Best Geocaching GPS

[+macStorm]

My 4 year-old daughter and I just started geocaching, first we tried using my iPhone 3g, but it not very accurate, then we tried, my TomTom 910, but that doesn't seem to work well either, tried a little garmin forerunner, which I know is very accurate either. Now I just want to buy a good unit, a 4 year-old's attention span is very short, so I need to get to the right spot, so the hide-and-seek part can start for her.

 

What the best GPS unit for geocaching? I looked at the colorado, is that good or over kill??? I don't want to spend $500 if I can get the same functionality with a $300 unit, but I want to be able to easily see the coordinates, and the paperless thing would be nice too!!!

[+LeonW]

The best GPS unit is the Garmin GPSMap60CSx. Don't know what it cost in your area, but it is the best.

[CloseHauled20]

I have to agree with LeonW's choice for best unit. My wife got me my GPSmap 60CSx for Christmas. Amazon advertises the unit for $300. It's an additional $75 for the MapSource software for road navigation. It's well worth the money.

 

The unit has an accuracy of +/- 9 ft. In heavily wooded areas it still comes in at +/- 18 ft. Excellent for geocaching.

 

When you purchase yours, take your time and learn all the features. You'll be amazed.

 

One thing. I've noticed that the forums are replete with people complaining how their unit's signal "is bouncing all over the place." Give the unit a chance to sync with the satellites. When closing in on a general location, broad moves are fine. When you go geocaching with your new unit, and you close in on the cache, be patient. It needs a chance to close in on an increasingly smaller spot.

 

Good Luck,

 

CloseHauled20

[sanramonhunter]

For geocaching here are my rankings:

 

1.)Garmin Oregon

2.)Garmin Colorado

3.)Garmin 60csx

4.) Any Garmin etrex with the "H" designation

5.) Explorist 500 or 600

 

I've owned #1,3, and 5. I've used the Colorado a few times, never used an etrex in the field, just played with one at the store. I didn't include any of the Delorme's just because I've never had one in my hands, but I've heard they are good units as well.

 

Other than price you really can't go wrong with the oregon for geocaching. If you want to save some $ get an etrex and an old palm. Use the etrex for the hunt and the old palm for the paperless. The added bonus is that you can hand the 4 year old the GPS while you read the cache description on the Palm. Gives her something to do while you figure out what your looking for. An older palm will run less than $30 and cachemate will run you $8.

[+bonstetten]

1. Garmin Oregon: Good performance, good display, good usability combined with the comfortable geocaching-functions (paperless)
   
2. 60 CSx, if you do not want/need to connect your gps often the pc and have a robust, reliable device with actualy a good price. But accept then the "paper-based" caching and avoid to compare the display of the 60Csx with one of an Oregon/Colorado
   

P.S. The Oregon with it's touch-screen is the first of my GPS my wife "really likes" - so I think to keep my 60Csx to have at least one device in my hands...

Edited September 6, 2008 by bonstetten

[+Chuy!]

If you want paperless, the Oregon and Colorado's are your only choices in the Garmin line.

 

If you you're going to be using maps and the autorouting features, then a 60CSx, or Vista/Legend HCx is what I recommend.

 

Skip the auto-routing function and you can look at the Venture HC for $135. It can still hold maps, but it won't autoroute and memory space is limited (24mb). However, the coordinate tracking ability is the same as with the 60CSx and Vista HCx units.

[+off-camber]

I have had a bunch if GPSs since they came out in the mid 90s and the Oregon is the easiest to use with a lot of nice features for GCing.

 

Paperless GCing is the way to go and once you have a unit with feature you won't want to go back to paper.

[+ethanbl]

I have a Garmin GPSMAP 60Cx. I love it, because it is very accurate, and doesn't have an elctronic compass, or altimeter, which would need to be recalculated. I have had experience with many makes and models of GPSrs, and I think that the garmin GPSMAP 60Cx or 60 Csx would be the perfect unit. For paperless, I would look around on craigslist, or the forums for a cheap (possibly used) PDA. I use a Palm Tungsten (With A Rhino Case) with Cachemate loaded on it, which you can probably find for around $60.00. Before that, I used a Dell Axim X50 with GPXsonar, which you can find for about $115.00. I think that cachemate on a palm is much better. You can also load videos, games, and pictures onto a PDA/Pocket PC to keep your 4 y/o entertained if need be.

