Jump to content

Garmin Colorado -- will they add these features?


Recommended Posts

Like many others I'm debating the 60CSx vs. Colorado. I have never owned a 60CSX but I've had a Colorado for 2 weeks and put it through the things I use a GPS for (marine use, don't geocache). After the first few days I was cussing and ready to ship it back. This particular unit will have to be returned as it's got a hardware problem (Rock'nRoller problem) -- so I've got to decide to replace with another Colorado or the 60CSx.

 

But the more I use this Colorado, the more I like it. I love the way it feels in my hands and the ergonomics of how you use the unit. I love the fact that tracks are saved up to 5000 points. But past that the features of the 60CSx really make it a better GPS for my needs. I'd go with the Colorado in a heart beat if Garmin would "fix" the following. My question is, what is the likelihood these things will be changed?

 

1) trackback function for tracks and routes

2) be able to use compass page to navigate tracks with indexes to next (vs. just follow map now)

3) get the whole waypoint # on the screen

4) improve battery life

5) scroll through waypoints by name vs. having to "spell"

6) view tides for other dates

 

Thanks.

Edited by wfcrawford
Link to comment

Like many others I'm debating the 60CSx vs. Colorado. I have never owned a 60CSX but I've had a Colorado for 2 weeks and put it through the things I use a GPS for (marine use, don't geocache). After the first few days I was cussing and ready to ship it back. This particular unit will have to be returned as it's got a hardware problem (Rock'nRoller problem) -- so I've got to decide to replace with another Colorado or the 60CSx.

 

But the more I use this Colorado, the more I like it. I love the way it feels in my hands and the ergonomics of how you use the unit. I love the fact that tracks are saved up to 5000 points. But past that the features of the 60CSx really make it a better GPS for my needs. I'd go with the Colorado in a heart beat if Garmin would "fix" the following. My question is, what is the likelihood these things will be changed?

 

1) trackback function for tracks and routes

2) be able to use compass page to navigate tracks with indexes to next (vs. just follow map now)

3) get the whole waypoint # on the screen

4) improve battery life

5) scroll through waypoints by name vs. having to "spell"

6) view tides for other dates

 

Thanks.

 

Yours is a universal comment: we all suffer from 60CS(x) feature envy and short battery life. Waypoint search features are sorely missing from the CO. The wheel is an abomination for entering data, it makes the 60CS scoreboard method look good.

 

Be prepared for a long wait if you send it back! They have had mine for 4 weeks(versus the 10 day promise) and haven't had the courtesy to send me an explanation or a revised ETA. It appears that they are overwhelmed with CO problems and they are waiting for redesigned units from China. If I ever get mine back--I will check for batt life and some of the missing 60CS features in the replacement, if not satisfactory, it's going back to the dealer. In the meantime I can't recommend the CO to anyone. I teach a GPS trail user class and have steered my students away from this dog. I have warned the local REI store of its shortcomings. We are at least 6 months, if ever, away from a trail-ready device; maybe it's useful for someone's applications but none of mine! I wonder if this thing was designed by the Microsoft Vista team instead of the Garmin Vista team?? :laughing:

Link to comment

 

Yours is a universal comment: we all suffer from 60CS(x) feature envy and short battery life. Waypoint search features are sorely missing from the CO. The wheel is an abomination for entering data, it makes the 60CS scoreboard method look good.

 

Be prepared for a long wait if you send it back! They have had mine for 4 weeks(versus the 10 day promise) and haven't had the courtesy to send me an explanation or a revised ETA. It appears that they are overwhelmed with CO problems and they are waiting for redesigned units from China. If I ever get mine back--I will check for batt life and some of the missing 60CS features in the replacement, if not satisfactory, it's going back to the dealer. In the meantime I can't recommend the CO to anyone. I teach a GPS trail user class and have steered my students away from this dog. I have warned the local REI store of its shortcomings. We are at least 6 months, if ever, away from a trail-ready device; maybe it's useful for someone's applications but none of mine! I wonder if this thing was designed by the Microsoft Vista team instead of the Garmin Vista team?? :laughing:

 

I'm sure there are going to be the usual comments posted here about how its a NEW unit and in no way supposed to take after the 60CSX. I'm sure there will be folks who speak of how great their Colorado's are and how much they just love the features they use. All of that is fine. But I have to agree with RGK. For those of us who use our GPS's for more than just geocaching, like navigating the backcountry or logging scientific data, there are alot of shortcomings in the Colorado. It kind of reminds me of when Magellan went from the Meridian series to the Explorist. In some ways it was good, but they slipped backwards in many areas. I can only hope that Garmin doesn't just stop with perfecting the geocaching features of the Colorado and gives the rest of us improvements upon the other features as well. Yes, geocaching is a large market, but, units designed around geocaching would doubtfully stand on their own without great features for the rest of us.

 

There seems to be so many solutions on how improve the way the Colorado is implemented. Its good, just not great considering what they could do with it. No, I'm not a software engineer, and I don't understand the intracacies of GPS market forces, but that doesn't invalidate my argument.

Edited by yogazoo
Link to comment

Right now after seeing the beta update details for the new firmware I'm not holding my breath that garmin is going to add any features, all they did with the beta firmware is fix bugs. While this happened a lot with the 60/76 x series we were getting firmware updates there almost weekly, it's been nearly 2 months since the last colorado update so I'd have expected a lot more.

 

As others have said, and my sentiments exactly it may be a great unit for geocaching but for field use and navigation it's unacceptable. That simple lack of being able to hike in somewhere then use that track to navigate out is reason alone not to take it into the field, add to that waypoint averaging not being there, and the inability to move the pointer on the map and get a bearing to that position from current. Coupled with horrible battery life, and a very poor backlight, and waterproof issues on some units.

