GPSmap 60CSx to a Colorado 400t

[+The Yinnies]

Do I or don't I? I use it for caching and driving. I am not into tech that much.

[+XopherN71]

YES

 

Most definitely... those are the main 2 reasons I use mine and made the switch, no regrets at all - the 400t is incredible.

[CivilVet]

This is probably the best thing to help you with your decision:

 

http://garmincolorado.wikispaces.com/Colorado+vs+60csx

 

Since I have never used a Colorado don't take this as a recommendation, but based on that list I don't feel the need to upgrade right now.

[A.B.E.L.]

the paperless caching function is reason enough to upgrade (imho)

 

not to mention the gui/maps feel like Apple OSX and the 60CSx gui/maps now feel like Windows 95/Palm OS, It's a world of difference!

 

I recently upgraded from a 60CSx to a 400t and have zero regrets, sure there are some minor quirks still... but for me the pro's outweigh the cons at this point. if you have the means to upgrade then do so!

[+XopherN71]

Here's an animated gif I made this morning with some random screenshots thrown in showing some highlights of navigation as well as geocaching mode.

 

Hope it helps.

[CivilVet]

the paperless caching function is reason enough to upgrade (imho)

 

not to mention the gui/maps feel like Apple OSX and the 60CSx gui/maps now feel like Windows 95/Palm OS, It's a world of difference!

 

I recently upgraded from a 60CSx to a 400t and have zero regrets, sure there are some minor quirks still... but for me the pro's outweigh the cons at this point. if you have the means to upgrade then do so!

 

Personally, until the bugs are worked out of the firmware, and that might be as soon as 2.51 is out of beta, I wouldn't want to deal with it.

 

Although I wish I could have profiles, those sound very helpful and paperless caching would be very nice. However, the longer battery life, the ability to edit or create geocaches in the field, and that turn pop ups occur on any page are very helpful features, IMO.

 

Once these issues get sorted out I would likely consider a 400t for my next unit. But I don't get the argument about user interface, but I don't mind the interface on the 76/60Csx, I thin it works well for everything I have wanted to do with it.

[+XopherN71]

I think you are confusing 'bugs' with 'features', bugs are something that is not working right, advertised functions that fail. The latest firmware (2.51 Beta) has cured almost all of these.

 

What you mention are things you would like to see it gain in the future, which may or may not ever happen.

 

From your post I'm not sure whether or not you have one, or ever used one.

 

Repeating what others have said without experience is just a pet peeve of mine I guess, a lot of false information gets passed along this way. When someone is trying to make an educated decision it's hard enough to sort through the posts let alone have to decipher what is a legitimate downfall or not.

 

Both the 60CSx and Colorado are excellent devices, you'll have a blast either way. You do however have to weigh your options and decide what features are important to you and which ones aren't.

 

The Colorado is NOT a replacement for a 60CSx, I don't care what anyone says. For me, the display, screen size, paperless caching and wireless capabilities far outweighed waypoint averaging. Others cannot do their work without that feature.

Edited April 22, 2008 by XopherN71

[+Marky]

For me, the display, screen size, paperless caching and wireless capabilities far outweighed waypoint averaging. Others cannot do their work without that feature.

Although waypoint averaging might be a nice warm tummy feature, I've never seen it proven that it is statistically better than a waypoint taken with a device that doesn't have waypoint averaging (assuming that both devices have been on for a reasonable length of time, say 20 minutes).

 

As far as switching from a 60 CSx goes, it depends a lot on if you make use of the 60CSx features that are missing in the Colorado. If you look over that list and don't see any deal breakers, then you'd probably be very happy with the Colorado. One thing to consider, people who aren't happy with the switch tend to be much more vocal about it that people that are happy, so keep that in mind.

 

--Marky

[+XopherN71]

Although waypoint averaging might be a nice warm tummy feature, I've never seen it proven that it is statistically better than a waypoint taken with a device that doesn't have waypoint averaging

 

For what it's worth, I watched my 60CSx go through the averaging process and let it run 100 cycles.

 

The coordinates never changed.

 

Since I've had my Colorado I've gotten multiple comments on my hides (the hides I used the Colorado with) stating that the coordinates were spot on.

[CivilVet]

I know the difference between bugs and features, thanks. You're right, the newest BETA firmware does seem to solve the issues most people have had. But I also would NEVER recommend someone use beta software. So if I did not have a pressing need, I would wait until 2.51 is out of beta. Which is likely a matter of a few weeks.