Edited September 6, 2008 by ethanbl

[+roadrage64]

The best GPS unit is the Garmin GPSMap60CSx. Don't know what it cost in your area, but it is the best.

 

Without a doubt!!!!

[+macStorm]

I have a Garmin GPSMAP 60Cx. I love it, because it is very accurate, and doesn't have an elctronic compass, or altimeter, which would need to be recalculated. I have had experience with many makes and models of GPSrs, and I think that the garmin GPSMAP 60Cx or 60 Csx would be the perfect unit. For paperless, I would look around on craigslist, or the forums for a cheap (possibly used) PDA. I use a Palm Tungsten (With A Rhino Case) with Cachemate loaded on it, which you can probably find for around $60.00. Before that, I used a Dell Axim X50 with GPXsonar, which you can find for about $115.00. I think that cachemate on a palm is much better. You can also load videos, games, and pictures onto a PDA/Pocket PC to keep your 4 y/o entertained if need be.

 

So what GPS unit would you use with the Palm? I have a TX, laying around since I got my iPhone. Could you use the 60SCSX. I think i'm sold on the 60CSX, but the Colorado sounds good too, problem is I have 2 car navs, TomTom and a Dash, so I don't want to pay for a bunch of features I won't use...

[+Ratsneve]

My 4 year-old daughter and I just started geocaching, first we tried using my iPhone 3g, but it not very accurate, then we tried, my TomTom 910, but that doesn't seem to work well either, tried a little garmin forerunner, which I know is very accurate either. Now I just want to buy a good unit, a 4 year-old's attention span is very short, so I need to get to the right spot, so the hide-and-seek part can start for her.

 

What the best GPS unit for geocaching? I looked at the colorado, is that good or over kill??? I don't want to spend $500 if I can get the same functionality with a $300 unit, but I want to be able to easily see the coordinates, and the paperless thing would be nice too!!!

If you have just started geocaching and would like to enjoy paperless geocaching and a touchscreen and are not to set in your GPSr ways yet the Garmin Oregon might be ideal. Unfortunately Garmin is having quite a time fixing bugs in both these new units (the Colorado especially and the Oregon). If you have got some time I would track the Oregon here and see if it settles down again. It is currently liked by many but Garmin just came out with an Oregon software update which fixed or improved some things but introduced at least one new problem.

 

The 60CSx is an older very reliable unit with a smaller screen and can't do paperless. In general everyone today that has a 60CSx is devoted to them and unwilling to give them up for paperless geocaching.

 

In mid October DeLorme is introducing a new GPSr, the PN-40, which you might like to follow, but it is impossible to recommend until it is out and used and liked. It has a smaller non-touchscreen then the Oregon but it will do paperless geocaching.

 

Right now is really not the best time to buy any of the new GPSr's. Many can't avoid it and all of our mileages have varied pretty much.

[+Team Chinook]

Currently the best GPS for geocaching (on the market) is the Colorado 400T. It has it's flaws, but if your hardcore at caching and your unit is ok out of the box, then it is by far the best unit around.

 

However the "reference" GPS for backcountry use is still the 60csx. But it doesn't do paperless caching and is +/- on features w/ the Colorado.

[+Team CowboyPapa]

 

In mid October DeLorme is introducing a new GPSr, the PN-40, which you might like to follow, but it is impossible to recommend until it is out and used and liked. It has a smaller non-touchscreen then the Oregon but it will do paperless geocaching.

 

Allow me to add to Ratsneve's post. But first, let me make the observation that what I get the sense of here is some My Chevy is better than your Ford, case closed! attitude.

 

Well, that can be excused because, as Ratsneve mentions, the DeLorme PN-40's capabilities have only been hinted at up until now. I have been fortunate to have been selected as a Beta tester and have been testing it for almost two months under a strict non-disclosure agreement. This NDA was loosened somewhat today and I am now able speak specifically to some of its capabilities from hands-on experience.

