Jump to content

Garmin "High-sensitivity receiver" - worth xtra $$$?


Recommended Posts

I'm looking for a new GPSr and was wondering if the models that boast the "High-sensitivity receiver" are worth the extra money? Does the High-sensitivity receiver really improve the unit?

 

I'm looking at the Garmin 60CSx/76CSx and the eTrex Vista Cx. I have an eTrex Vista now, but want something that does map routing.... I like the smaller size of the Vista Cx, but not sure if the features of the 60CSx/76CSx are worth giving up the "compactness" to go with a larger unit. (I ride a lot of bicycles, and the smaller the unit, typically the better....)

 

Any opinions are appreciated....

Link to comment

I have the Vista C and haven't felt the need to upgrade to the 'x' version.

 

I prefer the smaller size of the Vista C vs. the larger 60/76 Cx/CSx versions, however, where I cache, I don't really need the "high-sensitivity receiver." If you cache in dense woods, you might want the other units, but if you are used to your Vista and like its size, you will be very happy with the Vista Cx. :D

Link to comment
I have the Vista C and haven't felt the need to upgrade to the 'x' version.

 

I prefer the smaller size of the Vista C vs. the larger 60/76 Cx/CSx versions, however, where I cache, I don't really need the "high-sensitivity receiver." If you cache in dense woods, you might want the other units, but if you are used to your Vista and like its size, you will be very happy with the Vista Cx. :D

I use a 60CS and never have had an issue either. There isn't much tree cover out here so that's probably why. However, when I've caches out east I had to use some special techniques in the woods. It actually made it more fun for me. But if I had to cache in the woods all the time I'd probably upgrade to an "x" model.
Link to comment

I have a 60 CSX, (Had a 60CS before that, then a Vista before that, etc). If you do not like losing your signal, yes the high senstitvity reciever is great. If you don't mind losing reception and low accuracy, don't get it. I use my 60CSX on my bike all the time. They have a nice holder.

Link to comment

I had a 76CS and did quite well with it. I sold it and got a 76CSx and I also do quite well with it. However, I found that the CSx got signal in a lot of places where the 76CS didn't.

 

For instance, the 76CS would get a signal in my wife's car IF it was on the dash or held up against a side window. If I held it in my hand or lap when I was a passenger I had to use an external antenna. (This wasn't a problem in my truck - only in my wife's car.) The 76CSx gets a great signal in her car no matter where it is located. Heck, I get great signal sitting at my desk inside my house!

 

I'm glad I made the switch.

Link to comment
I have a 60 CSX, (Had a 60CS before that, then a Vista before that, etc). If you do not like losing your signal, yes the high senstitvity reciever is great. If you don't mind losing reception and low accuracy, don't get it. I use my 60CSX on my bike all the time. They have a nice holder.
I don't think the "x" is any more accurate. I have never had any cache that I couldn't find with a non-x. However, if the "x" users start hiding caches inside then I'm in trouble... :D
Link to comment

I'm looking for a new GPSr and was wondering if the models that boast the "High-sensitivity receiver" are worth the extra money? Does the High-sensitivity receiver really improve the unit?

 

I'm looking at the Garmin 60CSx/76CSx and the eTrex Vista Cx. I have an eTrex Vista now, but want something that does map routing.... I like the smaller size of the Vista Cx, but not sure if the features of the 60CSx/76CSx are worth giving up the "compactness" to go with a larger unit. (I ride a lot of bicycles, and the smaller the unit, typically the better....)

 

Any opinions are appreciated....

 

As others have eluded, in myopinion and experience I've noticed a difference. It was worth it to me.

Link to comment

I for one live in the PNW where a lot of the area is heavily forested, and a lot of my hikes are in the deep woods.

 

The X model was a godsend for me! I was lucky if I could even get a lock before, Let me tell you how much backtracking I used to do with the old unit.

 

I can confidently say that with the X unit I rarely have less then 6 sats and about the worst acuracy I have ever seen with it was about 40 feet.

