Anyone Switch from Colorado to Oregon?

[+tannerk]

Hello all,

I just got the Colorado 400t last week and I am not to happy about it when using it for geocaching. The main reason I bought a GPS. I have been using an iPhone which has worked great and decided to take the plunge and decided to go with the Colorado. The problems I've been having is when I get close to a cache the Colorado has trouble pinpointing/tracking to the location. At one cache I had to use my trusty iphone to find a cache because the colorado had me walking all over the place as far as 100ft (GPS accuracy was less then 20ft). I have calibrated the compass, let the GPS sit outside with direct view of the sky before starting out.

 

This is what I have found so far:

1. While in geocaching profile the compass seems to stick even though the compass is on.

2. If I set a waypoint with no trees and GPS accuracy of say 13ft. When I use the Colorado to goto the waypoint as a test. The distance to destination reported on the GPS is sporadic. It could be 20ft one second 96ft the next.

 

I am using the latest firmware 2.7/2.8GPS. Did the "reset".

 

My Questions.

1. Is this a bad unit or just the way it is?

2. Any regrets switching to the Oregon?

3. Would I be better of using the PN-40 when it comes out?

 

Thanks.

[+Tequila]

After 3 defective Colorado's, Garmin gave me an Oregon.

 

I could not be happier. It works great.

 

All of the CO problems are well documented elsewhere in this forum. My advice is take it back and get the OR.

[+Red90]

Sounds like your unit is bad. Mine zeros as well as any GPS I have ever used. It also zeroes BETTER than any Oregons I have seen.

[+splashy]

I switched because I was not happy with the R r and the buttons you have to push operating the colorado. Oregon is a very nice gps, touchscreen a relief, soft/hardware mistakes from the colorado mostly resolved in the oregon, because of that the oregon seems a lot smarter.

[+tannerk]

One setting I just found in the map section in the setup was "lock to roads" was on by default in the geocaching profile. I wonder if that has any effect on what happening with the distance. I'll report back on what I find.

[knowschad]

One setting I just found in the map section in the setup was "lock to roads" was on by default in the geocaching profile. I wonder if that has any effect on what happening with the distance. I'll report back on what I find.

 

"Lock to roads" will most definately mess with your readings drastically!

[+Tequila]

I switched because I was not happy with the R r and the buttons you have to push operating the colorado. Oregon is a very nice gps, touchscreen a relief, soft/hardware mistakes from the colorado mostly resolved in the oregon, because of that the oregon seems a lot smarter.

 

I agree. I can enter a new waypoint and rename it in 1/10th the time of doing on a CO. That roller wheel is a pain. And some users have reported sticking problems.

[+StarBrand]

I have both a Colorado and an Oregon.

 

I actually (very slightly) perfer the Colorado now that most problems have been addressed with updates.

 

I don't like the erratic nature of the built-in compass and I have shut it off. The "countdown" field stays rather consistent for me and the compass stays good until you get with 20 feet or so but all units I have seen tend to do that.

 

Sounds like you may have a defective unit.

[+PhilAun]

I just bought an Oregon a week ago, after owning a Colorado (and Vista HCx before that) for a few months. I've only had a chance to take it out caching once (15 finds for the day). I was with a friend of mine using his Vista HCx and for accuracy purposes, and getting us to the cache, the two units performed very similarly - they both got us there without a problem.

 

Most of the things that I have come to like about the Colorado are better with the Oregon. It is easier (fewer steps) to auto-route to a cache, then switch to off road navigation on the Oregon. The menus are easier to navigate. I really thought I'd miss the dedicated geocaching screens from the Colorado, but I don't. The Oregon's touch screen makes it very easy to switch from map mode to compass, or wherever you need to go. It's smaller in size and therefore easier to fit into your pocket when you need to sign that log.

 

The two things that I think the Colorado does better (or at all) than the Oregon is scrolling through the cache descriptions and the ability to detour when auto-routing. You can scroll with the wheel on the Colorado very easily as opposed to scrolling with your finger on the Oregon (very bad when you have those cache descriptions that have book volumes 1, 2, and 3!). And the detour button is non-existent on the Oregon. This and other differences are covered well in the Oregon Wiki by GO$rs.

 

I won't go into the screen visibility much since it is covered well in other threads, but it's not a huge issue for me. Yes it is more dim, but I can read it much easier in direct sun than my iPhone.