 

Since I disdain the "my BMW is better than your MB" attitude, I'll restrict my comments to suggesting a hands-on comparison of the PN-40 with the 60csx and the Colorado/Oregon when the PN-40 becomes available at retail. You can then make your own judgement as to which suits you best.

 

In a positive sense I will say that it is truly paperless with regard to geocaching with the caveat of having a Premium Membership so that the GPX files can be accessed. It's accuracy is spot on, so if the cache owner/hider has an equivalent, your are within a few feet. I don't feel that is somewhat smaller screen than the Colorado is a detriment to geocaching and any that I've failed to find have been a result of my lack of insight.

 

I'm thinking that the total bundle including DeLorme's Topo maps of the entire USA is $430.

 

There are a couple of other threads nearby with more information including one about "GPS Map Challenge.." started by Ratsneve (which has many side-by-side screenshots) that you might benefit by reviewing them.

Edited September 7, 2008 by Team CowboyPapa

[+Redwoods Mtn Biker]

If money is no object, I'd go with the Oregon or 60CSx. I'd avoid the Colorado as, IMHO, the Oregon has a superior interface.

[+Night Stalker]

No matter what GPS you end up with, I would suggest that you find a local cacher and go with him or her to learn what you need to look for. I would also suggest that you avoid micros until you have cached for a while. This will make your caching much more fun.

[+Ratsneve]

No matter what GPS you end up with, I would suggest that you find a local cacher and go with him or her to learn what you need to look for. I would also suggest that you avoid micros until you have cached for a while. This will make your caching much more fun.

Certainly a good idea if you know of other local cachers. But in addition...after you find the cache...I would assess the accuracy of you own GPS and any other GPSr in the area to the cache too so you can start to get an idea of what accuracy really means toward the day you are hunting for caches yourself. Walk all around the cache area to see how the GPS compass behaves and to see how the electronic compass you might have when standing or walking slowly behaves and what you might detect from terrain differences. You may have to turn the electronic compass off to understand/see some of this. And lastly remember that the person that placed the cache might have been in error picking his/her latitude and longitude--so you can't size up your new GPS performance just from your first geocache.

 

Do you have any new thoughts on the subject of Best Geocaching GPS?

Edited September 7, 2008 by Ratsneve

[+macStorm]

Wow, everyone has given me some great info, Thank you.

 

I thought I'd let you know what I've purchased, at least for now...

 

I went and looked at both the 60CSx and the Oregon, and I really liked the screen on the Oregon 300 someone said it's the iPhone of GPS units, so that got me, (it's really over kill for what I want)

I got the 300 at REI, had to pay retail, even amazon has them at retail, but REI gives 10% back at the end of the year... Now that I've got it, I can't really find the info I'm looking for, I just want to see the coordinates nice and big and easy to find, but the only places I can see then the are pretty small and not the main info on the screen...

 

(maybe I should have got the 400t like someone else suggested don't really know the difference, I thought its just the maps that come with it right??)

 

Do you actually need the maps, which one should get the topo maps or the auto maps?

 

Haven't had a chance to actually use it, though I did take with us when Xen (my daughter) and I went on our walk tonight, but couldn't find the best way to see the coordinates screen...

 

If you want to see the most beautiful little girl in the world, checkout www.sabiha-xen.com

[+macStorm]

I'm not that excited about the Oregon, with rechargeable batteries the screen is very dim, and I still do not get a larger screen dispaly of the coordinates, like I saw on the colorado. I just found I'm moving to Silicon Valley for a Job at Apple, so I think I'm going to take it back and re-evaulate once I settle-in, in month.

[+Ratsneve]

I'm not that excited about the Oregon, with rechargeable batteries the screen is very dim, and I still do not get a larger screen dispaly of the coordinates, like I saw on the colorado. I just found I'm moving to Silicon Valley for a Job at Apple, so I think I'm going to take it back and re-evaulate once I settle-in, in month.

Not proven out yet by me (or anyone else??) but consider that if you used Lithium-ion rechargeable batteries you would get 7.2 V and ~900 mAh. This should give you a brighter backlight screen then 2.4 V and ~2700 mAh Ni-M-H batteries. And 7.2 V is higher then the USB 5 V or 12V to 5 V to MicroUSB inputs.