 

All that said, if you live in a less heavily forested place the difference will probibly be much smaller then mine.

 

Hope that helps

Link to comment

I had a 60C. Under heavy tree cover or in deep narrow canyons the device would lose satellite connectivity. I purchased an external antenna, and it helped keep the GPSr in satellite contact in poor conditions.

 

I purchased a 60Cx in March 2006, and in my opinion the SiRF GPS chip in the 60Cx is a valuable and necessary improvement. I no longer need the external antenna, and the 60Cx calculates quicker than the 60C.

 

Plus, the 60Cx has a removable MICRO SD memory card. Currently you can install up to 2GB of map data. It appears that 4GB MICRO SD cards are just about a month or two away. The 60C has 56mb's of fixed non-expandable memory.

Edited by Barrikady
Link to comment
I have a 60 CSX, (Had a 60CS before that, then a Vista before that, etc). If you do not like losing your signal, yes the high senstitvity reciever is great. If you don't mind losing reception and low accuracy, don't get it. I use my 60CSX on my bike all the time. They have a nice holder.
I don't think the "x" is any more accurate. I have never had any cache that I couldn't find with a non-x. However, if the "x" users start hiding caches inside then I'm in trouble... :D

The X versions of the 60 series use the SiRF-III chip. Definitely superior to the "non-X" versions.

Link to comment
I have a 60 CSX, (Had a 60CS before that, then a Vista before that, etc). If you do not like losing your signal, yes the high senstitvity reciever is great. If you don't mind losing reception and low accuracy, don't get it. I use my 60CSX on my bike all the time. They have a nice holder.
I don't think the "x" is any more accurate. I have never had any cache that I couldn't find with a non-x. However, if the "x" users start hiding caches inside then I'm in trouble... :D

The X versions of the 60 series use the SiRF-III chip. Definitely superior to the "non-X" versions.

I have never not been able to find a cache with either my Legend or my 60CS. There are very few trees out here so I often find the cache before the x-men do! :D
Link to comment

I'm looking for a new GPSr and was wondering if the models that boast the "High-sensitivity receiver" are worth the extra money? Does the High-sensitivity receiver really improve the unit?

 

I'm looking at the Garmin 60CSx/76CSx and the eTrex Vista Cx. I have an eTrex Vista now, but want something that does map routing.... I like the smaller size of the Vista Cx, but not sure if the features of the 60CSx/76CSx are worth giving up the "compactness" to go with a larger unit. (I ride a lot of bicycles, and the smaller the unit, typically the better....)

 

I had the exact same dilemma. I first bought a Venture Cx just for my bike but the reception in NYC where I live was really really bad. I couldn't live with that so I returned the Venture Cx and got a 60CSx. Now I have reception everywhere even throughout my whole apartment and I live on the third floor of a 5-story building!

 

In my book the SIRF receiver is definitely worth the money. Of course if Garmin were to put a SIRF on a high-end eTrex it would be a totally different story ...

Link to comment

“x” does not equal “high-sensitivity receiver” (SiRF chipset). “x” stands for expandable memory. There seems to be much confusion about this. The Garmin 60 and 76 Cx and CSx series are the only Garmin handhelds that have the SiRF chipset. The most important feature of a GPS to me is reception. If I can’t hold a lock here in the dense wooded Allegheny Mountains of west central Pennsylvania, then the game is over. With this in mind, the SiRF is absolutely worth it to me.

Link to comment
"x" does not equal "high-sensitivity receiver" (SiRF chipset). "x" stands for expandable memory. There seems to be much confusion about this. The Garmin 60 and 76 Cx and CSx series are the only Garmin handhelds that have the SiRF chipset. The most important feature of a GPS to me is reception. If I can't hold a lock here in the dense wooded Allegheny Mountains of west central Pennsylvania, then the game is over. With this in mind, the SiRF is absolutely worth it to me.
I agree. If I was buying a new GPS, I would get a 60CSx. Right now I have a 60CS, so I'm going to wait for the next-gen to upgrade, whatever that is...
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...