Is it worth upgrading from a 60csx

[wayoutwest2]

SO I have a 60csx and really like it, its about 3 years old, no problems at all with it. BUT I now have an opportunity to get a new GPS (handheld or Nuvi) at a great price.

 

I mainly use it for hiking, skiing, a little caching and carrying it around when we take the family on day trips (zoo/fair/disney) etc.

 

Is the Colorado nice enough to sell the 60csx and upgrade to a new one.

 

I have about a week to decide and plan on hitting REI to look at them in person

 

Thanks for any advice

[+Chapskis1]

I just got an Oregon yesterday, and love it so far. From what I understand though, is that the 60csx is just as good or better than an Oregon or Colorado minus the paperless feature. If you are going to upgrade though, the research I have done I have found that the Oregon is the way to go vs. a Colorado (for basically the same amount of $).

 

Hope this helps!

 

Chapskis1

[+Brassine Family]

pretty much the only difference is the Oregon and the Colorado are new with touch screen etc. plus you can enter info so you don't have to carry around paper.

 

But, do a search here on the forums about the Oregon or the Colorado and you will see that so many of them are a pain in the rear due to bugs and the systems not working right.

 

Honestly, I would hang on to the 60CSX for another year or so and give the two new gpsrs time to get the bugs worked out and the price drop even lower.

[+Prime Suspect]

People I know who've switch from the Colorado to the Oregon, all say the like the Oregon's interface much better. The touch screen is much easier to use than the "roller" selector, especially when entering waypoints in the field. Both, however, suffer from the dim-screen problem. Coming from the bright, easy-to-see-in-direct-sunlight 60CSx, you may not be happy with the dim display of either of the "state" models. Actually, it's not so much a matter of the backlight being dim, as it is a transflective problem. The greater the pixel density, the less sunlight a transflective screen can use for illumination. Adding a resistive touchscreen to the Oregon increases the problem slightly. A capacitive touchscreen, like the iPhone has, wouldn't cut the light, but then you encounter the problem of not being able to use it while wearing gloves - not good for an outdoors product. They can also be activated by just being near the touchpad, requiring some sort of screen lock to be used.

Edited October 11, 2008 by Prime Suspect

[+Walts Hunting]

Just remember as males we buy what we want not what we need. Just ordered my Oregon ($535, delivered to the door) and no way can I justify it so I didn't try.

[+boda]

Just remember as males we buy what we want not what we need. Just ordered my Oregon ($535, delivered to the door) and no way can I justify it so I didn't try.

Worked for me. That is the main reason I went for the Oregon rather than the 60csx. I was upgrading from a 60cs, so they were both improvements on a great GPS. I went to REI and looked at both the Colorado and the Oregon, and researched both products elsewhere. I treated myself to the Oregon and love using it.

 

To answer the OP specifically, though; would I have upgraded from a 60csx? I don't know. You said you don't do much caching, so the paperless aspect is probably not as important to you as it is to me. And you currently have one of the best all-around GPSr available. Would I upgrade at current prices? Probably not without a heavy dose of "Walts Hunting" toy factor.

[+Eaglecacher55]

I would highly question if going to a Colorado or Oregon is "moving up" at this point. The 60 CSx is a workhorse and proven in the field, and I have heard a lot of new design problems or manufacturing problems or what ever they are. I have no regrets and don't plan to "move up" anytime soon. As far as paperless caching, I did move up that area for about $40 for a used Palm M125, CacheMate, and a 128mb SD card for a 10,000 cache plus capability and a $15 replacement cost if lost or damaged. I personally don't want a touch screen of the price of an Oregon, out in the field/woods where I will be relying on it for multiple functions. My theory is keep it simple, capable and rugged. I'm sure others have various views, and if I had money to burn, I would have one in addition to my 60Csx, just because I am a high tech junkie by nature, (and a male LOL) but retirement has tamed many of my desires.... except my desire to cache my little legs off LOL and leave as much money as possible for gas to get to the woods.

[+Eaglecacher55]

(duplicate post slipped through~extra copy deleted)

Edited October 19, 2008 by Eaglecacher55

[+Red90]

I would highly question if going to a Colorado or Oregon is "moving up" at this point..

 

Have you used one caching? I doubt it. It is a whole new world. The 60csx is like a dinosaur. The whole caching experience is so much better with a CO or OR. Either one is fine. Don't listen to the haters, they both work great. Remaining bugs are small and won't interfere with your caching experience.

