Should I Buy a Garmin Colorado ?

[+don_kerry]

I'm looking to get started geocaching with my family , and in the market for a good GPS . The Colorado seemed to be the device to buy , but after reading some of the reviews for this thing , I just don't know . People either rave about it or shamelessly slam it . The fact that no-one is on the fence about it is suspicious to me . What's the truth ?

[+Sandy Hams]

I have used the Garmin Emap (old), Garmin Etrex Legend, and a Garmin IQue M5 Pocket PC. I like all of these. I recently purchased a Colorado 300 and after using it for a couple of weeks, resold it on Ebay. I didn't like it at all for geocaching. I found it cumbersome to use. It was great having the capability of having only one piece of equipment and still be able to do paperless caching (storing cache descriptions, logs, and hints on the GPS). However, frequently we will find a cache that includes coordinates to a bonus cache or we will do a multi cache and want the capability of manually entering waypoints and frankly we found the Colorado not so user friendly when trying to enter waypoints/coordinates manually. Consequently we are back to carrying two GPS's -- the Etrex for the last few feet and the IQue for the description and routing.

 

Still waiting for one instrument that "does it all".

[ao318]

I have no personal experience with the Colorado. I have a 60csx and I am very happy with it. I also use a palm tungsten e2 for the paperless caching aspect and have had no problems. If I were to buy another GPS it would be wither the legend hcx or vista hcx depending on my needs.

[+maxgyver]

I started cacheing back in early 2001...with a magellan 315...everything was manualy entered...about a year and half ago got more involed in extra caching with the family and got a etrex legend...builit in maps and way more features than the old magellan...just about a week ago I picked up a colorado 300.... the paperless way is so much easier...I was still entering caches manually into the legend for a good long time then finaly picked up a serial cable...however it was not working well with my USB only vista OS PC...the colorado 300 performs really well with the PC and once I loaded the newer firmware has been doing quite well in the field.

 

boils done to how much machine you want, I had n't really planned on getting the 300 but I won a Bid on E-bay for only 300...so hear i am with 2 great units..I'm still debating on if I want to sell the legend..I got a vacation coming up soon to run the coloradothrough some seroius testing and caching...I should know more in a couple weeks

[golfgunny]

I've been using various GPS units for years, and I feel that the Colorado is the best I've used yet. Were there some issues in the beginning, prior to the firmware updates? Yes, but not even with every unit. Did the updates fix the problems? Yep.

 

I've not had a single problem with mine, and I love how much easier it is to manually enter waypoints than with the 60 series and Etrex series. Paperless caching is great, accuracy is great, signal strength is great...no complaints at all.

 

You'll probably have to try one out to see for yourself, since personal preference has a lot to do with it. I would just ask that you be wary of those posts from people who have never used one (there's a few of them out there).

 

Now...Any wagers as to how fast this thread will get moved to the correct category?

Edited October 27, 2008 by golfgunny

[Neos2]

You just can't beat a Garmin 60CSx.

 

The truth is, I wanted to buy a Colorado or an Oregon. I like toys and I like all the bells and whistles. I like the idea of having a PDA built in with the gps. I even have trouble getting info into my old PDA now that I have 64-bit VISTA OS on my computer. My husband had a birthday coming up. I was ready to be sold on one of the two new members of Garmin's highest price gps units.

 

But they just plain don't do some of the things they need to do for geocaching.

 

My 60CSx does everything I need it to do. It is reliable, consistant, accurate, durable, easy to use, easy to read in day or night lighting, easy to get coordinates into or out of again, doesn't need me to continually update to the next newer version of the software to fix problems, costs less than the newer models, and it gets me to the cache.

 

I bought my husband a 60CSx like mine for his birthday. He loves it.

 

I still want to get something like the Oregon 400t --but not yet. Not until they have a model that is as good as the 60CSx in every way that matters and has a few more bells or whistles or even geegaws to justify the extra expense.

[golfgunny]

"But they just plain don't do some of the things they need to do for geocaching. "--

 

What things would those be, out of curiosity?

[+WeightMan]

"But they just plain don't do some of the things they need to do for geocaching. "--

 

What things would those be, out of curiosity?

For one, you can't edit the coords of a geocache.

[+Crid]

I had a 76CSx (basically a 60CSx in a different form factor) for a year before buying a Colorado. The Colorado has previously had some drift issues (mainly in "difficult" conditions such as under forest canopy) which could cause it to be several HUNDRED feet off course. Not at all useful for geocaching.

