing to back this up with. However it definately would be interresting to see results from this type of test.

[Isaiah 40:31]

 

That has been the question since geocaching began and the battle rages on.

 

It's too bad you see this as a "battle". I made an honest assessment based on NO PRIOR KNOWLEDGE of either product or that there were two different companies making GPS's. My observations were my own, the observations are accurate, the conclusions perhaps not so accurate, but certainly are sound based on my observations and interests.

 

and the fact Garmin still does not have expanded memory. If I want to add maps to my Magellan, I simply load them into a SD card. Good luck doing that with a Garmin.

 

Your "FACT" is wrong. The G comes with a 64MB micro SD card, expandable up to 1 GB, if not 2 GB (I'd have to confirm the 2 GB statement). Adding maps to my Garmin? I've MADE extremely accurate topographic maps and uploaded them to my G. (Check the thread on here on "Making custom Topo maps".

 

The article presented a good case for Garmin's battery life, and I'll have to agree with you that the battery on the LE 500 is not that great. However, you can replace the AAA's with a lithium rechargeable battery and that tends to resolve the issue.

 

An observation clearly made in my review...at the expense of less user friendliness in having to find uncommon batteries and charging systems with batteries that won't do a bit of good in nearly every other electronic device you operate. On a weekend trip, would I rather: a) bring along a bunch of batteries (and maybe a charger) that I know will fit all my devices (camera, GPS, flaslight, headlamp) so that I know even if I deplete the batteries in one device I can steal them from another, if need be. Or, bring along a bunch of batteries for my other devices and two or three or more for my GPS (and now 2 chargers, if I want the option of having chargers available) and "Oh no, it's dark and I've run out of batteries for my flashlight! At least I have the ones from my GP...uh oh".

 

Battery life? Based on Vagabond's and my very unscientific experiments (we probably should have repeated the test about 20 times with different batches of batteries and determined 3 standard deviations on a bell curve) the M had 7.5 hours on a, as I've called it, "semi-propietary" battery; and the G lasted 10 hours on prolific AA's with both units on their highest backlight settings! (Oh yeah, sorry, I failed to determine each screens canldle power (or candelas or lumens (isotropic), or watts per steradian at 555 nm or whatever other light output measuring unit you care to use!!!!) to determine that even this would be a fair comparison as pertains to screen brightness, and therefore it's relative consumption of energy). Still a better deal for batteries in the G in terms of both purchase cost of batteries, and total cost of getting the unit operating.

 

Yes, TO ME (that was what this review was about: MY impressions on the units) using AA's is a very important factor.

 

They both have color screens, and they both have a few bells and whistles. But do you need them? We are talking geocaching here. Plug in a coordinate and walk to the cache.

 

Do you need them? If I'm spending the same amount on either GPS why not have them? And, on the G, it's a whole lot more than "a few". "We are talking geocaching here." My bad. I did forget that I was in a geocaching forum, regardless of the fact that I was doing a straight comparison on two similar products, and regardless of the fact that I want to use it for hiking and regardless of the fact that I want to use it when kayaking to help me keep a bearing directly to my destination (which is why I spent nearly 3 times as much on a unit which would do all that, rather than just spit out a lat/long on a mapless monochrome screen. But then virtually ANY GPS will give you a raw lat/long readout why even bother having to enter the coordinates? Just watch as the readout changes? Or, you could use one with a few (or a lot) of the niceties that make the unit -and the experience- enjoyable.

 

Also try not to judge a book by it's cover. Trying to say one GPS is waterproof or not just by looking at it's case is not a good test. Ask someone who knows weather this is true like the guys at Consumer Report. They are a non-biased party that are paid to test this stuff.

 

Actually I did not judge it by it's cover, it was when I took off the cover (the back cover) that I started to question it's ability to keep dry. As stated, the rubber gasket DID NOT seat well, but instead would twist 'apparently' out of position as the cover was replaced. Non-biased? If you read my review you would see that I WAS non-biased. I had not previous knowledge of the merits of ANY GPS or manufacturer. I WASN'T biased, but it's hard not to be, now. Regardless, I can still be objective, can you?

 

Honestly, for geocaching, any GPS will do. The real question is how much do you want to spend, do you want the screen in color, does the thing have expanded memory, and how good is the battery life?

 

You have missed the point of the review. It was a comparison of two similar products, it was not a G Vs. M debate.

 

Here's one more thing to think about. Accuaracy... How accurate is the Garmin compared to Magellan. Unless you know a land surveyor with some heavy duty GPS equipment this question may go unanswered for a very long time. Personally I belive Magellan is more accurate, but I have nothing to back this up with. However it definately would be interresting to see results from this type of test.

 

I can't speculate on this. I would trust NO GPS to determine accuracy of any equipment. Land surveyors with means of earth measurement other than GPS would be the only reliable source. But again, it will vary from unit to unit, and you would need a large number of each unit, tested in a large number of locations to determine the answer to that. I didn't go on what I "personally believed", I wrote a completely objective and unbiased review based on the merits of either unit, and how those merits fit within my goals and expectations (goals and expectations beyond geocaching) of what I wanted out of a GPS unit.

 

I wrote this review without any loyalty to any brand or unit and without patriotism, pride or air of superiority. It was written carefully, clearly, and openly and objectively. I enjoy a good rational debate; and you will find me defending both sides of an issue, so as to keep the debate going in search of a final conclusion. I don't give a rip who wins, all I seek is the truth. And, as you may have guessed from my pseudonym, there are greater truths than these. This thread IS NOT a Garmin Vs. Magellan "battle", please do not make it so.

Edited January 17, 2007 by Isaiah 40:31

[+Rockin Roddy]

I doubt the "Battle" comment was meant between YOU and everyone that likes Magellan...don't take everything personal.

 

I've owned both Garmin AND now Magellan. My Magellan works great for ME!! I love the fact that it has a built in geocaching application, and can be plugged into my car for charging while mapping the next cache.

 

The battery of my Magellan lasts quite long enough, and when I AM done at the end of the day, I can leave it to charge and be ready for the next...it lasts all day every day! I also appreciate the fact that I CAN put AAAs in if I really need to..and I'd say, by the fact that the battery lasts well past the daylight hours, a few sets of batteries (AAA) would be plenty in case of emergency...or a little night caching...for a whole trip of say...a week or more?? BTW...at night, the light need NOT be on full on my Magellan, it's too bright and hurts my eyes!!

 

I have to disagree with you on the use of AAA batteries outside of the unit...my cachelights run on AAAs also! So, AAs are not of much use to me as I would have to say that THEY are the minority in MY usage.

 

Everyone has an opinion, I bought what I liked, you'll buy what you like...and the "BATTLE" will rage between the two companies for many years to come!!

 

AND...the topic name WOULD insinuate that this IS a Garmin vs Magellan "battle"...or debate ...or conversation...or hey...a comparison!!!!!!

 

Lastly...is it worth getting worked up about??