 

Is anyone using Li-ion cells in their Oregons or Colorados? The Colorado has a diagnostic screen where you might be able to read/confirm the higher voltage of the Lithium cells but seeing the screen actually dim down slightly switching from Li cells to 5 V USB input would be noteable indeed--if true. The Li cells will give you 1/3 the battery capacity though so that isn't to good.

 

I've got a nice voltmeter, no Li cells or charger, and so far no means of getting to the MicroUSB connector pins or an Oregon diagnositic screen to read the actual GPSr system voltage--like the Colorado has that was sweet.

Edited September 14, 2008 by Ratsneve

[+Redwoods Mtn Biker]

Can you link to a source of rechargeable AA Li-Ions? This is all I could find.

[+Team CowboyPapa]

I'm not that excited about the Oregon, with rechargeable batteries the screen is very dim, and I still do not get a larger screen dispaly of the coordinates, like I saw on the colorado. I just found I'm moving to Silicon Valley for a Job at Apple, so I think I'm going to take it back and re-evaulate once I settle-in, in month.

Not proven out yet by me (or anyone else??) but consider that if you used Lithium-ion rechargeable batteries you would get 7.2 V and ~900 mAh. This should give you a brighter backlight screen then 2.4 V and ~2700 mAh Ni-M-H batteries. And 7.2 V is higher then the USB 5 V or 12V to 5 V to MicroUSB inputs.

 

Is anyone using Li-ion cells in their Oregons or Colorados? The Colorado has a diagnostic screen where you might be able to read/confirm the higher voltage of the Lithium cells but seeing the screen actually dim down slightly switching from Li cells to 5 V USB input would be noteable indeed--if true. The Li cells will give you 1/3 the battery capacity though so that isn't to good.

I got a voltmeter and an Li-Ion rechargeable (currently being recharged) that goes in my DeLorme PN-20. Gotta' go for now and back later with a voltage.

[+Ratsneve]

Can you link to a source of rechargeable AA Li-Ions? This is all I could find.

Do a Google for "lithium aa cells" and you'll find more. However, I noticed something I missed. Apparently they come in a second flavor--1.5 V AA and 3.00 Ah (is that 3,000 mAh?) and the 3.6 V AA and 900 mAh.

[+Ratsneve]

I'm not that excited about the Oregon, with rechargeable batteries the screen is very dim, and I still do not get a larger screen dispaly of the coordinates, like I saw on the colorado. I just found I'm moving to Silicon Valley for a Job at Apple, so I think I'm going to take it back and re-evaulate once I settle-in, in month.

Not proven out yet by me (or anyone else??) but consider that if you used Lithium-ion rechargeable batteries you would get 7.2 V and ~900 mAh. This should give you a brighter backlight screen then 2.4 V and ~2700 mAh Ni-M-H batteries. And 7.2 V is higher then the USB 5 V or 12V to 5 V to MicroUSB inputs.

 

Is anyone using Li-ion cells in their Oregons or Colorados? The Colorado has a diagnostic screen where you might be able to read/confirm the higher voltage of the Lithium cells but seeing the screen actually dim down slightly switching from Li cells to 5 V USB input would be noteable indeed--if true. The Li cells will give you 1/3 the battery capacity though so that isn't to good.

I got a voltmeter and an Li-Ion rechargeable (currently being recharged) that goes in my DeLorme PN-20. Gotta' go for now and back later with a voltage.

Does the DeLorme PN-20 (PN-40) have a diagnostics screen that includes the system voltage input? The Garmin Colorado does but the Oregon doesn't.

Edited September 14, 2008 by Ratsneve

[+Marky]

I'm not that excited about the Oregon, with rechargeable batteries the screen is very dim, and I still do not get a larger screen dispaly of the coordinates, like I saw on the colorado. I just found I'm moving to Silicon Valley for a Job at Apple, so I think I'm going to take it back and re-evaulate once I settle-in, in month.

Congrats on the job. My son works for Apple too. You're moving into our cache rich area. We look forward to seeing your find logs.

