GPSMAP 60CSx vs Legend HCx

[+viking0311]

Which of these two models gets better satellite reception? Which gets better signal under tree coverage? I am looking to upgrade from a Map 330 Magellan(which is I have been having signal issues with). Both Garmin models seem to be fairly close, the legend is lighter, smaller and has better battery life. But the 60CSx is more expensive...is it worth the difference? Only using for geocaching as I have a TomTom 720 for navi in my car.

 

I have read alot of reviews of both, but haven't really seen much of these two side by side...anyone have any experience with them?

 

Thanks for the help.

[gallet]

Vista HCx = 60CSx

Legend HCx = 60Cx

 

Although they have different chips and aerials, both units get equally high quality reception in very difficult conditions. Some people think the H chips have a slight edge.

 

Not only is the HCx cheaper it's also much nicer to use with better button placement. I'd still get a Vista HCx over a 60CSx even if the Vista was dearer.

[+viking0311]

Vista HCx = 60CSx

Legend HCx = 60Cx

 

Although they have different chips and aerials, both units get equally high quality reception in very difficult conditions. Some people think the H chips have a slight edge.

 

Not only is the HCx cheaper it's also much nicer to use with better button placement. I'd still get a Vista HCx over a 60CSx even if the Vista was dearer.

 

thanks. That makes alot of sense, but do you happen to know what the difference is between the Vista HCx and the 60CSx that makes the 60CSx so much more expensive?

[gallet]

That makes alot of sense, but do you happen to know what the difference is between the Vista HCx and the 60CSx that makes the 60CSx so much more expensive?

 

That's a bit of a loaded question so I will give you my considered opinion. As you know prices of goods like this are set by factors other than cost of manufacture, which changes over the life of a product.

 

First thing I'd point out is that Garmin themselves, just before the Colorado release, gave buyers of the 60CSx a $50 cash rebate.

 

Up until July last year, the 60CSx had a far, superiour chip than the etrex range. Anyone serious about gps navigation would not have considered any of the etrex. The 60CSx was in a class of it's own and it had a premium price. Garmin saw the writing on the wall and knew they were not going to get away with old technology so they upgraded their eTrex range with the new H chips from Media Tek. While they are very different chipsets their ability to track under heavy canopys or city canyons the new Media Tek is as good or maybe even better than the SirfStar.

 

Remember the 60CSx was already 18 months old when the HCx came out.

 

What appears to be happening now is that the 60CSx is living off its past reputation as the gps with the top dog chipset. It was not important that the 60CSx was bulky or a bit flaky because it was all about the chipset. However once the H chips were released all this changed but a lot of people have an emotional attachment with their 60CSx's and give out a lot of misinformation with regards to functionality.

 

Now that the chips are equal other factors come into consideration. Like unnecessary bulk, battery life, screen brightness etc. If you *need* a serial connection then you must get the 60CSx otherwise there is no advantage any longer and there are considerable disadvantages with the 60CSx.

 

If both units were released today you'd probably be paying a premium for the smaller size of the etrex, which while being smaller, has *effectively* the same size screen.

[+Miragee]

Vista HCx = 60CSx

Legend HCx = 60Cx

 

Although they have different chips and aerials, both units get equally high quality reception in very difficult conditions. Some people think the H chips have a slight edge.

 

Not only is the HCx cheaper it's also much nicer to use with better button placement. I'd still get a Vista HCx over a 60CSx even if the Vista was dearer.

 

thanks. That makes alot of sense, but do you happen to know what the difference is between the Vista HCx and the 60CSx that makes the 60CSx so much more expensive?

I think some people are willing to pay for for the perceived "cool factor" of the 60CSx. Even if they were exactly the same price, I would buy my Vista HCx again. I prefer its small size, and the click-stick navigation.

[+viking0311]

Makes alot of sense....the only other thing that I can disern as a difference is the 60 CSx has a quad helix and the vista HCx ha a "patch" antenna...doe this effect reception?...ie: tree cover, cloud cover, etc...?

[+viking0311]

So to give anyone a heads up that is also curious about these two models, here is what Garmin had to say:

 

1st email:

 

Thank you for contacting Garmin International.

 

In terms of functionality the units are exactly the same. Other then the size of the units and how the controls are set up, there are no differences.

 

If you should have any further questions or concerns, please feel free to contact us.

 

With Best Regards,

Shawn V

 

Product Support Specialist

2nd Shift Outdoor/Fitness Team

Garmin International

913-397-8200

800-800-1020

913-397-8282 (fax) Att: Shawn V

www.garmin.com

 

After asking for clarification about the difference in the antennas here's what they sent:

 

Aside from the design of the two antennas, there isn't any difference as

far as signal strength and the ability to aquire and hold the satellite

signals. They are both high sensitivity receivers.

 

If you should have any further questions or concerns, please feel free

to contact us.

