Jump to content

Which of the two?


Recommended Posts

Ok folks I've looked through the posts and I was sure the subject has come up but couldn't find it, so I'm backpacking/hiking and geocaching, which unit would you get if you were buying it now the colorado or 60csx, I'm looking for different oppinions, I work at REI so I have above avarage knowledge but all of you may know more since your in this forum, I've used the 60cs alot for geocaching (the stores not mine) I own a vista cs but I'm not sure if the colorado is worth getting yet?, it has so many problems when caching but they may address them like the ones on early 60 series, I'm not in a big hurry to get a new unit so waiting will be ok with me, all opinions welcome thank you.

Edited by Team sixgun
Link to comment

Ok folks I've looked through the posts and I was sure the subject has come up but couldn't find it, so I'm backpacking/hiking and geocaching, which unit would you get if you were buying it now the colorado or 60csx, I'm looking for different oppinions, I work at REI so I have above avarage knowledge but all of you may know more since your in this forum, I've used the 60cs alot for geocaching (the stores not mine) I own a vista cs but I'm not sure if the colorado is worth getting yet?, it has so many problems when caching but they may address them like the ones on early 60 series, I'm not in a big hurry to get a new unit so waiting will be ok with me, all opinions welcome thank you.

 

Do like I did - buy both the 60scx and the 400T and take them both out. The kicker for me was the tripmeter on both . The 400 T said I had traveled 0.12 less than the 60scx, an Edge 305, a Cateye , and actual road makers. So the 400T went back.

 

When the bugs have been worked out of the 400T, I will be first in line. Other than the issues, I loved its features.

 

Now that I think of it, I wonder if many Geocachers even see the dynamics of real in motion travel statisitics as would be provided by the tripometer - as most of us Geocachers walk ? whereas I ride a bike on trail to get near the cache first.

Edited by schmidtbaby
Link to comment

Ok folks I've looked through the posts and I was sure the subject has come up but couldn't find it, so I'm backpacking/hiking and geocaching, which unit would you get if you were buying it now the colorado or 60csx, I'm looking for different oppinions, I work at REI so I have above avarage knowledge but all of you may know more since your in this forum, I've used the 60cs alot for geocaching (the stores not mine) I own a vista cs but I'm not sure if the colorado is worth getting yet?, it has so many problems when caching but they may address them like the ones on early 60 series, I'm not in a big hurry to get a new unit so waiting will be ok with me, all opinions welcome thank you.

 

Do like I did - buy both the 60scx and the 400T and take them both out. The kicker for me was the tripmeter on both . The 400 T said I had traveled 0.12 less than the 60scx, an Edge 305, a Cateye , and actual road makers. So the 400T went back.

 

When the bugs have been worked out of the 400T, I will be first in line. Other than the issues, I loved its features.

 

Now that I think of it, I wonder if many Geocachers even see the dynamics of real in motion travel statisitics as would be provided by the tripometer - as most of us Geocachers walk ? whereas I ride a bike on trail to get near the cache first.

 

Comparison table is located here: http://garmincolorado.wikispaces.com/Colorado+vs+60csx

 

To the point of odometer accuracy -- I've compared my odometer on my 400t to my 60cs over many (~30) hikes and as long as the 60cs doesn't lose lock they are usually within 1-2% of each other, the 400t is almost always a little longer. Instantaneous speed and time moving/stopped tend to vary widely between the two units. The 400t's instantaneous speed always seems to read low although average speed for both units is almost identical. The 400t tends to more accurately record the stopped time better than the 60cs.

 

GO$Rs

Link to comment

Ok folks I've looked through the posts and I was sure the subject has come up but couldn't find it, so I'm backpacking/hiking and geocaching, which unit would you get if you were buying it now the colorado or 60csx, I'm looking for different oppinions, I work at REI so I have above avarage knowledge but all of you may know more since your in this forum, I've used the 60cs alot for geocaching (the stores not mine) I own a vista cs but I'm not sure if the colorado is worth getting yet?, it has so many problems when caching but they may address them like the ones on early 60 series, I'm not in a big hurry to get a new unit so waiting will be ok with me, all opinions welcome thank you.

 

Do like I did - buy both the 60scx and the 400T and take them both out. The kicker for me was the tripmeter on both . The 400 T said I had traveled 0.12 less than the 60scx, an Edge 305, a Cateye , and actual road makers. So the 400T went back.

 

When the bugs have been worked out of the 400T, I will be first in line. Other than the issues, I loved its features.

 

Now that I think of it, I wonder if many Geocachers even see the dynamics of real in motion travel statisitics as would be provided by the tripometer - as most of us Geocachers walk ? whereas I ride a bike on trail to get near the cache first.

 

Comparison table is located here: http://garmincolorado.wikispaces.com/Colorado+vs+60csx

 

To the point of odometer accuracy -- I've compared my odometer on my 400t to my 60cs over many (~30) hikes and as long as the 60cs doesn't lose lock they are usually within 1-2% of each other, the 400t is almost always a little longer. Instantaneous speed and time moving/stopped tend to vary widely between the two units. The 400t's instantaneous speed always seems to read low although average speed for both units is almost identical. The 400t tends to more accurately record the stopped time better than the 60cs.

 

GO$Rs

 

Trouble is I want it all - accurate location, speed, distance, etc. I feel that all in all the 60scx is more accurate than the 400/300 series - but that is my personal opinion and it appears to be the opinion of quite a few other people on these forums.

 

It seems that a more scientific comparsion could be done with the Colorados and other units out there - more scientific than verbage from these forums. But with that said, I suspect that there is variance between individual 400s/300's and even 60scx's. I also suspect that part of the problem with the Colorados is where your'e at on earth and the particular satellite constellation you're using.

 

So I'm waiting on someone to convince me that the 400T is as accurate or moreso than the 60scx. When that happens. I'll buy one again. I love the feature set of the 400T and can't wait until it's perfected.

Edited by schmidtbaby
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...