[+Eaglecacher55]

I'm sure they are great, and I am sure you have far more experience than I do. And no, I don't use one, bottom line is I can't afford it and not really ashamed to admit it. The forums are a place for sharing opinions and relating experiences and that's exactly what I was doing, however I would not malign you for having your opinion. My point was, that I have observed more people dissatisfied with the newer models than I have that were satisfied even though they have a fantastic set of capabilities. Call them haters if you want to, but they seem to have real issues. I'm sure that the issues either have been or will be worked out and that they are fantastic equipment, but for me they would not be a move up. Call me a dinosaur too if you would like, but I choose not to stoop to that level in the forums.

 

The dinosaur lover

[+Red90]

My point was, that I have observed more people dissatisfied with the newer models than I have that were satisfied even though they have a fantastic set of capabilities.

 

Online or in REAL life?

 

You need to realise that forums are place for people that LIKE to complain to congregate..... You are not seeing an equitable range of opinions here.

 

All that I am saying is don't put something down that you have never used. Don't let the internet create your opinions.

[+Prime Suspect]

It all depends on how important "all in one device" geocaching it to you (plus the ability to do Whereigos). To get this, you're giving up a bright, easy to read in sunlight display (pretty, shaded maps are nice, but useless if you can't see them). You're gaining a more compact unit. You're giving some GPS sensitivity (but not much - you may not notice it). It's all a matter of trade-offs.

[golfgunny]

I went from an original Etrex, to a Map 60 (yes, just a 60), and then upgraded to the Colorado 400t. I absolutely love it, and haven't had a single problem with it. It performs flawlessly, and the interface simply took a little getting used to after becoming familiar with the 60's keypad.

 

I haven't upgraded to 2.8 firmware, but still haven't had any problems with it. I really love it, and am quite pleased with the paperless caching feature. I like that I don't have to pull the batteries out to get to the memory card, and I enjoy how quickly it boots up (even with that huge map stored in there).

 

I cannot say a single bad thing about the CSx, simply because I have never used one. They are, of course, the benchmark of sorts, and I've never heard a bad comment about them. I just prefer the interface of the Colorado over the 60's keypad, and only having to carry one device (vice a palm).

[+YBLee]

As a Geocacher, I love the potential of both the Colorado and the Oregon and prefer the Oregon. I have owned and compared both to my 60CSx, in the field, Geocaching. Hands-down, the basic function of GPS accuracy was better on the 60CSx than on either the Colorado or Oregon. I even had drifting issues in "clear view" areas with both the Colorado and Oregon and the 60CSx was rock solid. I varying density canopy situations, the 60CSx was always the most reliable instrument. For all-in-one Geocaching, the idea of both Colorado and Oregon is GREAT, but comes at a compromise - at least as of the point when I owned both.

I generally use a 2610 to route to the cache area and then use the 60CSx for the search. Three weeks ago I did a 2000+ miles motorcycle tour of eastern AZ and western NM. I used the 60CSx on batteries for routing and direct caching and it was as flawless as any GPS could be using CNNA and Topo's. If Garmin made a GPS that performed and had a display as good or better than the 60CSx and had the features of the Oregon, I'd buy it in a heart-beat. BUT, that hasn't happened yet!! From experience with all the above, I would recommend the 60CSx over either the Colorado or the Oregon at this point in time. Hope this helps.

PS: In no way do I mean to offend anyone that owns the Colorado or Oregon.

[+Red90]

They do. A Colorado that is working properly with the current firmware is as sensitive as a 60csx if not more..... I've done a lot of caching with people carrying a 60csx and rarely have we zeroed out at different locations. When we have, usually the Colorado was closer to the cache. I've also closely compared tracklogs in very poor reception conditions and there is no difference.

 

Anyone that wants to stand here and claim otherwise should provide some facts or data as the gossip is getting old...

 

Here are some tracks... One is a 60csx, the other a Colorado 300. This is on the side of a VERY steep hill in heavy coniferous forest. Which is which?

 

AND this was long before the current firmware, the Colorado performance is even better with the new GPS firmware....

[Neos2]

I wanted to buy my husband a new gps for his birthday. He loves toys as much as the next guy and was envious of my 60CSx. We really liked the idea of the Colorado and Oregon units. I got together with friends who owned them and checked them out, I asked folks about them --especially folks who had owned 60CSx's before getting the newer Garmins.

 

The one thing people told me over and over again was to get him the 60 CSx.

 

And the friends who owned the Colorados and Oregons have almost all sold them or returned them and re-purchased 60 CSx units. A couple of people have kept the Oregons to use in addition to their 60CSx's--especially the ones who want to try Wherigo caches.