 

With Best Regards,

 

Shawn V

Product Support Specialist

2nd Shift Outdoor/Fitness Team

Garmin International

913-397-8200

800-800-1020

913-397-8282 (fax) Att: Shawn V

 

hope this helps someone also, cause I was 98% on the vista and they just talked me into saving a 150 bucks .

[QuigleyJones]

Not only is the HCx cheaper it's also much nicer to use with better button placement.

And yet I dispise the HCx button placement and adore the CSx ergonomics.

[+pigpen4x4]

That's why there's chocolate and vanilla.

I too am well stated as preferring the 60CSx.

Go somewhere that you can put both in your hands.

Go through different functions. Find a waypoint. Mark a waypoint. Go to the main menu.

Buy the one you like better.

 

I'm sure Gallet thinks I'm stalking their posts, but really! I'm not!

[gallet]

... and adore the CSx ergonomics.

 

It's one thing to say you like the 60csx layout. However it is not correct to use the term "ergonomic" because like it or not the 60CSx has not been designed to be ergonomic.

 

ergonomic |ərgəˈnämik|

adjective

(esp. of workplace design) intended to provide optimum comfort and to avoid stress or injury.

[moonpup]

Here's my take on this from another thread I commented on...

 

Here's my story regarding these units. When I first started out geocaching, I used the original blue etrex legend and over time upgrading through the newer etrex units until I finally settled on the 60CSx. Once I had the 60CSx I used it extensively and liked it a lot. Most recently I sold it (huge mistake) for the new Colorado 400t and hated the 400t so much due it's bugs I returned it, but that's another thread

 

Anyway, after returning the Colorado (i'm sure over time it will be refined, but i'm impatient) I needed to settle on another gps. My first thought was picking up another 60CSx, but although it's an excellent unit I found the ergonomics lacking for me. I hated how high the antenna stuck up and I really grew to dislike the buttons on the bottom and found them spongy. Then I thought, I really had liked the form factor of the etrex units so I bought a VistaHCx.

 

What I really like about the VistaHCx is it's compactness (i hike alot), the super long battery life, bright display and button layout. I think the ergonomics for me are perfect, i'm also a fan of the click stick. Don't let anyone fool you about the antenna on these units. They are exceptional and I found it to be better than the 60CSx. My accuracy always tends to be +/- 12 ft on average. Although the compass in these units needs constant calibration I like it and find it beneficial. The altimeter is neat, but take it with a grain of salt.

 

Anyway, personal preference is the key here. What some people like others will hate. Try them out and see what works for you. From a technical and performance standpoint you will not go wrong with either a LegendHCx ot VistaHCx.

Edited April 23, 2008 by moonpup

[+viking0311]

thanks to all who added there uniqueness to the collective. Here's a minor question that I don't want to start a new thread for...yet at least.

 

I decided on the Vista HCx...yey me...I know I want topo maps, but garmin topo 2008 is a bit pricey, can I use topo v3.02? it's on eBay for relatively cheap and I am guessing a whole less time consuming than trying to load free maps(which I want to play with, but am more interested in getting on the trail this weekend).

 

Does anyone know the compatibility and perhaps the actual differences between 2008 and v3.02 which I am guessing is the previous release. Or if I am wrong about v3.02 is there an alternative to the expensive 2008 topo that is easy to use?

 

thanks for all the help

 

 

Semper Fi

[+Red90]

Sure, it will work fine.

[+Miragee]

<snip>

 

Does anyone know the compatibility and perhaps the actual differences between 2008 and v3.02 which I am guessing is the previous release. Or if I am wrong about v3.02 is there an alternative to the expensive 2008 topo that is easy to use?<snip>

That is probably the version of Topo I have on my Vista HCx. They work just fine. The only thing you will want to do is download the latest version of Mapsource from the Garmin Site. Also, there is a "patch" you will need to download and install after you install the Topo maps.

 

So you don't have to put the CDs in your CD Drive to use the Topo maps on your computer, copy all three to your hard drive first, then do the install from the hard drive.

[+viking0311]

So Brown left my GPSr yesterday....woohoo a product called vista that doesn't suck

 

thanks for everyone help making up my mind on this one. rest assured you will hear from me again when run into problems

[+viking0311]

GRRRRRR!

 

ok so I have found yet another product called vista that is not flaw free. For some reason my vista won't display bearing or distance to a waypoint and there is no bearing arrow(the big red one on the compass page).

 

call tech support today. will post resolution(if there is one)

[bmirak]

the only other thing that I can disern as a difference is the 60 CSx has a quad helix and the vista HCx ha a "patch" antenna...doe this effect reception?...ie: tree cover, cloud cover, etc...?

 

Bingo. There's a lot of talk here about chipsets, but a chipset only performs as well as the data it receives. The 60csx quad helix antenna is vastly superior to the etrex patch antenna - particularly in regard to reception under heavy cover. Examples:

- In my house, I get at least limited reception almost anywhere. The etrex has to be right next to a window.