 

Now if garmin could address those things, add a trackback feature, waypoint averaging, bearings to a pointer location, not to mention being able to search for POI's from a pointer location, give us the option for more backlight similar to what we get when connected to an external power source, they would have a reasonable unit for field use.

 

I've compared field sample location data using and not using waypoint averaging and have found that when using waypoint averaging with a average time of 5-10min yielded significantly better locations when compared to Trimble data. It's still not perfect, but it's on average more accurate than without.

 

However, even wtih those fixes battery life is a serious problem. For those of us in the field 12-15 hours a day, that's 2 maybe 3 sets of batteries per day, where an etrex unit not only has all the features needed, but runs 2 field days on one set of batteries.

 

I'd say if I don't need features added in the next firmware update after the upcoming one (now in beta) then I'll dump mine, because it's not field worthy as it stands.

Edited by toddm
Link to comment

For those of us who use our GPS's for more than just geocaching, like navigating the backcountry or logging scientific data, there are alot of shortcomings in the Colorado.

You bring up an interesting point. I love my Colorado when Geocaching - I also volunteer along the AT and use my GPS to aid me in locating survey monuments. Guess what: When I go out volunteering I carry my 'old' 60CS and not the Colorado... I am happy that I have both - each has it's strength at the moment but neither can do all I want....
Link to comment

When the Colorado was first released, I was part of a few heated debates regarding functionality issues. More than one felt the initial release version of the Colorado was "essentially exactly" what Garmin had hoped. Another said the initial release version of the Colorado was a great tool for serious mountain climbers and would be seen on Everest this year. Well the Colorado may make it onto Everest, but I sure hope someone in the group has a unit that offers a reliable back-tracking feature.

 

My close to the early Colorado groupies was this question/statement: "I wonder what all of you will think about the initial Colorado release after 6 months?"

 

One brave individual even went so far as to predict the date of the second firmware update with subsequent updates every two weeks. Well those predictions were not even close. Then again, this individual also said all of the "issues" people were having were due to user error. This individual went on to imply most GPSr users are too stupid to know how to use the Colorado and expanded to say that we shouldn't purchase the Colorado because we are too poor. Even if this individual is twice as smart as asserted, all credibility was voided by these gross, uneducated, and inappropriate generalizations.

 

Garmin has added some features, enhanced a few, and "corrected" (their own words) other problems. Their Firmware is in "Beta" form. Production has been halted due to hardware issues that are being worked out. We are almost four months into that first six and where do we stand? Is the Colorado a "serious tool for serious users" or is it a first generation concept unit released into the market to offset R&D?

 

Some have lucked out and received, what they feel are, fully functioning units. Others have had 3 or 4 faulty units. Some problems seen unit specific while others seem to be affecting large percentages of production. Some love their Colorado's, some regret the purchase, and many are still waiting to pass judgment under the assumption Garmin will work everything out.

 

Here is a questions for you; If you were Garmin, would you invest a ton of additional money into the Colorado when the next generation chip-set is already out or would you simply roll that money into the next generation GPSr?

 

Who knows? Maybe there will be a Colorado 300/400 "x" version in the future. Maybe it will offer more bang for the buck with enhanced and added features? Don't bet on Garmin adding all, or even any, of your wish list features. The Colorado is what it is. It all comes down to individual preferences. Are you willing to give up certain features for the new ones on the Colorado? If you answer yes, buy yourself a new Colorado and have fun. If your answer is no, stick with what you already have, or get a 60csx or one of the HCx's, and have fun.

Link to comment

 

Here is a questions for you; If you were Garmin, would you invest a ton of additional money into the Colorado when the next generation chip-set is already out or would you simply roll that money into the next generation GPSr?

 

Who knows? Maybe there will be a Colorado 300/400 "x" version in the future. Maybe it will offer more bang for the buck with enhanced and added features? Don't bet on Garmin adding all, or even any, of your wish list features. The Colorado is what it is. It all comes down to individual preferences. Are you willing to give up certain features for the new ones on the Colorado? If you answer yes, buy yourself a new Colorado and have fun. If your answer is no, stick with what you already have, or get a 60csx or one of the HCx's, and have fun.

 

If they simply abandon the CO and bring out a new model---would anyone even buy it considering the black eye that Garmin now bears?? Even early adopters are smarter than that. Fool me once................ This would be a good time for Magellan to bring out a killer model.

 

BTW, an hour after I sent my previous squawk about Garmin CO repair service (been 4 weeks without my CO and no feedback from service department), a new CO arrived on my front porch. I did an immediate battery life test with previously used batteries---the thing shut down at 2.56 volts! this means that the CO is still rejecting batteries with lots of remaining energy. This is a bad sign-- battery life is not likely to be any better than before. Looks like it will be going back to the dealer for a refund. Anybody want some full size SD cards?

Link to comment

There is no telling which features Garmin will "backfill" into the Colorado. We have to wait and see.

 

From a recent Garmin blog entry, dated April 14: "Before the Colorado 400t came on the scene, the GPSMAP 60CSx set the standard for excellence in outdoor handhelds." (http://garmin.blogs.com/)

 

Does this mean they consider the Colorado 400t to be the new "standard" for outdoor handhelds? Or did the marketing people write this, and the engineers are rolling their eyes? Who knows.