[BLIXX88]

We are newer cachers with a new 60CSX. We are very pleased with the unit as is. I have never cached with the Oregon or Colorado though, just played with them alot at the stores. The 60CSX just felt right and I felt quite justified getting it after lots of research. I can't imagine a "upgrading" to anything else until the unit has a built in toaster.

[+Renegade Knight]

SO I have a 60csx and really like it, its about 3 years old, no problems at all with it. BUT I now have an opportunity to get a new GPS (handheld or Nuvi) at a great price.

 

I mainly use it for hiking, skiing, a little caching and carrying it around when we take the family on day trips (zoo/fair/disney) etc.

 

Is the Colorado nice enough to sell the 60csx and upgrade to a new one.

 

I have about a week to decide and plan on hitting REI to look at them in person

 

Thanks for any advice

 

Given you have a 60Csx I don't think you will feel like it's an upgrade so much as just new. New handhelds really don't improve on the 60 series. They are different, lesscapable, and it's not even a good different.

[+Bad Duck]

Red 90 I'd say you were carrying the black line gps and the yellow was tied to ol yeller your dog as he made many more direction changes. Probably sniffing things as he walked with you.

[+Red90]

Red 90 I'd say you were carrying the black line gps and the yellow was tied to ol yeller your dog as he made many more direction changes. Probably sniffing things as he walked with you.

 

 

Black was me and the CO... Yellow was DanOcan with his 60Csx. I count him stopping 6 times in that short section. It was tres steep. GCT7AZ

[+Mudfrog]

I would highly question if going to a Colorado or Oregon is "moving up" at this point..

 

Have you used one caching? I doubt it. It is a whole new world. The 60csx is like a dinosaur. The whole caching experience is so much better with a CO or OR. Either one is fine. Don't listen to the haters, they both work great. Remaining bugs are small and won't interfere with your caching experience.

 

A matter of opinion. I've used both and can honestly say that i don't see any difference if their abilities to get you to a cache. If not having a scrollwheel (i don't like the thing myself) makes a gpsr a dinosaur, then so be it. The gpsr capability seems to be about the same on both units. The CO is nice for those who want a gpsr, mapping, and the ability to go paperless in one unit. However, it doesn't sound like the OP would be in need of that last mentioned ingredient. As Prime Suspect mentioned, the display of the CO is definitely harder to see outdoors. Also, and this may not be a common happening,,, my female friend has a CO and has a hard time pushing the power and enter buttons because of her longer fingernails. This wasn't a problem for me but it may be something to think about for some.

 

For me, the paperless aspect of the CO may be enticing but that's the only thing it's got going for it over the 60csx. It's certainly not enough to justify that hefty price.

[+DanOCan]

SO I have a 60csx and really like it, its about 3 years old, no problems at all with it. BUT I now have an opportunity to get a new GPS (handheld or Nuvi) at a great price.

 

Here is how I see it:

 

You have a device that you are comfortable with, has given you no issues and does what you want. Get the Nuvi and you can have both a great handheld and a automotive model.

[+Red90]

....If not having a scrollwheel (i don't like the thing myself) makes a gpsr a dinosaur, then so be it.....

 

- Larger and much higher resolution display making looking at the maps and planning your route much easier as there is more information. This includes cache information on the same screen as the map.

- All cache information a click or two away WHILE navigating makes a huge difference when caching compared to using a separate device for the cache information. I now normally read descriptions and logs and rarely wqould have done that in the past.

- Upload of field notes makes logging substantially easier.

 

- IME, the Rock and Roller interface is MUCH better as well. All input can be done using one hand and your thumb. It can also be used left or right handed without problem. The 60 series is very awkward to use with one hand.

[+M3J]

Far be it for me to be a counterpoint to Red90's thoughts, but I had been using a 60CSx for over a year when I "upgraded" to a Colorado in May. I did not like it at first but decided to put public opinion aside and give it a fair shake.

 

What I like about the Colorado:

 

1) Paperless caching....very very nice to have as I no longer need to upload to cachemate on my cell phone

2) Beautiful shaded maps

3) Easier to mount in my RAM mount and bike mount (can remove with one had easier)

4) That's about it...

 

I have had quite a few problems with the CO and they have been getting worse lately (drift is getting worse for example).

 

I was out this past weekend with my 10 year old and had loaded up the same caches on the 60CSx and gave it to him. I had a hard time getting the CO to settle a few times and grabbed the 60CSx...took me right to the bounty.

 

I have a bit of a theory...the times the CO seems to drift the most or is just plan off are the times we drive up to a cache parking area with the CO on the dash and then jump out and start hiking. I wonder if the CO is trying to figure how fast we are moving once the change takes place and going from road speed to trails throws it for a loop for a bit. The 60CSx doesn't seem to suffer from this.