 

-Marky

[+Team CowboyPapa]

 

I got a voltmeter and an Li-Ion rechargeable (currently being recharged) that goes in my DeLorme PN-20. Gotta' go for now and back later with a voltage.

Does the DeLorme PN-20 (PN-40) have a diagnostics screen that includes the system voltage input? The Garmin Colorado does but the Oregon doesn't.

The fully charged voltage for the Li-Ion battery pack from DeLorme is 4.19.

For a Delkin brand, physical equivalent, it is 3.45.

 

The DeLorme PN-20 and -40 do not present voltage in those terms. However, they do display remaining battery life in terms of %. I assume that this is determined from the remaining charge vs. voltage characteristics for the battery type being used.

[+Ratsneve]

The fully charged voltage for the Li-Ion battery pack from DeLorme is 4.19.

For a Delkin brand, physical equivalent, it is 3.45.

 

The DeLorme PN-20 and -40 do not present voltage in those terms. However, they do display remaining battery life in terms of %. I assume that this is determined from the remaining charge vs. voltage characteristics for the battery type being used.

Interesting... And in my last google and from another post there seem to be two different voltages available for Litium AA cells.

 

4.2 (rounded) probably means each cell is 2.1 V and they are in series, certainly not as high as the 3.6 V variety. Does the PN-40 spec give a _maximum_ input voltage? What if you installed two 3.6 V 900 mAh cells? Although it is not as important on the PN-s as it would be on a CO or OR, it might give a much brighter backlight _and_ possibly shorten the life expectancy of the screen? Learning these detailed specs for a DeLorme may be a piece of cake compared to learning them for a Garmin.

[+Team CowboyPapa]

The fully charged voltage for the Li-Ion battery pack from DeLorme is 4.19.

For a Delkin brand, physical equivalent, it is 3.45.

 

The DeLorme PN-20 and -40 do not present voltage in those terms. However, they do display remaining battery life in terms of %. I assume that this is determined from the remaining charge vs. voltage characteristics for the battery type being used.

Interesting... And in my last google and from another post there seem to be two different voltages available for Litium AA cells.

 

4.2 (rounded) probably means each cell is 2.1 V and they are in series, certainly not as high as the 3.6 V variety. Does the PN-40 spec give a _maximum_ input voltage? What if you installed two 3.6 V 900 mAh cells? Although it is not as important on the PN-s as it would be on a CO or OR, it might give a much brighter backlight _and_ possibly shorten the life expectancy of the screen? Learning these detailed specs for a DeLorme may be a piece of cake compared to learning them for a Garmin.

I don't recall that DeLorme gives quantitative data of that nature. They do have a drop down list of four from which you select in accordance with which type that you have installed:

Alkaline (AAs)

Lithium (AAs)

NiMH (AAs)

Li-Ion (Rechargeble pack)

 

For more than you'll ever want to know, check this:

http://www.batteryuniversity.com/

Edited September 15, 2008 by Team CowboyPapa

[+Red90]

My ranking for CACHING use with money not a consideration.

 

1) Colorado or Oregon (same units, different interface, personal preference)

 

2) PN-40 (Although it is not out, it should be #2 based on specs so far).

 

3) 60 or 76 Cx or Csx

 

4) Etrex Legend or Vista HCX

[+mtnbikerET]

I would suggest the Colorado because it is way more tough than the Oregon. I had an Oregon but I dropped it and the touch screen broke. The Oregon also has problems with the touch screen way point marking thing. In other words... Get the colorado.

[+Nomad001]

Don't know if you've made your purchase yet or not, but here's my thought on the matter:

 

I have both the Oregon, and the GPSMAP60cs. I like them both but for different reasons. Oregon because it has all the bells and whistles of the paperless and touchscreen. There is a learning curve (especially if you've had another GPSR). There is a few features that aren't on the 60 but they're inconsequential. I did read a post regarding how acurate the 60 was in wooded areas. I have to refute that based on my experience. I've lost reception in sparse wooded areas. I've had both units with us and the 60 is always losing reception while the Oregon hardly ever does. I find that with both units having full batteries and being calibrated the 60 is more accurate while walking. The Oregon has the right bearing and all but is slower to adjust location at slow speeds (in the car it's faster and more accurate). Also once you stop, and allow the Oregon to "catch up" it is more accurate than the 60.