 

The Oregon, for me so far, has behaved just as well as my Colorado if not better, and hopefully will continue to perfom as good. I have no regrets so far.

 

Good luck, and Happy Caching!

[+Tequila]

I have both a Colorado and an Oregon.

 

I actually (very slightly) perfer the Colorado now that most problems have been addressed with updates.

 

I don't like the erratic nature of the built-in compass and I have shut it off. The "countdown" field stays rather consistent for me and the compass stays good until you get with 20 feet or so but all units I have seen tend to do that.

 

Sounds like you may have a defective unit.

 

There are LOTS of defective CO's out there.

[+tannerk]

I just bought an Oregon a week ago, after owning a Colorado (and Vista HCx before that) for a few months. I've only had a chance to take it out caching once (15 finds for the day). I was with a friend of mine using his Vista HCx and for accuracy purposes, and getting us to the cache, the two units performed very similarly - they both got us there without a problem.

 

Most of the things that I have come to like about the Colorado are better with the Oregon. It is easier (fewer steps) to auto-route to a cache, then switch to off road navigation on the Oregon. The menus are easier to navigate. I really thought I'd miss the dedicated geocaching screens from the Colorado, but I don't. The Oregon's touch screen makes it very easy to switch from map mode to compass, or wherever you need to go. It's smaller in size and therefore easier to fit into your pocket when you need to sign that log.

 

The two things that I think the Colorado does better (or at all) than the Oregon is scrolling through the cache descriptions and the ability to detour when auto-routing. You can scroll with the wheel on the Colorado very easily as opposed to scrolling with your finger on the Oregon (very bad when you have those cache descriptions that have book volumes 1, 2, and 3!). And the detour button is non-existent on the Oregon. This and other differences are covered well in the Oregon Wiki by GO$rs.

 

I won't go into the screen visibility much since it is covered well in other threads, but it's not a huge issue for me. Yes it is more dim, but I can read it much easier in direct sun than my iPhone.

 

The Oregon, for me so far, has behaved just as well as my Colorado if not better, and hopefully will continue to perfom as good. I have no regrets so far.

 

Good luck, and Happy Caching!

 

Thanks for the input.

 

I think the Colorado I have is bad. With the GPS accuracy in the teens I get anywhere from 4 to 100+ ft for the distance to a waypoint randomly.

 

The other thing that doesn't make sence is that when the map is set to "track up" not so sure about "north up" using the geocaching profile. If I want to goto a waypoint I set and have the gps get me there the map sometimes just does rotate to match the direction I may be walking so if I have a road on my right and matchs the gps and I turn say 90 degrees I can walk 5 minuetes before the map corrects itself if it does corrects itself. Does the oregon have this issue?

[+twolpert]

The other thing that doesn't make sence is that when the map is set to "track up" not so sure about "north up" using the geocaching profile. If I want to goto a waypoint I set and have the gps get me there the map sometimes just does rotate to match the direction I may be walking so if I have a road on my right and matchs the gps and I turn say 90 degrees I can walk 5 minuetes before the map corrects itself if it does corrects itself. Does the oregon have this issue?

Can't speak to the Oregon. On the Colorado, this behavior is consistent with traveling at low speed with the compass on but not calibrated. At low speeds with the compass enabled, the unit uses the compass to determine direction of travel. At higher speeds, it automatically switches to satellite data. Map orientation in track up mode depends on direction of travel. So if you're moving slowly (or stopped) and your compass is not calibrated, the map will not orient properly. Although I have not tried it, I suspect that failing to hold the unit level in these circumstances will also screw things up since it's a two-axis compass.

 

Try disabling the compass, then see if track up behaves more as you expect it to.

[+PhilAun]

If I'm understanding you correctly, you probably have your settings on your compass set up for "auto" as opposed to "off?" Which basically means that your compass is on, but when you pass a certain speed (not sure what it is and someone feel free to correct me here) it 'points' in the direction you're traveling instead of the direction the gps is facing.

 

How are you holding your gps when your standing still, or walking at a slow pace? Upright, tilted, or completely flat and level? If you're not holding it completely flat and level you won't get an accurate representation of the direction your facing. This is because the compass is a two axis compass (as opposed to a three axis) and needs to be held level to work properly. If this is indeed the case, then the Oregon is the same as the Colorado in this regard.

 

Edit: I see I was beaten to the punch...or post . I agree with the above post.

Edited November 6, 2008 by PhilAun

[+tannerk]

Just a quick test at lunch.