 

I like the feel of the Colorado. I like the screen resolution (but not the color choices). So far I've been frustrated by the text entry method. There are a lot of tracking, waypoint, navigation-related features that weren't carried over from the GPSMAP 60CSx. I'm truly puzzled as to way they didn't carry over essentially _all_ the features into the new model. It's only software. The Coloardo is not incapable of performing all those functions.

 

Like others here, I'm still carrying my 60CSx in the field when I need to rely on the best set of navigation features. (Yes, I carry a map set and compass too!) I hope Garmin will "grow" the Colorado into at least the equivalent of the 60CSx. It's just a matter of when.

Edited by Manatee87
Link to comment

 

Here is a questions for you; If you were Garmin, would you invest a ton of additional money into the Colorado when the next generation chip-set is already out or would you simply roll that money into the next generation GPSr?

 

Who knows? Maybe there will be a Colorado 300/400 "x" version in the future. Maybe it will offer more bang for the buck with enhanced and added features? Don't bet on Garmin adding all, or even any, of your wish list features. The Colorado is what it is. It all comes down to individual preferences. Are you willing to give up certain features for the new ones on the Colorado? If you answer yes, buy yourself a new Colorado and have fun. If your answer is no, stick with what you already have, or get a 60csx or one of the HCx's, and have fun.

 

If they simply abandon the CO and bring out a new model---would anyone even buy it considering the black eye that Garmin now bears?? Even early adopters are smarter than that. Fool me once................ This would be a good time for Magellan to bring out a killer model.

 

BTW, an hour after I sent my previous squawk about Garmin CO repair service (been 4 weeks without my CO and no feedback from service department), a new CO arrived on my front porch. I did an immediate battery life test with previously used batteries---the thing shut down at 2.56 volts! this means that the CO is still rejecting batteries with lots of remaining energy. This is a bad sign-- battery life is not likely to be any better than before. Looks like it will be going back to the dealer for a refund. Anybody want some full size SD cards?

 

You Can send those SD cards to me as I can use them in my new 530HCx- great unit! and in need of a card!! :rolleyes:

Link to comment

...

My close to the early Colorado groupies was this question/statement: "I wonder what all of you will think about the initial Colorado release after 6 months?"

...

Garmin has added some features, enhanced a few, and "corrected" (their own words) other problems. Their Firmware is in "Beta" form. Production has been halted due to hardware issues that are being worked out. We are almost four months into that first six and where do we stand? Is the Colorado a "serious tool for serious users" or is it a first generation concept unit released into the market to offset R&D?

Hold on there cowboy. According to the date on your post that you are referring to ...

 

...

 

I give up. There is no point arguing with you guys about this since the Colorado is nearly perfect in every possible way. I wonder what you guys will say about the initial release in 6 months???? Hmmmm..........

We are just past two of that six months, not four - you are off by two months ... nice try. Feel free to triumphantly refer to your quote in four months.

 

Anyway, moving on ... I guess that I am one of the rare few who "lucked out" and received a unit that I have no serious complaints. My Colorado is an excellent geocaching unit and after a ~35 cache day I was even more sold on my 400t. Is it perfect? No. Do I believe that the other small issue that I have with it will be fixed? Yes.

 

Their first firmware update was not simply a ho-hum update, as you seem to suggest. It fixed several serious problems that people were complaining about, including my two biggest complaints : slow startup time and not keeping track up after panning.

 

Yes, it's really unfortunate that so many are having problems with their Colorado. Maybe I should send Garmin my 400t so they can clone it for everyone.

 

...

The Colorado is what it is. It all comes down to individual preferences. Are you willing to give up certain features for the new ones on the Colorado? If you answer yes, buy yourself a new Colorado and have fun. If your answer is no, stick with what you already have, or get a 60csx or one of the HCx's, and have fun.

Essentially, I think that you are correct. Garmin will fix the existing problems but I seriously doubt that we will see most, if any, of the wish-list items in this Colorado.

 

After owning my 400t for three months I am a happy camper. When 3 Hawks re-refers to his February 14 post in four months I expect that I will be a happier camper.

 

For me, I have no problem spending the money that I did on the Colorado. The ability to see cache pages, log and upload finds, play Wherigo cartridges ( and a couple more items that don't come to mind ) make this unit worth the $600 ( less the REI rebate ) that I paid for it. I AM having fun and as much as I feel badly for those who are having problems with their units, I am not letting their misfortune(s) take away any of the pleasure that I am having with my 400t.

Edited by nicolo
Link to comment

I was an early adopter of the Colorado, recieved my unit on January 18th. Three units later I got one that finally worked. Someone mentioned a few posts up, that if Garmin were to release a new unit soon would there be as many early adopters? Well, we all know the answer but I don't think that I would be one of them.

 

Truth be told, after two or three months, I'm still a little dissapointed with the pace at which Garmin crawls along to make this unit trouble free. Issues, not wish/lists, are why I'm not as satisfied as I thought I would be. I don't cache very much and maybe thats the difference. This unit to cachers is light-years ahead of anything else available if you want paperless caching on a single unit. To the rest of us, using this GPS as a serious navigation and data gathering tool leaves some to be desired. I propose this as a contributing factor to the dichotomy of who is satasfied and who's not. Others have suggested it's the units themselves but I have to wonder. Maybe how we use the Colorado is really the difference between satisfied or not satisfied.

 

I will take a serious pause before I jump on the eary adopter bandwagon next time. Garmin has given me reason for this pause. Call me crazy but I feel a little burnt.

 

MY "Wish-List" or pet peeves if you will.

 

1) Fix the Barometer so that the unit logs data when unit is powerd off (as advertised)

2) Fix the display of intermittent water bodies (currently its a light brown color and next to impossible to distinguish) This failure to include coding for intermittent water, in my opinion, is very sloppy.