 

However, the latest version of the GPS firmware - version 2.8 - SEEMS to have sorted this problem. It's hard to tell for sure yet because - a ) it's hard to confirm that it's fixed unless it does it again, and b ) it's hard to do a like-for-like comparison right now because there's less leaf cover at this time of year. I've been running the new version for a couple of weeks now and SO FAR it's looking very good. Only time will tell for certain.

 

As at least one other poster has mentioned, the interface is a bit clunky compared to a 60 or 76. The new click wheel should have made things easier, but somehow it doesn't work that way. Probably because there are fewer buttons available. Either that or the programming team hasn't had much previous experience building user interfaces. (Let's assume it's the former, just to be nice).

 

On the whole the interface isn't a massive deal for me, although it does take longer to enter text. The Oregon is undoubtedly faster in that respect, but I can't comment on that unit because I haven't used one.

 

The paperless aspect of the Colorado is a massive plus for me. I don't have a PDA, so I was previously using a GSAK macro to load cache information into the address book of my iPod. That was a good solution given the hardware I had at my disposal (I wasn't going to buy a PDA just for geocaching), but the Colorado does it much better. In fact, I only use GSAK to load cache information into my 76CSx. For the Colorado you simply unzip the GPX files you get from a pocket query and upload them straight to the Colorado.

 

Paperless caching isn't necessarily a massive deal if you're only going after caches near your home. But if you want to cache while on vacation, or on a trip away from home it's fantastic. You don't end up printing off cache descriptions "just in case". No doubt in the future we will be able to check cache details online while "out in the field" (the iPhone app being one step towards this), but paperless caching with a Colorado is pretty hassle-free.

 

The Colorado may have a few annoying aspects, but if the new GPS firmware proves to be reliable it will be my main caching GPS for quite some time.

Edited October 27, 2008 by Crid

[+billandlore]

"But they just plain don't do some of the things they need to do for geocaching. "--

 

What things would those be, out of curiosity?

For one, you can't edit the coords of a geocache.

You can't edit the coords but you can make a new waypoint and change it's coords.

[+WeightMan]

"But they just plain don't do some of the things they need to do for geocaching. "--

 

What things would those be, out of curiosity?

For one, you can't edit the coords of a geocache.

You can't edit the coords but you can make a new waypoint and change it's coords.

That is true, but it would be much easier to just edit the coords on a multi. That way, when you find the box, you can log the attempt. It is also many fewer steps to do it that way.

[+Crid]

That is true, but it would be much easier to just edit the coords on a multi. That way, when you find the box, you can log the attempt. It is also many fewer steps to do it that way.

Or have a mechanism where a waypoint can have a parent geocache. That way you could be heading for the waypoint (part of a multi, for instance), but still easily have access to the cache description.

[+briansnat]

I think if you are new to GPS use, you probably would be quite happy with a Colorado. If you are a veteran user of a great unit like a 60CSX you will be frustrated by things the Colorado can't do that the 60CSX and similar units can.

[+StarBrand]

I love my Colorado 300 unit. I had some problems with the coordinates drifting and "snapping" back but a recent firmware upgrade nhas cured that. I think pretty much all of the "defects" of the unit have been fixed but some still complain that it doesn't offer some features of older models. I think it is a terrific geocaching unit and is uncannily accurate at leading me to geocaches.

[+on4bam]

I got a Colorado 300 a few weeks back from Ebay and like it a lot. Of course, the difference with my old GPS12XL (1999) is huge

I still take my PDA with me so I can have the spoiler pics of the caches and have some helper apps available.

Accuracy is great (latest firmware) and having topo maps makes it a lot easier to make your way to a cache without hitting obstacles. Making an extra profile with only the items I need makes it easier to use the unit.

 

On the down side:

Battery use could be better

The screenlighting setting should be sticky

Entering coordinates or text could be made easier, still it's better than the GPS12XL

[Skippermark]

I think if you are new to GPS use, you probably would be quite happy with a Colorado. If you are a veteran user of a great unit like a 60CSX you will be frustrated by things the Colorado can't do that the 60CSX and similar units can.

Brian, do you have a list of the things the Colorado can't do that the 60CSx does. I knew about the editing of coords (that would stink for multis) but didn't know there were others.

 

Also, I heard there were early issues where, if you edited a cache in GSAK like added parking coords or corrected puzzle coords and then sent it back to the Colorado, it wouldn't show up in the Colorado in the map screen.

 

Everyone I know who uses one doesn't use GSAK and sends the PQs directly from GC to the Colorado through Mapsource. I'm curious if the GSAK type of issues have been fixed.

[Skippermark]

The screenlighting setting should be sticky

Do you need the light all the time? When I checked a friends out, it seemed kind of hard to read without the light on.