 

Yes what I said are features that aren't on the CO; however, those are important to me, much more so than having to keep a logbook. g-o-cachers website gives a LOT of useful information, and there are features that are useful that the CO does not have beyond just waypoint averaging. Like the ones I mentioned, and some of the missing features relate to navigation like the OP asked about. I have only played with a CO for a few minutes at a store since everyone I know has a Etrex, or 76 and none of them are looking to buy a new one. But based on the reviews on the web and this forum I have no incentive to upgrade other than the "coolness" factor of the new unit.

 

Also IMO you have to be a premium member in order to fully use the geocaching features of the CO. If you aren't a premium member and don't want to become one, then you will still need a logbook for hints, and other notes.

 

So until certain features get added I am in no hurry to upgrade, but the choice of ANY GPS unit has to be based on the features you want and need. Just saying it works for you is worthless, the same as saying it doesn't work for me. If the OP wants a CO he needs to look at the comparison and see if the advantages of a 60 is important to him. And then he needs to decide if the advantages of the CO are worth the $.

[+XopherN71]

Personally, until the bugs are worked out of the firmware, and that might be as soon as 2.51 is out of beta, I wouldn't want to deal with it.

What specific 'bugs' are you referring to then?

 

Also IMO you have to be a premium member in order to fully use the geocaching features of the CO.

Log on to your "My Garmin" account and select the Geocaching link. Search for caches there, voila - full use of the Colorado's Geocaching features.

 

BTW, the OP said caching and driving - 2 things the Colorado excels at over the 60CSx, I know from experience.

 

I'm really not trying to single you out, but you keep posting statements without any backing or additional info... that's why I keep asking questions. As far as not recommending the beta release, that might be the worst advice yet Normally I would agree, but in this case it's simply awesome and I can't wait for the final release.

 

Side note:

I've submitted a request that 'may' get implemented, the tech that took my request agreed and will personally forward it on. The ability to auto select maps when you change profiles. Apparently I'm not the only one who mentioned it to them, that would be awesome! Just goes to show, if you want something done don't just rant about it in a forum, contact the manufacturer - in some cases it might just happen.

Edited April 22, 2008 by XopherN71

[A.B.E.L.]

But I don't get the argument about user interface, but I don't mind the interface on the 76/60Csx, I thin it works well for everything I have wanted to do with it.

 

It wasn't a big deal to me either... until I started using it, it just feels tremendously better. Also since the data fields are transparent it just 'feels' like the screen is bigger (although its only marginally bigger than the 60CSx) also you can easily hide the softmenu icons (top left and right) as well as the datafields (with 2 clicks vs. the 60CSx like 4-10+ clicks and the colorado's profiles remember this) which again, makes the screen just feel bigger and better. I don't think I could ever go back... at least without a fight

[CivilVet]

I thought you had to be a premium member to download hints, logs and descriptions. That has been described elsewhere as why it won't transfer those things over the link. If that is incorrect then my bad, it has been reported in numerous sources here and in reviews.

 

Bugs:

 

Lockups on power up,

Sometimes geocaches are not loaded from GPX file into the Geocache list

Backlight setting

 

Plus I would want a fully QA version of the 2.51 firmware. Not a BETA version, since 2.4 seems to have lots of problems.

 

ETA: Plus the number of defective units reported on these forums is too high for me to buy one right now. In 3-6 months that issue may have gone away.

Edited April 22, 2008 by CivilVet

[+XopherN71]

You may be right on the Geocaching thing, I'll have to look again but I'm almost positive the one time I did it that way that I had all the info.

 

I'm a premium member here, so pocket queries are where it's at

 

I'll load one up now in another state just to see... screenshot coming one way or the other.

Edited April 22, 2008 by XopherN71

[+Red90]

ETA: Plus the number of defective units reported on these forums is too high for me to buy one right now. In 3-6 months that issue may have gone away.

 

One of our locals was talking to the big GPS stores and they said that returns were high when they first came out, but have dropped to normal level for the past while. Most likely the "bad" units are already out of the system.

 

I personally have not seen any "bugs" since changing to 2.51. No lockups, no incorrect operation.

