60CSX vs Colorado What's your opinion

[+blkhawks]

Due to the theft of my Garmin 60CSX recently I'm looking to buy a new GPS so I have a question for all of you. If you had the choice which would you buy?

 

Looking for your two cents worth

Blkhawks

Edited October 28, 2008 by blkhawks

[+Red90]

Without trying to sound rude, there are a few long discussions on this subject here already.

 

For caching and automotive use the Colorado is much better. For things like hiking use, the 60csx makes more sense.

[+ventura_kids]

You did sound rude.

 

What about the Oregon?

[+xshooter]

I played with an Oregon at Bass Pro and I think I'll stick to my Colorado.

[+incaorchid]

I don't see where Red90 was rude at all!

He even states that he isn't trying to sound rude.

I think he answered the question and even helped me

with my decision.

[+Tequila]

The 60 is a work horse. It has no problems and will acquire and hold a strong signal virtually anywhere.

 

The Colorado has well documented issues included a severe issue with water leaking into the battery compartment. Look for that topic in this forum. I had 3 defective CO's.

 

The Oregon is a much better unit. Data entry is very very simply and it has no waterproof issues.

 

If paperless caching is your most important requirement, consider the OR. But if a good solid GPS is most important, replace your 60.

[+ventura_kids]

I don't see where Red90 was rude at all!

He even states that he isn't trying to sound rude.

I think he answered the question and even helped me

with my decision.

 

It worked! I was wondering how people get into arguements in the forums.....

 

I agree with Red90 also.

[+incaorchid]

You are a dork! lol. jk.

Trying to choose which unit to buy can be frustrating, eh?

Edited October 29, 2008 by incaorchid

[+grp318]

I had the 60csx for a few years and loved it. It worked without a hitch and was right on target. I lost it in a burglary and replaced it with the 400t. I love the new units options and interface. If you are a gadget person you will love the 400 series. BUT, I have found it not to be a accurate as the 60csx while geocaching. If you are looking for a work horse the 60csx is the way to go. REI still has them for $399 with a 100% money back guarantee. Play with them and take it back if it does not fit your needs.

 

GRP318

[A.B.E.L.]

I've owned both and if paperless caching is important to you, then I'd recommend the Colorado/Oregon.

[+GPS777]

My Colorado (and many others) was miserably inaccurate. You could record a hike twice and it would vary by hundreds of feet. Plus, it can only display one track at a time. It really shouldn't be on the market yet. Maybe someday. But that's assuming the accuracy problem isn't hardware...

[Snipe315]

My Colorado (and many others) was miserably inaccurate. You could record a hike twice and it would vary by hundreds of feet. Plus, it can only display one track at a time. It really shouldn't be on the market yet. Maybe someday. But that's assuming the accuracy problem isn't hardware...

 

Wait a minute...

 

I thought the latest software upgrade (2.8) fixed many of the Colorados problems including the drift and inaccuracy issue?!?

 

[+g-o-cashers]

After 2 weeks of testing with the Colorado on GPS Software 2.8 I think the position error issue is much better but not completely eliminated:

 

More details on some of my results here: http://www.gpsfix.net/?p=39 .

 

The thread for this issue on the Groundspeak forums is here: http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php...=184158&hl=

 

I'd be curious to know if people who saw the position error before 2.8 are still seeing it or not. My general sense is that it has improved for most people.

 

GO$Rs

[knowschad]

My Colorado 400t is now back in the hands of REI. I exchanged it for the 60CSx. While I certainly miss a few of the features on the CO, I feel much more in control. I somewhat miss the field notes (although I hated the wheel method of "typing") and I definately miss the ability to mark a DNF, but that's about it.

[+ventura_kids]

We use the 60 and download the hints from gsak.

 

When we cache with other cachers that have the colorado and oregons, they never have time to read the cache pages, the descriptions, and the logs.

We are normally back in the jeep by then, and heading to the next cache.

 

I know some will say NO WAY.... it's faster than that.

But it's true.

 

I believe we average about 2 minutes per cache now.

The cacher with the colorado or oregon never even gets to hunt.

They read the cache page, and by then we give up and leave.

[+Jenischmeni]

I think a good question for the OP would be to ask: "Do you already own a Palm?" If you have the Palm and are already accustomed to doing it that way, the Oregon or Colorado are a bit redundant and you're wasting a perfectly good Palm. If you don't have a Palm now, then the OR and CO are going to look more appealing.

 

I agree with a lot of the compliments towards the 60CSX. I don't know of any cacher who regrets purchasing a 60CSX. They are reliable and well performing.

[+xshooter]

We use the 60 and download the hints from gsak.

 

When we cache with other cachers that have the colorado and oregons, they never have time to read the cache pages, the descriptions, and the logs.

We are normally back in the jeep by then, and heading to the next cache.

 

I know some will say NO WAY.... it's faster than that.

But it's true.

 

I believe we average about 2 minutes per cache now.

The cacher with the colorado or oregon never even gets to hunt.

They read the cache page, and by then we give up and leave.

 

Nothing says you have to read the cache page. I have a Colorado 400t and I don't read the cache page unless I'm not finding it right away or I read it while walking to GZ.

I did the Palm thing and spent so much time trying to find the cache I was hunting on the Palm that I would get frustrated and quit using it.

Between that and the macros for GSAK that make it so easy to move data in and out of the Colorado I don't ever want to go back to a normal GPSr.

[+Prime Suspect]

I did the Palm thing and spent so much time trying to find the cache I was hunting on the Palm that I would get frustrated and quit using it.

Then you were doing it wrong.

[+GeekBoy.from.Illinois]

My Colorado 400t is now back in the hands of REI. I exchanged it for the 60CSx. While I certainly miss a few of the features on the CO, I feel much more in control. I somewhat miss the field notes (although I hated the wheel method of "typing") and I definitely miss the ability to mark a DNF, but that's about it.

 

If you have a Windows Mobile PDA, and CacheMate, you can have those features back. Smittyware recently added a plug-in for the Windows Mobile version of CacheMate to export a Field Notes file, and it works great. I started using Windows Mobile for my CacheMate while I was still using my 60CSx and had the ability to mark DNF's as well as notes, and other things. About 8-9 months ago, I bought a Colorado 300, and for the first 3-4 months, I kept using the PDA along with the GPSr because I didn't trust the new technology yet. As I got to trust the hardware a little more, I stopped using the PDA, and now with the recent changes to CacheMate, I have started using it again. Yes, the method of entering data on the Colorado is cumbersome, but if you don't want to carry around a second device, you can live with it, you just learn to use more abbreviations like kids sending text messages. Now that I can create a Filed Notes file out of my PDA, I am using it more again, because I can enter better notes in the field.

 

Since the last firmware update, My Colorado 300 and my wife's 60Cx have been within a few feet of each other for caching in our joint outings. Before the update, I could be 40-70 feet off from her, making it much more frustrating when searching for those difficult to find micro caches in the rocks... Being off my 50-70 feet looking for an ammo can in the woods isn't near as bad as being off that far looking for a well camo'ed micro in an urban environment...

[Dosido]

I'd be curious to know if people who saw the position error before 2.8 are still seeing it or not. My general sense is that it has improved for most people.

GO$Rs

 

I haven't seen anything with 2.8 in the drift category yet, though I don't typically test it like you do, walking the same route, and checking the entire track log. However, pre-2.8, it happened enough times that I noticed it at GZ on several cache hunts, which may or may not indicate that it happened more often, and I was oblivious to the track log while following a trail.