[+on4bam]

The screenlighting setting should be sticky

Do you need the light all the time? When I checked a friends out, it seemed kind of hard to read without the light on.

I find it almost impossible to see the screen without the light. I have the timer set to 1 minute so everytime I touch a button the light comes on for 1 minute. However, after switching off and back on I need to set the intensity of the light again. This should be sticky.

[+Crid]

I find it almost impossible to see the screen without the light. I have the timer set to 1 minute so everytime I touch a button the light comes on for 1 minute. However, after switching off and back on I need to set the intensity of the light again. This should be sticky.

Have you tried turning off the basemap? I had a similar problem until I did that.

[+xshooter]

I have no problems seeing the screen unless it's dark out and the more I use the wheel to input data the more I like it. Much better than the 60C.

I use GSAK to load the Colorado using the Colorado export macro.

I use the import and log macro to get the found caches out of the Colorado. It puts your finds in the order that you found them, much easier than the 60C that I was using before.

The biggest problem that I had with the 60C and a PDA was finding the cache that I was hunting on the PDA, nearly drove me nuts sometimes.

With the Colorado all I have to do is push the center of the wheel and the description pops up.

About the only thing I would like to see is being able to add additional waypoints while doing a multi.

[+briansnat]

I think if you are new to GPS use, you probably would be quite happy with a Colorado. If you are a veteran user of a great unit like a 60CSX you will be frustrated by things the Colorado can't do that the 60CSX and similar units can.

Brian, do you have a list of the things the Colorado can't do that the 60CSx does. I knew about the editing of coords (that would stink for multis) but didn't know there were others.

 

Also, I heard there were early issues where, if you edited a cache in GSAK like added parking coords or corrected puzzle coords and then sent it back to the Colorado, it wouldn't show up in the Colorado in the map screen.

 

Everyone I know who uses one doesn't use GSAK and sends the PQs directly from GC to the Colorado through Mapsource. I'm curious if the GSAK type of issues have been fixed.

 

I recall a list someone made in the GPS fourm. Can't seem to find it, but I found THIS, which might be helpful.

[+Crid]

Brian, do you have a list of the things the Colorado can't do that the 60CSx does. I knew about the editing of coords (that would stink for multis) but didn't know there were others.

The editing of geocache coords really isn't a big deal. You simply add a new waypoint and edit that. If a cache has child waypoints already, the cache detail isn't editable but the child waypoints are simply imported as regular waypoints. A slight annoyance (for me anyway) is that although the caches will disappear if you delete the appropriate GPX file from the Colorado, the child waypoints don't and you have to delete them manually. It's not a big issue, but it's annoying if I do a PQ for a different area for a vacation or flying visit.

 

There's not much I've noticed that the Colorado can't do that my 76CSx can. I assume the majority of the "missing" stuff consists of things I don't use anyway. The only thing missing for me is waypoint averaging. I have no idea why Garmin haven't included that - it seems like a no-brainer to me. Somebody has created a Wherigo cartridge that can do it, although I haven't tried it myself.

Edited October 28, 2008 by Crid

[Braff-n-MandaRue]

I recently ordered a Colorado 300, and am currently awaiting it's delivery.

 

I'm pretty excited about getting it, and think it will be great for what I would like to use it for.

 

I read all the reviews I could find, and thought about it for a long time before finally purchasing the unit.

 

I took all things in to consideration, and finally decided that this was exactly what I wanted in a GPS.

 

Hoping I won't be dissapointed.

[+J10fly]

I recently ordered a Colorado 300, and am currently awaiting it's delivery.

 

I'm pretty excited about getting it, and think it will be great for what I would like to use it for.

 

I read all the reviews I could find, and thought about it for a long time before finally purchasing the unit.

 

I took all things in to consideration, and finally decided that this was exactly what I wanted in a GPS.

 

Hoping I won't be dissapointed.

 

Just make sure you update it to the newest firmware when it comes in. I love mine especially since the new firmaware updates. When I first got it I had a lot of issues with freezing up and and just random annoyances. They slowly worked everything out and the latest firmware really just about cleaned the entire thing. I dont have freezing issues, the load time is quick, battery life excellent! I added the extra street maps which really improved the accuracy on roadways and whatnot. For some reason when I got it the basemap roads always seemed to be off by a small distance which was real annoying. I added the maps and that disappeared. I'm guessing they fixed this by now too since i havent heard anyone complaining abouit it.