- In my car, I get great reception just placing by 60csx on the passenger seat. The etrex has to sit on the dash.

[geoprincesss]

Does anyone know the compatibility and perhaps the actual differences between 2008 and v3.02 which I am guessing is the previous release. Or if I am wrong about v3.02 is there an alternative to the expensive 2008 topo that is easy to use?

I played with Topo 2008 and the older TopoUSA at a friends house. There appeared to be very little difference in terms of useable map detail (new roads, rural structures, etc.) but a HUGE difference in memory required. Sometimes we found 2008 required 4 times the amount of memory to display the same map segments. I suspect this is due to the shading (DEM) that is added to 2008.

 

On the pc monitor using Mapsource, the shading was useful to help visualize elevation. However, I believe the only gpsr that "might" take advantage of these type maps is the Colorado series. Even then I suspect the shading feature might be rather useless on the tiny gpsr screen.

[+MacFlash]

the only other thing that I can disern as a difference is the 60 CSx has a quad helix and the vista HCx ha a "patch" antenna...doe this effect reception?...ie: tree cover, cloud cover, etc...?

 

Bingo. There's a lot of talk here about chipsets, but a chipset only performs as well as the data it receives. The 60csx quad helix antenna is vastly superior to the etrex patch antenna - particularly in regard to reception under heavy cover. Examples:

- In my house, I get at least limited reception almost anywhere. The etrex has to be right next to a window.

- In my car, I get great reception just placing by 60csx on the passenger seat. The etrex has to sit on the dash.

 

Which Etrex are you talking about? The extex H(high sensitivity models) seem to be just as sensitive as the 60CSx. I can get lock on the bottom floor of my 3 story Townhouse in the middle of the building with my Legend HCx. As to patch versus helix- it depends on the environment and position. Sujggest you search-many comparisons have been made and I can't find anything conclusive.

[CenTexDodger]

 

On the pc monitor using Mapsource, the shading was useful to help visualize elevation. However, I believe the only gpsr that "might" take advantage of these type maps is the Colorado series. Even then I suspect the shading feature might be rather useless on the tiny gpsr screen.

 

The shading is part of it, but the real beauty of the DEM data is that it will show elevation data of any point. even if your topo maps are hidden behind the street maps. if you are standing at a spot and use the key pad to scroll to another point, the little box that pops up to show location will give elevation as well.

[+viking0311]

 

The shading is part of it, but the real beauty of the DEM data is that it will show elevation data of any point. even if your topo maps are hidden behind the street maps. if you are standing at a spot and use the key pad to scroll to another point, the little box that pops up to show location will give elevation as well.

 

And the older topo map doesn't give elevation info?

[CenTexDodger]

And the older topo map doesn't give elevation info?

 

No it doesn't. it gives you the contour lines, which show the elevation, but the DEM data will embed the elevation in routes and such, and IIRC, it will put the elevation in remotely marked waypoints.

 

The old Topo is essentially a vectorized version of a paper map.

Edited May 5, 2008 by CenTexDodger

[+imajeep]

the only other thing that I can disern as a difference is the 60 CSx has a quad helix and the vista HCx ha a "patch" antenna...doe this effect reception?...ie: tree cover, cloud cover, etc...?

 

Bingo. There's a lot of talk here about chipsets, but a chipset only performs as well as the data it receives. The 60csx quad helix antenna is vastly superior to the etrex patch antenna - particularly in regard to reception under heavy cover. Examples:

- In my house, I get at least limited reception almost anywhere. The etrex has to be right next to a window.

- In my car, I get great reception just placing by 60csx on the passenger seat. The etrex has to sit on the dash.

 

Coulda fooled me. I use a 60 CSx and love it, and Ms. Imajeep uses a Vista HCx (and loves that). Performance on both units is comparable, unless we're in a slot canyon. Then I win.

[+viking0311]

best I can see is both have their own high points and the only way to cover all bases is to carry both.

[gallet]

the only other thing that I can disern as a difference is the 60 CSx has a quad helix and the vista HCx ha a "patch" antenna...doe this effect reception?...ie: tree cover, cloud cover, etc...?

 

Bingo. There's a lot of talk here about chipsets, but a chipset only performs as well as the data it receives. The 60csx quad helix antenna is vastly superior to the etrex patch antenna - particularly in regard to reception under heavy cover. Examples:

- In my house, I get at least limited reception almost anywhere. The etrex has to be right next to a window.

- In my car, I get great reception just placing by 60csx on the passenger seat. The etrex has to sit on the dash.

 

This was the situation about a year ago, then Garmin rolled out the new media tek H series chipsets many people seem to have comprehending this fact.

 

http://gpstracklog.typepad.com/gps_tracklo...tek-gps-ch.html

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=80114

Edited May 5, 2008 by gallet