4) Allow map adjustments while in pan mode. All previous models alow you to change map, adjust detail etc.while in pan mode.

5) Waypoint averaging.

6) When I save a track, make the default time tag my local time instead of UTC time. I hate saving a track quickly and having the date show as being tomorrow. Just plain sloppy programing IMHO.

 

Most of the wishes above aren't really wishes after all, but rather fixes to make the unit operate as either advertised or as expected for what I paid for it. Note: None of the "wishes" have anything strictly to do with geo-caching.

 

I still won't recommend the Colorado to my friends/family members wanting to upgrade. Lets face it, for those who don't live and die by geocaching, this unit leaves some to be desired. A lot of biologists in Montana are preping for the upcomming field season and have budgets to purchase GPS's. Being the GPS nerd in my small circle, they ask me for my advise as to what's new/what's best to buy for serious field and navigation use. I wish I could, but I can't and don't recommend the Colorado for this purpose. If I was a geocacher nerd and my geocacher buddies would ask, it may be a totaly different story.

 

This, my friends, may be where the dichotomy originates between lovers and grumblers of the Colorado. Just a thought. What do you all think of this hypothesis?

Link to comment

I hope they increase the maximum brightness setting so I can see the display outside.......... :mad:

 

When I read this sort of thing, i wonder if people have a bad unit. I've NEVER felt the need to turn the backlight on outside. It is fine and easy to read. I find no desire for a backlight anymore than any other unit I have used.

 

I find the unit great. It is much better to Geocache with than the 60Cx it replaced. Much better. The people I cache with have not had any problems either. I have not look at the 60Cx since I bought it and I have elso not turn on Cachemate once.

 

The first firmware fixed the major problems. The last fix any bugs that I have seen. Everything else is pie.

Link to comment

...

 

I still won't recommend the Colorado to my friends/family members wanting to upgrade. Lets face it, for those who don't live and die by geocaching, this unit leaves some to be desired. A lot of biologists in Montana are preping for the upcomming field season and have budgets to purchase GPS's. Being the GPS nerd in my small circle, they ask me for my advise as to what's new/what's best to buy for serious field and navigation use. I wish I could, but I can't and don't recommend the Colorado for this purpose. If I was a geocacher nerd and my geocacher buddies would ask, it may be a totaly different story.

 

This, my friends, may be where the dichotomy originates between lovers and grumblers of the Colorado. Just a thought. What do you all think of this hypothesis?

I don't think that it's an unreasonable hypothesis. If you look at the Colorado : it has Wherigo playability and serious geocaching functionality ... is it really meant to be used professionally? Perhaps not ( well, reading the model description, it doesn't say "Geocaching" "Wherigo" as much as using it does to me ).

 

Now me, being what I'd classify as a serious geocacher, if a geocacher wanted to upgrade their GPSr and asked me for a suggestion, I'd recommend the Colorado. But I would let them know that this unit has some problems for a non-trivial number of people.

Link to comment
...

The ability to see cache pages, log and upload finds, play Wherigo cartridges ( and a couple more items that don't come to mind ) make this unit worth the $600 ( less the REI rebate ) that I paid for it.

...

Oh yeah, also quick cache ( via GPX file ) lookup.

Link to comment

I was an early adopter of the Colorado, recieved my unit on January 18th. Three units later I got one that finally worked. Someone mentioned a few posts up, that if Garmin were to release a new unit soon would there be as many early adopters? Well, we all know the answer but I don't think that I would be one of them.

 

Truth be told, after two or three months, I'm still a little dissapointed with the pace at which Garmin crawls along to make this unit trouble free. Issues, not wish/lists, are why I'm not as satisfied as I thought I would be. I don't cache very much and maybe thats the difference. This unit to cachers is light-years ahead of anything else available if you want paperless caching on a single unit. To the rest of us, using this GPS as a serious navigation and data gathering tool leaves some to be desired. I propose this as a contributing factor to the dichotomy of who is satasfied and who's not. Others have suggested it's the units themselves but I have to wonder. Maybe how we use the Colorado is really the difference between satisfied or not satisfied.

 

I will take a serious pause before I jump on the eary adopter bandwagon next time. Garmin has given me reason for this pause. Call me crazy but I feel a little burnt.

 

MY "Wish-List" or pet peeves if you will.

 

1) Fix the Barometer so that the unit logs data when unit is powerd off (as advertised)

2) Fix the display of intermittent water bodies (currently its a light brown color and next to impossible to distinguish) This failure to include coding for intermittent water, in my opinion, is very sloppy.

4) Allow map adjustments while in pan mode. All previous models alow you to change map, adjust detail etc.while in pan mode.

5) Waypoint averaging.

6) When I save a track, make the default time tag my local time instead of UTC time. I hate saving a track quickly and having the date show as being tomorrow. Just plain sloppy programing IMHO.

 

Most of the wishes above aren't really wishes after all, but rather fixes to make the unit operate as either advertised or as expected for what I paid for it. Note: None of the "wishes" have anything strictly to do with geo-caching.

 

I still won't recommend the Colorado to my friends/family members wanting to upgrade. Lets face it, for those who don't live and die by geocaching, this unit leaves some to be desired. A lot of biologists in Montana are preping for the upcomming field season and have budgets to purchase GPS's. Being the GPS nerd in my small circle, they ask me for my advise as to what's new/what's best to buy for serious field and navigation use. I wish I could, but I can't and don't recommend the Colorado for this purpose. If I was a geocacher nerd and my geocacher buddies would ask, it may be a totaly different story.