 

Progress so far:

1. Bought the Colorado a week ago. Did the webupdate to load the latest firmware.

2. Had a bad day geocaching with new Colorado(basically loaded gpx's and used the default settings of the gps). Had better luck with the iphone finding the caches.

3. Did the reset cleared user setting think it might help after the firmware update.

4. Let the colorado get some sun for the almanac for about 30 minutes after reset. Plain view of the sky sitting level on the ground.

5. Switched to geocaching profile.

6. Recalibrated compass.

7. Created fresh way points.

8. Test accuracy to get to the waypoints. Distances were way off and random. The map didn't update when changing direction holding the gps level.

9. Did this post on the forum. Maybe a bad unit or maybe I would be better off with the Oregon instead based on the colorado issues.

10. Discovered the "Lock on roads" was on (not sure why when in geocaching profile). Turned it off.

11. Recalibrated compass. Retest waypoint accuracy. Seem to help with the distance issue made it less sporadic.

12. After suggestions from this thread I turned off the compass from auto.

13. Recalibrated compass and walked around outside with gps level and this helps keeping the map updated with the direction I am going.

14. Just need to do some more testing.

 

Always using fresh batteries.

 

Question about the compass setting. Should this be set to auto only if I want to use the compass page on the gps and off the rest of the time? Why is that?

 

Thanks for the help/info so far.

Edited November 6, 2008 by tannerk

[+Red90]

Turn the compass OFF.

 

Hold the unit vertically and high when taking waypoint or trying to get maximum accuracy. This holds true for ALL quad helix units....

[snomchfun]

Turn the compass OFF.

 

Hold the unit vertically and high when taking waypoint or trying to get maximum accuracy. This holds true for ALL quad helix units....

 

I've been through 5 colorado 300's and had Garmin replace it with an Oregon 300, hate to say it but my experience with the Oregon sofar is night and day better than the Colorado. Way easier to use, perfectly stable and is much much better on batteries.

[+Tequila]

Turn the compass OFF.

 

Hold the unit vertically and high when taking waypoint or trying to get maximum accuracy. This holds true for ALL quad helix units....

 

I've been through 5 colorado 300's and had Garmin replace it with an Oregon 300, hate to say it but my experience with the Oregon sofar is night and day better than the Colorado. Way easier to use, perfectly stable and is much much better on batteries.

 

WOW!!!! I feel better. I only went through 3 CO's before I saw the light. LOL.

[+tannerk]

Turn the compass OFF.

 

Hold the unit vertically and high when taking waypoint or trying to get maximum accuracy. This holds true for ALL quad helix units....

 

I've been through 5 colorado 300's and had Garmin replace it with an Oregon 300, hate to say it but my experience with the Oregon sofar is night and day better than the Colorado. Way easier to use, perfectly stable and is much much better on batteries.

 

What was your problem with the 5 bad colorados? Same issue or various?

[+twolpert]

12. After suggestions from this thread I turned off the compass from auto.

13. Recalibrated compass and walked around outside with gps level and this helps keeping the map updated with the direction I am going.

 

Question about the compass setting. Should this be set to auto only if I want to use the compass page on the gps and off the rest of the time? Why is that?

When the compass is off, it has no effect on the unit at all. In this mode, it is not necessary to hold the unit level or worry about the speed at which you are travelling. The only caveat is that when you are standing still, the map orientation (in track up mode) is likely to reflect the direction in which you were last travelling, NOT the direction in which you are currently facing. With compass off, you are actually better off holding the unit upright since this gives marginally better reception (as someobody else pointed out) given the antenna type in the Colorado.

 

When the compass is in auto mode, it is "on" -- or as "on" as it gets on the Colorado. In this mode, behavior depends on your speed of travel. At low speeds and when stopped, the unit uses the compass. In effect, your direction of travel is the direction you are facing. At higher speeds, the unit uses satellite data to determine your actual direction of travel. That is, at higher speeds in compass-auto mode, the unit behaves as if the compass was off.

 

I believe that g-o-cashers decided that the threshhold speed is 10 mph. That seems awfully high, but I've not experimented with it myself so I'll take his word for it. He's usually right about stuff like this.

 

In order to avoid calibration problems, problems with holding the unit level, and other weird stuff, a lot of cachers work with the compass off on both the Colorado and the Oregon. Personally, I have decent luck with it on, except for the fact that the pointer tends to swing a lot when you get close to the cache. But by then, I'm using eyeballs not the pointer anyhow.