 

Anyway, I am about to move to the Oregon...the Colorado is going. One thing remains though, I will still keep my 60CSx and will still bring it with me when I am out.

 

The 60CSx is hard to beat for a number of reasons, though the "cool factor" of the CO and OR is pretty neat! I am certain I will love my OR based on what a few trusted individuals tell me. I would agree that you need to try things out for yourself...don't take our word for it. Each person has different needs and different things give us satisfaction so make sure its the right decision for you, not just because we all tell you something based on our experiences. As you can see, many ARE happy with the CO...just not me.

[+Red90]

I have had quite a few problems with the CO and they have been getting worse lately (drift is getting worse for example).

 

Is this happening with GPS Firmware 2.80? If so, you are the first to have any complaints about GPS performance with that firmware that I have seen.

 

From my testing and the testing of other with this firmware, GPS performance is as good as a 60Csx (if not better). Note that the Oregon GPS performance is certainly worse than a Colorado or 60csx.

Edited October 22, 2008 by Red90

[+Mudfrog]

....If not having a scrollwheel (i don't like the thing myself) makes a gpsr a dinosaur, then so be it.....

 

- Larger and much higher resolution display making looking at the maps and planning your route much easier as there is more information. This includes cache information on the same screen as the map.

- All cache information a click or two away WHILE navigating makes a huge difference when caching compared to using a separate device for the cache information. I now normally read descriptions and logs and rarely wqould have done that in the past.

- Upload of field notes makes logging substantially easier.

 

- IME, the Rock and Roller interface is MUCH better as well. All input can be done using one hand and your thumb. It can also be used left or right handed without problem. The 60 series is very awkward to use with one hand.

 

The higher resolution and bigger screen are nice,,, that is, if you're looking at it in the right lighting conditions. There are times when neither of these help because of the dim display.

 

On the wheel, the rocker on the 60csx is just more intuitive. If ya want to scroll down on the page, you push rocker down. Up, push the up. Left,, push left, etc,,,. With the wheel, you have to guess which way to rotate it to go up or down, zoom in and out, or navigate to the different pages. I always found myself turning it the wrong way when trying to make a selection. (of course i know i would get used to this after a while)

 

As far as one handed, i agree. Although it's not that big an issue, it is one of the reasons i use a 76cx instead!

Edited October 23, 2008 by Mudfrog

[beauxp]

the Oregon is not an upgrade from the 60csx.

 

Depending on what features you are looking for you may like the Oregon better or the 60csx better.

 

The Oregon is super easy to use and fast to use because of the touch screen. The shaded relief is very very nice.

 

The screen is not nearly as bright as the 60csx and the 60csx has so many more features and customizations.

Edited December 4, 2008 by beauxp

[+bikercr]

I've owned a 60CSx for a year using it for hiking, deep woods bushwhacking and geocaching. It's been excellent--very accurate, even in deep cover, easy to use and customize, and has a brilliant screen that rarely needs backlighting. I was contemplating "upgrading" to a GPSr that does built-in paperless caching.

 

Then, last week, I spotted a post regarding a sale EMS was having online: CO 300 for $249, with $50 rebate and $25 EMS card--net price $175. I snagged two of these--one for myself and one for my brother. This was just too good a deal to pass up. The CO 300 is now sold out, or taken off the website, possibly having been mispriced.

 

I've used the CO, with the 2.8/2.8 update, for about a day now--still learning it. Took it out in the woods today with the 60 CSx. The 60CSx was always more readable even with the CO backlight on full. The CO was cumbersome to use because any setup changes required shifting out of the map--bunches of clicks and wheel turns to do a task that would be a simple button press on the 60 (like turning on or off the compass). Panning the map on the CO is slow and results in tedious map redraws that leave blank white areas on the screen until the map gradually fills in. The 60CSx was always more accurate in EPE, or they were equal under full sky. Overall, the 60Csc is one fantastic unit.

 

However, there's something very sexy about the CO--the form factor, look, feel, and paperless caching features. Also, the 3D view which I found extremely helpful in certain hiking situations to judge the upcoming terrain. When you can see it, the maps are spectacular--esp. with the street and waypoint labels set on large. I'm sticking with the CO until I thoroughly learn it. A few improvements via firmware updates would be nice. Hopefully, Garmin is working on these.

 

Is it an upgrade? Cosmetically, ergonomically and technically yes. Functionally--no.