[+Crid]

Just make sure you update it to the newest firmware when it comes in. I love mine especially since the new firmaware updates. When I first got it I had a lot of issues with freezing up and and just random annoyances. They slowly worked everything out and the latest firmware really just about cleaned the entire thing. I dont have freezing issues, the load time is quick, battery life excellent! I added the extra street maps which really improved the accuracy on roadways and whatnot. For some reason when I got it the basemap roads always seemed to be off by a small distance which was real annoying. I added the maps and that disappeared. I'm guessing they fixed this by now too since i havent heard anyone complaining abouit it.

Unit firmware (2.7) and GPS firmware (2.8). Webupdater should tell you what's available.

[+WitzAbout]

I've been caching for over 3 years now. Up until jsut a couple of months ago, I'd always used a low-end eTrex. The first 1.5 years I had units without WAAS error correction.

 

I've tried routing car GPS units when driving other's vehicles, and enjoyed the ability to drive to an address or point-of-interest (stores, restaruants, etc). But most of them can not easily be set to get you to a cache location.

 

So I finally bought a Garmin Colorado 300 in the last couple of months. While there are issues with it, overall I'm rather happy with it. I love being able to route to caches! But I find that I usually have to change modes when I'm looking for a cache. Not hard when you set up shortcuts correctly.

 

This past weekend, I did some power caching. I had set out a pre-set route to travel - but I found myself not being able to use the route much, I jsut went to the next nearest cache. And I used the eTrex to find a lot of the caches. Though I did take out the Colorado a couple of times to get better coordinates and descriptions.

 

I love the ease of loading caches onto the Colorado. I love the ease of logging caches when loading back from the Colorado. And being able to add notes in the field is a great aid when logging online later! Of course, the spin-method of spelling can be a bit cumbersome. I wonder if the Oregon makes that a snap? I even have started to occasionally spell asyncronously! Ex LAMP - cursor over to second character, A; Cursor back twice to first letter, L; Cursor over to character 3, M; then finish with P. Anybody else starting to spell out-of-order because of the Colorado?

 

The 300 has less memory - but it will take large SD cards, which can make up for the smaller built-in memory. I have a number of SD cards so I can switch what cache sets I see when out in the field. I have a card for my partner's unfound cache and another for all local caches, for when I want to make sure I'm not hiding too close to another cache. I did wind up having to reformat most of my SD cards to get them to be read by the Colorado in GPS mode (it worked fine in card-reader mode).

 

But the main thing that pushed me over the line was the Wherigo. I wanted to be able to play and create Wherigo adventures. So far, I have the first and only Wherigo cache in Colorado - the GPS's namesake!

 

My biggest concern was battery usage. I saw a friend seem to go through batteries more than twice the rate of the eTrex. But now I have 2 sets of rechargable AAs that I swap out. Usually one set is good for a full day of caching. And the fact that it takes regular AAs means I can swap to store-bought if I get in a pinch.

 

I'm looking to get started geocaching with my family , and in the market for a good GPS . The Colorado seemed to be the device to buy , but after reading some of the reviews for this thing , I just don't know . People either rave about it or shamelessly slam it . The fact that no-one is on the fence about it is suspicious to me . What's the truth ?

[Skippermark]

Thanks, on4bam, briansnat & Crid for the links & info. A lot of people ask me what they should buy. I don't like to specifically recommend something, but I do like to tell them the differences between each unit and let them decide what is best for them.

 

I'm giving a seminar on paperless caching next summer at a large event and tried to get Garmin to donate a Colorado or Oregon so I could answer questions (and know what I'm talking about) and be able to show all they do, but I had no luck.

Edited October 29, 2008 by Skippermark

[golfgunny]

I have to, once again, agree with Crid. My Colorado does everything I "need" it to, and I have not had a single problem with it. Of course, as with any device that uses silicone o-rings, one must use a wee bit of care and some occasional preventive maintenance, but that's pretty much a no-brainer.

 

I've used both the 60csx, and the Colorado, and noticed no difference in accuracy, not even in dense jungle canopy. The features on the Colorado make it my clear winner.

 

Personal preference should be the only deciding factor. The "documented" issues of water leakage, after the same individuals admitted to pinching and ruining the o-rings, don't concern me a bit.

 

If you're not looking to do paperless caching with a single device, were happy with your 60csx, and don't care about any new features, then you should probably stick with the 60csx, as you are already accustomed to its interface and features.

[+don_kerry]

Thanks to all . I got alot of useful info , from this thread . I like this community . Everyone seems eager to help a newcomer .

 

Don

[walkguru]

Thanks to all . I got alot of useful info , from this thread . I like this community . Everyone seems eager to help a newcomer .

 

Don

as a n00b still trying to figure out which one i want, thanks to all who posted. dan.