 

This, my friends, may be where the dichotomy originates between lovers and grumblers of the Colorado. Just a thought. What do you all think of this hypothesis?

 

I agree with you 100 %, as an outdoor entusiast it is a definate step backwards from my current 60csx. I'm on my third unit and still have stability issues, what were the main reasons you returned your initial units and how did you finally know when you got a unit you can trust to keep.

Link to comment

Is the Colorado meant to compete with or replace the 60CSx, I don't think so.

 

To me it's clearly aimed at fitness and geocaching. Remember, the Colorado can do many things the 60CSx simply cannot. I think it would be best if we tried to keep them separate and face the fact that they both have their place and are both strong players in different arenas.

 

The Colorado offers wireless data transfer, wireless connectivity to a bicycle cadence censor as well as heart rate monitor, superior geocaching functions that nobody else can come close to, and a display that's above and beyond any GPS I've used.

 

Is there room for improvement? Of course there is, and I have no doubt Garmin's development team is all over it. To be upset that the Colorado isn't the 60CSx with a new look and features just doesn't make sense to me, and that's what I keep reading over and over again.

 

Personally, I look forward to upcoming firmware releases because I'm already 95% satisfied with everything about this device.

 

Then again, I bought it for what I believe it was designed for - not what I hoped it would become.

Edited by XopherN71
Link to comment

Is the Colorado meant to compete with or replace the 60CSx, I don't think so.

 

To me it's clearly aimed at fitness and geocaching. Remember, the Colorado can do many things the 60CSx simply cannot. I think it would be best if we tried to keep them separate and face the fact that they both have their place and are both strong players in different arenas.

 

The Colorado offers wireless data transfer, wireless connectivity to a bicycle cadence censor as well as heart rate monitor, superior geocaching functions that nobody else can come close to, and a display that's above and beyond any GPS I've used.

 

Is there room for improvement? Of course there is, and I have no doubt Garmin's development team is all over it. To be upset that the Colorado isn't the 60CSx with a new look and features just doesn't make sense to me, and that's what I keep reading over and over again.

 

Personally, I look forward to upcoming firmware releases because I'm already 95% satisfied with everything about this device.

 

Then again, I bought it for what I believe it was designed for - not what I hoped it would become.

 

"Take on the trails with Colorado 400t. This rugged, advanced handheld is packed with detailed topographic maps for all your hiking adventures not to mention 3-D map view, a high-sensitivity receiver, barometric altimeter, electronic compass, SD card slot, picture viewer and color display. Exchange tracks, waypoints, routes and geocaches wirelessly between similar units. When the going gets tough, Colorado leads the way."

 

This is a direct quote from the Garmin website, that's why I bought it. The 60 series says essentially the same thing with slightly different wording, so that is exactly why you keep reading these comments over and over ..........it doesn't live up to it's description.............

 

"

Link to comment

We are just past two of that six months, not four - you are off by two months ... nice try. Feel free to triumphantly refer to your quote in four months.

 

It was late....and I've never said I was smart. Not to mention, it has seemed like an eternity waiting for the updates. I know it has not been that long, but the Colorado has soooooo much additional potential and I keep thinking the next update will be the one that blows me away.. Two months.....four months.....what ever. My initial point was that time will clearly show if the Colorado was released too early. When the "finished" product is out it will be easier to determine this contended point. It is far easier to look back and say "This is how it should have been from the start" than to say "It was perfection from day one."

 

Anyway, moving on ... I guess that I am one of the rare few who "lucked out" and received a unit that I have no serious complaints. My Colorado is an excellent geocaching unit and after a ~35 cache day I was even more sold on my 400t. Is it perfect? No. Do I believe that the other small issue that I have with it will be fixed? Yes.

 

I never used the words "rare few" in my initial post. However, I'm glad you received a fully functioning unit. At least you did not have to endure 3 or 4 returns before finding an acceptable unit. I guess I'm just use to my prior Garmin experiences in that my GPSr's have always worked as expected straight out of the box and I didn't have to sit on the edge of my seat waiting for Firmware updates. Heck, I went over a year with my first GPSr before I even knew of Firmware updates and I never knew I was missing anything.

 

It is also good to see you admitting to issues with the Colorado. It is always easier to meet on agreement when people are willing to step away from the extremes. There was a time when some said the only problems with the Colorado were due to user error and unrealistic expectations. There are still a few who refuse to step away from this extreme.

 

Their first firmware update was not simply a ho-hum update, as you seem to suggest. It fixed several serious problems that people were complaining about, including my two biggest complaints : slow startup time and not keeping track up after panning.

 

Where have I suggested that the updates were "ho-hum?" What I think is one of the most telling results of the Firmware updates is Garmin's choice of words. They use the word "corrected." In order for something to be corrected, it must first be incorrect. Those who initially sniped at people voicing concerns over functionality seemed to soften their tone once Garmin admitted to problems with the initial release.

 

Yes, it's really unfortunate that so many are having problems with their Colorado. Maybe I should send Garmin my 400t so they can clone it for everyone.

 

That would be nice and I'm sure Garmin has a few of their initial test models set aside for that purpose. As it is with all consumer electronic devices, the Colorado is the sum of its components and is only as strong as the weakest part. Garmin has placed trust in the companies manufacturing the components. I hope Garmin works things out because one shouldn't have to cross their fingers when opening up the box in hopes of a fully functioning unit. Can you think of any other consumer product where this would be acceptable?

 

...

The Colorado is what it is. It all comes down to individual preferences. Are you willing to give up certain features for the new ones on the Colorado? If you answer yes, buy yourself a new Colorado and have fun. If your answer is no, stick with what you already have, or get a 60csx or one of the HCx's, and have fun.