Edited December 3, 2008 by bikercr

[+LogJammin']

FWIW... Had a 60 CSx, sold it and got an Oregon 400t. Selling the Oregon now and getting a Delorme PN-40. The Oregon is more paperless and user-friendly than the 60CSx, but definitely dumbed-down. Annoyingly so. Our first thought upon realizing that we were disappointed with the Oregon was to go back to the 60, but it just doesn't integrate well enough with geocaching. We have high hopes for the Delorme (especially as firmware upgrades come along) but we had high hopes for the Oregon too and it failed its first serious outing. This is our first foray away from Garmin. We've had 5 or 6, so brand hopping is new to us. Point is, we were Garmin folk and the Oregon made us turn.

[+LogJammin']

I would highly question if going to a Colorado or Oregon is "moving up" at this point..

 

Have you used one caching? I doubt it. It is a whole new world. The 60csx is like a dinosaur. The whole caching experience is so much better with a CO or OR. Either one is fine. Don't listen to the haters, they both work great. Remaining bugs are small and won't interfere with your caching experience.

 

Hardly a "hater" to point out that the newer are dumber. I went from 60CSx to Oregon eagerly, and am dumping the Oregon just as eagerly. There's a sweet spot and no one has hit it yet... might still be a few years off. If I had to bet, Delorme or someone not too map-greedy teaming with iPhone.

[Snipe315]

I've been thinking along the same lines recently.

 

I love my 60Csx but want something new in addition to it.

 

I looked long and hard at the Garmin Colorado and Oregon models but at the end of the day, they are really just prettier units, not better ones. They have less by way of features, functions, and options than my 60Csx. Their prettier screen and smoother interfaces don't make up for the lost functionality IMHO.

 

I've decided to take a long hard look at the DeLorme PN-40. While it has a smaller screen than the 60Csx, it does offer true paperless geocaching and aerial/satelitte images (which my 60Csx doesn't).

 

Now if garmin were to come out with a TRUE successor to the 60Csx line...

 

 

BTW, the Amazon.com page has a surprisingly large amount of information and images on the PN-40:

 

Amazon Delorme PN-40 page

Edited December 3, 2008 by Snipe315

[+bikercr]

I've been thinking along the same lines recently.

 

I love my 60Csx but want something new in addition to it.

 

I looked long and hard at the Garmin Colorado and Oregon models but at the end of the day, they are really just prettier units, not better ones. They have less by way of features, functions, and options than my 60Csx. Their prettier screen and smoother interfaces don't make up for the lost functionality IMHO.

 

I've decided to take a long hard look at the DeLorme PN-40. While it has a smaller screen than the 60Csx, it does offer true paperless geocaching and aerial/satelitte images (which my 60Csx doesn't).

 

Now if garmin were to come out with a TRUE successor to the 60Csx line...

 

 

BTW, the Amazon.com page has a surprisingly large amount of information and images on the PN-40:

 

Amazon Delorme PN-40 page

Just watch-- I'm going to get pounced on by the Delorme KoolAid drinkers right now, but, the PN screen is very small compared to what's available these days--70% smaller than the CO and OR for example, and about 40% smaller than the fantastic 60CSx. Folks say this isn't a problem and that it's very readable. But, even if you are under 40, have great eyes or wear reading glasses in the wilderness, if you just have a couple of data fields on your map, you've only got a tiny porthole through which to see the world around you (for a lame analogy). I'd really hestitate to commit to a GPSr with such backwards-looking screen technology.

[+lotochrome]

Ok, I hope this is not a stupid question but when people are talking about a 60 CXs are they talking about the GPSmap 60 CXs? Or did Garmin make another model that was just a 60 CXs?

[+Prime Suspect]

Ok, I hope this is not a stupid question but when people are talking about a 60 CXs are they talking about the GPSmap 60 CXs? Or did Garmin make another model that was just a 60 CXs?

GPSMAP is a model line, like eTrex. It includes all the 60 and 76 models, plus many lesser known Marine units, and some discontinued units.

[+bunkerdave]

I have just gotten an Oregon 400T, and I have been using a CSx for about a year now. If anyone asked me which was "better" I would say that if I were only going to have ONE GPS, it would be the CSx. THat said, I love the Oregon. It is just so smooth for caching, and the more I use it, the more I love it. There are a LOT of things the CSx does that for serious GPSing, including Geocaching, you just can't do with the Oregon. If you are a new cacher, you might never miss them, but I've been GPS-ing for a while, and have gotten used to having all those other features, to the point that it would really bug me to not have them.

 

Anyway, this isn't going to help you much, but like I said, if you are only going to have one, get the CSx. It's the workhorse, and really does the most stuff. You can't go wrong with it, and you can get a FRU for about $250 online. I only paid a little more than that for my Oregon, so it was a great deal, but I would NEVER have paid $600 for it. Or even $400.