 

Personally, I'm also getting tired of people that don't own one coming on here and saying the unit is bad.... You are just perpetuating internet gossip.

[A.B.E.L.]

Personally, I'm also getting tired of people that don't own one coming on here and saying the unit is bad.... You are just perpetuating internet gossip.

 

agreed!

 

on another note, I just got my 400t last week and it shipped with v2.40 software (also has 4gb memory *whew*) and I have yet to run into any lockups or any problems! (still on v2.40)

[CivilVet]

ETA: Plus the number of defective units reported on these forums is too high for me to buy one right now. In 3-6 months that issue may have gone away.

 

One of our locals was talking to the big GPS stores and they said that returns were high when they first came out, but have dropped to normal level for the past while. Most likely the "bad" units are already out of the system.

 

I personally have not seen any "bugs" since changing to 2.51. No lockups, no incorrect operation.

 

Personally, I'm also getting tired of people that don't own one coming on here and saying the unit is bad.... You are just perpetuating internet gossip.

 

THe unit isn't bad, I like some things about it, but it doesn't have features that are valuable to me and currently isn't worth the cost without those features. Features are what makes a piece of electronics useful. the CO is better on some things, worse on others. A user needs to know about the strengths and weaknesses of each. I never said it was bad only 1) It isn't worth it FOR ME, 2) if I wanted one I would wait a few months.

 

I have the same advice about any first gen electronics. Wait till it has been out 3-6 months to let them work out any hiccups in manufactoring and software. This has been true with the PS1, ipod, Xbox 360, the 60Csx I think had problems initially. YOu said the defective units were and issue, and 2.4 sucked, so why is it "gossip" to say wait a little while to let the first units and v2.4 to get out of the marketplace.

 

From the posts here 2.51 sounds like good firmware, but I don't use BETA software. Example, I love Firefox, I hate the memory issues in v2, and all indications that the current version of v3 solves these issues. However, I will not load software below a release candidate at least, final version is better. I doubt I am alone in not using BETA software.

 

But whatever, I am not going to argue about it anymore. My advice is still the same, check the features of the CO are they worth upgrading, use the list of GO$rs and reviews on the web.. If yes I would say wait a few months to minimize the chance of getting a defective unit, let 2.51 be installed so you don't have to flash the firmware, and let the "new gadget" price premium disappear.

[bmirak]

I have not used the Colorado, but judging from this board it is a very good device. That being said, the CO's lack of capabilities found on the less expensive 60csx - things that are just a matter of programming - is irritating.

 

Garmin obviously thinks it can make more money by dividing capabilities b/w the two units rather than outright replacing the 60csx. I don't blame a company for wanting to maximize profits, but it irritates me as a consumer.

 

The biggest problems for me are:

- The CO lacks waypoint averaging

- The CO does not support custom waypoint images

 

As slick as the CO is, I'm not going to pay the extra money until the CO fully replaces the 60csx.

[+XopherN71]

The CO does not support custom waypoint images

 

You can however create custom POI's with custom images, I have some set as 'Camprounds' and another set as 'Speed Limit XX'. One set will have a camper the other whatever the speed limit change is.

[+csmith0406]

Do I or don't I? I use it for caching and driving. I am not into tech that much.

 

Hi, I actually bought the Colorado first, returned it and bought the 60CSx. The only reason I returned the Colorado was because of the accuracy issues you may have heard of. Mine was completely inaccurate, but after doing some research to find out if there was a fix, I found that other people were having intermittent accuracy problems. Knowing myself, that would drive me crazy, so I returned it instead of exchanging it and got the 60 CSx. If I had another unit I might have stuck it out longer, but I needed one now.

 

Now that I have the 60 CSx, I love it, and wouldn't upgrade to the Colorado. The Colorado 400t has an awesome 3D topo map and the paperless geocaching is great, but other than that I now feel the 60 CSx is a better fit for me. It is much easier to learn than the Colorado, for me anyway.

 

I assume you have a 60 CSx now and are looking for an upgrade, if you are looking for a change, my guess would be you'll like the Colorado. If you can wait, I recommend you wait a little longer until the problems stop surfacing. I know many people feel the latest upgrade has fixed all problems, but I would wait longer to be sure that is the case. I don't think the accuracy issues are fixed yet, but I also don't think that is a widespread problem.

[+The Yinnies]

Why are some of you saying wait? Is there some new software?

Thanks