Essentially, I think that you are correct. Garmin will fix the existing problems but I seriously doubt that we will see most, if any, of the wish-list items in this Colorado.

 

Hey now.......ummmm.....I didn't think we were allowed to agree on anything. That's not how this game is played. :laughing:

Edited by 3 Hawks
Link to comment

it doesn't live up to it's description.............

 

What in the world are you talking about? It does everything they say it will in that paragraph...

 

This rugged / check

advanced handheld / check

packed with detailed topographic maps / check

not to mention 3-D map view / check

high-sensitivity receiver / check

barometric altimeter / check

electronic compass / check

SD card slot / check

picture viewer / check

color display / check

Exchange tracks, waypoints, routes and geocaches wirelessly between similar units / check check check check

 

What am I missing here that it isn't living up to?

 

On top of that list you can add the ability to load the entire US and Canada City Navigator maps on the device without having to use an SD card...

 

I know this is getting a tad off topic, agree or disagree I think I've made my point...

Edited by XopherN71
Link to comment

it doesn't live up to it's description.............

 

What in the world are you talking about? It does everything they say it will in that paragraph...

 

This rugged / check

advanced handheld / check

packed with detailed topographic maps / check

not to mention 3-D map view / check

high-sensitivity receiver / check

barometric altimeter / check

electronic compass / check

SD card slot / check

picture viewer / check

color display / check

Exchange tracks, waypoints, routes and geocaches wirelessly between similar units / check

 

What am I missing here that it isn't living up to?

 

My point is that it is being marketed in the same category as the 60 series and it is a step backwards except for the better display, 3D view and a few minor things. How did you ever get the idea it was developed mainly for geocaching and fitness, geocache is mentioned once and fitness not at all in the overall description. Maybe you should write a new marketing page for Garmin....

Link to comment

it doesn't live up to it's description.............

 

What in the world are you talking about? It does everything they say it will in that paragraph...

 

This rugged / check

advanced handheld / check

packed with detailed topographic maps / check

not to mention 3-D map view / check

high-sensitivity receiver / check

barometric altimeter / check

electronic compass / check

SD card slot / check

picture viewer / check

color display / check

Exchange tracks, waypoints, routes and geocaches wirelessly between similar units / check

 

What am I missing here that it isn't living up to?

 

My point is that it is being marketed in the same category as the 60 series and it is a step backwards except for the better display, 3D view and a few minor things. How did you ever get the idea it was developed mainly for geocaching and fitness, geocache is mentioned once and fitness not at all in the overall description. Maybe you should write a new marketing page for Garmin....

 

I forgot to add your quote.....

 

"To me it's clearly aimed at fitness and geocaching"

Link to comment

You didn't answer my question... you stated it's not living up to it's description, what doesn't it do that is says it will?

 

By same category, do you mean 'Mapping Handhelds'?

 

On the Trail/Mapping Handhelds

https://buy.garmin.com/shop/shop.do?cID=145

 

Whoa, how dare they put the Colorado in that list. :laughing:

 

To answer yours:

How did you ever get the idea it was developed mainly for geocaching and fitness

 

Let's see... it has a separate Geocaching option, ability to upload fitness data, connect to 2 different fitness devices (cadence sensor and heart rate monitor) simultaneously, and display that data on the main page if you wish. It's my opinion on what it was aimed at, that's why I prefaced the comment with 'To me'. I never said Garmin developed it that way... but they sure could have.

Edited by XopherN71
Link to comment

It's simple really, the Colorado as it stands right now is great for geocaching, and seriously lacking for navigation and working in the field. So if you are interested in geocache its as good as is currently on the market. If you want to navigate tracks, and do field work with it, the 60/76 and even etrex line is far superior

Link to comment

You didn't answer my question... you stated it's not living up to it's description, what doesn't it do that is says it will?

 

By same category, do you mean 'Mapping Handhelds'? I see a lot more inferior models in that list than the Colorado, I can assure you of that.

 

On the Trail/Mapping Handhelds

https://buy.garmin.com/shop/shop.do?cID=145

 

Whoa, how dare they put the Colorado in that list. :laughing:

 

Of course there's older models at a much lower prices, should I expect the brand new technology at the highest price to be an inferior product ..........

 

1) poor battery performance

2) dim screen

3) less reception under heavy cover

4) can't display multiple tracks

5) no wavepoint averging

6) no back tracking

7) search fron curser loacation on map

8) declutter

9)proximity alarms

for some..................

Link to comment

Seriously lacking for navigation?

 

How so?

 

It gets me within 15 feet 90% of the time, and I can see the track on the map to follow.

 

Side note: I loaded City Navigator on it... wow, in vehicle navigation is awesome! Re-routing is fast and accurate, detour functionality, very impressed.

 

I would like to know more about the real issues though... so if I'm misunderstanding something please enlighten me with details.

Link to comment

Seriously lacking for navigation?

 

How so?

 

It gets me within 15 feet 90% of the time, and I can see the track on the map to follow.

 

Side note: I loaded City Navigator on it... wow, in vehicle navigation is awesome! Re-routing is fast and accurate, detour functionality, very impressed.

 

I would like to know more about the real issues though... so if I'm misunderstanding something please enlighten me with details.

 

I've taken the 60scx and the Colarado out together several times and in heavy cover the 60scx is holds it's signal much better.....I gave you a list.........

Link to comment

Here we go again...

 

1) poor battery performance

Define poor? I've gone over 10 hours with my backlight on.