 

As far as the Colorado goes, I've read comparisons regarding them and the Oregon out performs the Colorado in almost every category. Not sure where the previous poster got info on waypoint marking but the only issue I have with waypoint marking is not having the ability to average (for placing a new cache).

 

If you go with the 60 you can download directly from GSAK using export to html option in conjunction with freeware called iSilo for your computer and iSiloX for your palm (you have to install on both to utilize). You can upgrade and register it for a small cost. Once you have the file up in html window you use iSilo clipper and it converts to palm format and then you sync your palm with your computer. You get everything you see on the cache page (pics included). When my wife and I go out I download to my Oregon, and 60, then download to a palm so that both of us can use wireless and have access to hints, logs, and info regarding caches. Hope this helps.

[+Nomad001]

Wow, everyone has given me some great info, Thank you.

 

I thought I'd let you know what I've purchased, at least for now...

 

I went and looked at both the 60CSx and the Oregon, and I really liked the screen on the Oregon 300 someone said it's the iPhone of GPS units, so that got me, (it's really over kill for what I want)

I got the 300 at REI, had to pay retail, even amazon has them at retail, but REI gives 10% back at the end of the year... Now that I've got it, I can't really find the info I'm looking for, I just want to see the coordinates nice and big and easy to find, but the only places I can see then the are pretty small and not the main info on the screen...

 

(maybe I should have got the 400t like someone else suggested don't really know the difference, I thought its just the maps that come with it right??)

 

Do you actually need the maps, which one should get the topo maps or the auto maps?

 

Haven't had a chance to actually use it, though I did take with us when Xen (my daughter) and I went on our walk tonight, but couldn't find the best way to see the coordinates screen...

 

If you want to see the most beautiful little girl in the world, checkout www.sabiha-xen.com

 

I saw this after I made my lengthly post below. You didn't need to go to the 400t. If you're looking for the compass, you need to find what cache you want to go to, the touch go. Once it brings up the map, exit out of it and then keep exiting until you come back to your main screen. Select compass and it will have it big. You can customize the order you want the options to appear. I have Geocaches, Compass, Where to, Trip odometer, mark waypoint, and waypoint manager on first page because those are the ones I use the most.

You will also see 4 boxes above the compass, these fields can be personalized just by touching the screen and you can put in what you want to see.

[+space_man]

You realy cant go wrong with any of the newer units. Just figure out what you want it to do for you and one in your price range. You would do fine no problems. I do have a 60cx and i love it .

 

Alex

[+scubahhh]

Take a look at Delorem before you buy. Buy more than one; use them both dide-by-side for a while; keep the one that performs best and return the other.

[+Wild Thing 73]

Garmin MAP 60CSx

[Neos2]

I'm not that excited about the Oregon, with rechargeable batteries the screen is very dim, and I still do not get a larger screen dispaly of the coordinates, like I saw on the colorado. I just found I'm moving to Silicon Valley for a Job at Apple, so I think I'm going to take it back and re-evaulate once I settle-in, in month.

You really ought to take another look at the Garmin 60 CSx.

 

The person who told you the accuracy in the 60CS was not as good as their Oregon was comparing apples to oranges--the Garmin 60 CS does not have the same chipset as the Garmin 60 CSx.

 

The CS model are now discontinued and the newer chipsets were never put into those units. I bought a 76 CS and a 60 CS a month before the "x" models came out! We have since replaced those units with 60 CSx units and there is a significant difference in the accuracy between the CS and the SCx units.

 

You "can" cache paperless with the 60 CSx if you enter the caches as points of interest--and it will hold thousands of caches that way. You do give up some of the nifty geocaching features if you do that, though. Personally, I use GSAK to load a lot of the basic info into the gps (size, type of hide, difficulty & terrain, and hint) and carry along a PDA with the full cache information.

 

I have been looking at the Oregons, because I like cool toys as much as the next cacher. But every time I think I might try one, I read something else that convinces me not to go there yet. I'm interested in finding caches. I need something rugged, reliable, accurate, easily read, and easy to use--the 60 CSx give me just that.