 

2) dim screen

Alas, a valid concern in certain circumstances... but you can't have both a super bright screen AND long battery life, pick one or do what Garmin did and compromise.

 

3) less reception under heavy cover

I guess I haven't seen this, but I think any device will suffer 'less' when under poor conditions. I get a good signal in the basement of my house, I can't imagine what worse conditions may lie outside. Have you experienced this?

 

4) can't display multiple tracks

Ok?

 

5) no wavepoint averging

Nope, did they say it would?

 

6) no back tracking

What is your definition? I can see tracks and follow them back.

 

7) search fron curser loacation on map

Valid concern, but there is a workaround.

 

8) declutter

Ok

 

9)proximity alarms

Ok

 

Not sure but is this your 'answer' to my question? Because I don't recall any of this being in the 'description' of what it says it CAN do.

Link to comment

Seriously lacking for navigation?

 

How so?

 

It gets me within 15 feet 90% of the time, and I can see the track on the map to follow.

 

Side note: I loaded City Navigator on it... wow, in vehicle navigation is awesome! Re-routing is fast and accurate, detour functionality, very impressed.

 

I would like to know more about the real issues though... so if I'm misunderstanding something please enlighten me with details.

 

I've taken the 60scx and the Colarado out together several times and in heavy cover the 60scx is holds it's signal much better.....I gave you a list.........

 

read my list as it is , I didn't say

"Seriously lacking for navigation?"

Link to comment

No trackback, it can't do the simple task of hiking into a location, and have the unit navigate the same track in the reverse. This also means for every track I want to load to the unit and have the unit navigate me along, I have to load two tracks one for each direction.

 

No waypoint averaging. I've done the testing in comparison to survey gear, waypoint averaging gives more accurate and consistent sample locations in comparison to not using waypoint averaging.

 

No way to adjust map settings from the mapping screen, yes you can do it from the menu but it takes longer and is a cludge.

 

No heading when using the mapping pointer, there are times it's much easier to move to an area of interest with the pointer on the map and then use a compass to navigate a heading to that location. Also no way to search POI's or Info from a map pointer location.

 

Screen dimness, it's difficult to see in many light conditions, it is possible to see, but it's much harder to see than the etrex screens due to dim backlight and the higher resolution screen not being as bright in reflected sunlight. This is more of an annoyance, and probably more of an issue as I'm used to an etrex or 76 with much brighter screens.

 

Runtime......it's flat out not acceptable for field work, many field days are 12-15 hours in the field, that's 2 if not 3 sets of batteries in the colorado, every day, plus backups. It's not realistic to charge 6 batteries every day in the field doing work. An etrex line can go 2 full field days on a single set.

 

I'll admit the car nav is nice.

Link to comment

Here we go again...

 

1) poor battery performance

Define poor? I've gone over 10 hours with my backlight on.

 

2) dim screen

Alas, a valid concern in certain circumstances... but you can't have both a super bright screen AND long battery life, pick one or do what Garmin did and compromise.

 

3) less reception under heavy cover

I guess I haven't seen this, but I think any device will suffer 'less' when under poor conditions. I get a good signal in the basement of my house, I can't imagine what worse conditions may lie outside. Have you experienced this?

 

4) can't display multiple tracks

Ok?

 

5) no wavepoint averging

Nope, did they say it would?

 

6) no back tracking

What is your definition? I can see tracks and follow them back.

 

7) search fron curser loacation on map

Valid concern, but there is a workaround.

 

8) declutter

Ok

 

9)proximity alarms

Ok

 

Not sure but is this your 'answer' to my question? Because I don't recall any of this being in the 'description' of what it says it CAN do.

 

This is a comparison with the 60scx not your personal opinon of what you think is good....the battery life is a far cry from the 60scx (and all other older units), the screen is dimmer than the 60csx (and most older models), the reception is less ( not an opinion, my testing), backtracking is a guidance feature on the 60csx and older models..................

Link to comment

Again, comparing apples to oranges.

 

I take it you're not going to answer my question? You stated it's not living up to it's description, I don't think that's a fair statement to make at all, especially if someone is interested in the device and reads that. It couldn't be farther from the truth.

Edited by XopherN71
Link to comment

...

If you want to navigate tracks, and do field work with it, the 60/76 and even etrex line is far superior

I've been meaning to ask people who are insisting that TracBack feature be added to the Colorado.

 

I have had a 60C and a 60CSx and have never used this feature. When I needed to go back to, say, where I parked my Jeep, I have simply followed the track that I just made on my GPSr and, voila!, I'm back at my Jeep. When I have wanted to hike a trail that has been recommended to me, I have loaded their saved track into my GPSr followed it.

 

What does TracBack give you that is so wonderful that my above-mentioned "alternative" simply doesn't cut it for you? I am seriously asking this and am not being sarcastic.

 

...

 

I looks like this has been mentioned already but if someone can do a ~"side-by-side" comparison of the two methods, I appreciate it.

Edited by nicolo
Link to comment

That's a no then... :laughing:

 

Just more untruths being spread for no good reason.

 

So you don't think battery life, reception, navigational features are important. At least the info I've discussed is based on fact.....you don't seem to have ant facts so who's spreading untruths, you must work undercover for garmin.

Link to comment

Those are all valid concerns... but not features it's lacking from it's description like you stated earlier, you're dancing around it so I guess you just won't admit it was incorrect.

 

I've already stated I think there is room for improvement, but that doesn't mean 'make it like the 60CSx'.

 

Work undercover for Garmin :laughing: now that would be cool! I actually think large companies could benefit from a forum hound, not a bad idea! :laughing:

 

Nothing I said is untrue... I've stated my personal experience and verified that it does everything you said it doesn't do in their description, now you're just grabbing at straws.

Edited by XopherN71
Link to comment

Those are all valid concerns... but not features it's lacking from it's description like you stated earlier, you're dancing around it so I guess you just won't admit it was incorrect.

 

I've already stated I think there is room for improvement, but that doesn't mean 'make it like the 60CSx'.

 

Work undercover for Garmin :laughing: now that would be cool! I actually think large companies could benefit from a forum hound, not a bad idea! :laughing:

 

Nothing I said is untrue... I've stated my personal experience and verified that it does everything you said it doesn't do in their description, now you're just grabbing at straws.

 

I don't appreciate your comment about me spreading untruths, they are my findings and are as valid as your opinions.

Link to comment

Truth hurt?

It does everything in that list and you go on to say it doesn't live up to it. That is 100% untrue, not your findings and certainly not valid. It doesn't do what you THOUGHT it would, not what you read, now THAT is an opinion.

 

"Take on the trails with Colorado 400t. This rugged, advanced handheld is packed with detailed topographic maps for all your hiking adventures not to mention 3-D map view, a high-sensitivity receiver, barometric altimeter, electronic compass, SD card slot, picture viewer and color display. Exchange tracks, waypoints, routes and geocaches wirelessly between similar units. When the going gets tough, Colorado leads the way."

 

This is a direct quote from the Garmin website, that's why I bought it. The 60 series says essentially the same thing with slightly different wording, so that is exactly why you keep reading these comments over and over ..........it doesn't live up to it's description.............

 

As far as 'will it have certain features it doesn't advertise having'?

I'd call Garmin and see what they tell you, my guess at this point is probably not, at least not until all the bugs are worked out on the features it already has.

Edited by XopherN71
Link to comment

Truth hurt?

It does everything in that list and you go on to say it doesn't live up to it. That is 100% untrue, not your findings and certainly not valid. It doesn't do what you THOUGHT it would, not what you read, now THAT is an opinion.

 

"Take on the trails with Colorado 400t. This rugged, advanced handheld is packed with detailed topographic maps for all your hiking adventures not to mention 3-D map view, a high-sensitivity receiver, barometric altimeter, electronic compass, SD card slot, picture viewer and color display. Exchange tracks, waypoints, routes and geocaches wirelessly between similar units. When the going gets tough, Colorado leads the way."

 

This is a direct quote from the Garmin website, that's why I bought it. The 60 series says essentially the same thing with slightly different wording, so that is exactly why you keep reading these comments over and over ..........it doesn't live up to it's description.............

 

An advanced handheld should have battery life, ect. ect. ( I'm tired of repeating myself). So you tell me where it says it's primarily a geocaching/fitness unit?

Link to comment

It doesn't and I never said THEY DID... I said (AGAIN) 'TO ME IT'S CLEARLY AIMED AT FITNESS AND GEOCACHING'.

 

It's your own fault you are repeating yourself, not mine...

 

IN THAT LIST THAT YOU QUOTED FROM GARMIN WHAT FEATURE DOES IT NOT HAVE THAT IT STATES IT DOES?

 

Are you seriously stating that by not having a longer battery life, it's not an advanced handheld and therefore the only reason out of that whole paragraph that it doesn't live up to it's description?

 

Wow

Edited by XopherN71
Link to comment

It doesn't and I never said THEY DID... I said (AGAIN) 'TO ME IT'S CLEARLY AIMED AT FITNESS AND GEOCACHING'.

 

It's your own fault you are repeating yourself, not mine...

 

IN THAT LIST THAT YOU QUOTED FROM GARMIN WHAT FEATURE DOES IT NOT HAVE THAT IT STATES IT DOES?

 

Are you stating that by not having a longer battery life, it's not an advanced handheld?

 

Well the actual description says it's for outdoor adventures and the issues I mentioned are problems you need to know about when using for it's stated purpose. It does the General things in the description, just not as well as previous "less advanced" models. ( and yes of course it's not worse at all things........just some very important ones).

Link to comment

Well I think we battled this one to death, let's call it a night :laughing:

 

I do agree it needs work, like I said earlier... my main complaint is that people knock the Colorado because it's not the 60CSx.

 

Seems some people expected a 60CSx with a better screen and Geocaching ability.

 

I don't know... is that the case? I have a 60CSx, great device, but it's not perfect either. For what I use it for (and the intent of this site) is Geocaching, and for that the Colorado is phenomenal.

 

Over and over again it seems the seasoned 60CSx users are the main ones that basically disown the Colorado, and to them it will probably always be the black sheep of the family.

 

Again, sorry for going off topic I just wanted to reiterate why I took the stance I did on this.

 

All the best!

Edited by XopherN71
Link to comment

Well I think we battled this one to death, let's call it a night :laughing:

 

I do agree it needs work, like I said earlier... my main complaint is that people knock the Colorado because it's not the 60CSx.

 

Seems some people expected a 60CSx with a better screen and Geocaching ability.

 

I don't know... is that the case? I have a 60CSx, great device, but it's not perfect either. For what I use it for (and the intent of this site) is Geocaching, and for that the Colorado is phenomenal.

 

Over and over again it seems the seasoned 60CSx users are the main ones that basically disown the Colorado, and to them it will probably always be the black sheep of the family.

 

Again, sorry for going off topic I just wanted to reiterate why I took the stance I did on this.

 

All the best!

 

No worries, I just want to help the people that don't only geocache to get the right product that works for them, I guess your right, it is a mainly geocaching site ..........nothing's perfect.

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...