[+Red90]

Look.... ALL Garmin quad helix GPS units with compasses should have the compass OFF..... The unit's GPS signal degrades when held horizontal, which is needed for the compass.. This has been shown for years and years. Just leave it off.

[+Tequila]

Turn the compass OFF.

 

Hold the unit vertically and high when taking waypoint or trying to get maximum accuracy. This holds true for ALL quad helix units....

 

I've been through 5 colorado 300's and had Garmin replace it with an Oregon 300, hate to say it but my experience with the Oregon sofar is night and day better than the Colorado. Way easier to use, perfectly stable and is much much better on batteries.

 

What was your problem with the 5 bad colorados? Same issue or various?

 

All 3 of my defective units had waterproof issues. One unit died with a "system software missing" and would not restart. I could not get it back to factory settings or anything. Two of the units (I didn't bother testing the third) had the "drift" problem where I would be off by as much as 250 meters from the geocache while standing on top of the cache with a GPSMAP60CSx zeroing out.

 

By the time I got the third unit from the Canadian Repair Centre, Garmin had already agreed to replace it with a OR. So I didn't do any testing with it.

 

I use my GPS for geocaching but also use it for Search & Rescue and it was impossible to rely on the Colorado. I now use the OR for SAR work with total confidence.

[Mag Magician]

I'm thinking, by reading and rereading this thread a few times, that I will stick with my 60Cx. Lock on a waypoint, go to the cache, within 2-10 feet most times and log a smily.

[+Red90]

I'm thinking, by reading and rereading this thread a few times, that I will stick with my 60Cx. Lock on a waypoint, go to the cache, within 2-10 feet most times and log a smily.

 

The same thing happens with a Colorado. I've done hundreds of caches and it has never zeroed me out incorrectly, ever. I cache with people that have 60csxs all the time and never have I felt that they zeroed more quickly or accurately than I did.

 

There are a couple of serious haters on these forums and they make it sound like the world came to an end. It is a good unit that works very well. I would never go back. Caching is so much nicer now.

 

IMO, the difference between these units is minor, mostly related to the input method and some details in the way the software is setup. Personally I prefer the Colorado interface and screen setup, but it is close enough to be left to personal choice.

[snomchfun]

Turn the compass OFF.

 

Hold the unit vertically and high when taking waypoint or trying to get maximum accuracy. This holds true for ALL quad helix units....

 

I've been through 5 colorado 300's and had Garmin replace it with an Oregon 300, hate to say it but my experience with the Oregon sofar is night and day better than the Colorado. Way easier to use, perfectly stable and is much much better on batteries.

 

What was your problem with the 5 bad colorados? Same issue or various?

#1 The unit would shut off when I hit the right button.

#2 The unit would'nt keep time, 2 hour battery llife and would randomly shut down

#3 Again the unit would randomly shut down ( with screen fade away )

#4 Couldn't get more than 4 hours battery life ( lithium or 2700 nimh ) + altimeter stopped working

#5 After 3 days completely fried, not even reset would get it going.

 

recieved a 6th, didn't even open it, traded it for Oregon ( which has been perfect after 2 weeks ) and still on same batteries..........

[+Tequila]

I'm thinking, by reading and rereading this thread a few times, that I will stick with my 60Cx. Lock on a waypoint, go to the cache, within 2-10 feet most times and log a smily.

 

The same thing happens with a Colorado. I've done hundreds of caches and it has never zeroed me out incorrectly, ever. I cache with people that have 60csxs all the time and never have I felt that they zeroed more quickly or accurately than I did.

 

There are a couple of serious haters on these forums and they make it sound like the world came to an end. It is a good unit that works very well. I would never go back. Caching is so much nicer now.

 

IMO, the difference between these units is minor, mostly related to the input method and some details in the way the software is setup. Personally I prefer the Colorado interface and screen setup, but it is close enough to be left to personal choice.

 

If you take the time to work your way through the volumes of threads in this forum, there are dozens of horror stories from dozens of peolpe with Colorados. I would suggest there are a couple of serious lovers who seemed to have gotten lucky with their CO's. Otherwise, the vast majority of experience is not good.

 

There is a wiki space that documents things very well too.

[+Red90]

If you take the time to work your way through the volumes of threads in this forum, there are dozens of horror stories from dozens of peolpe with Colorados. I would suggest there are a couple of serious lovers who seemed to have gotten lucky with their CO's. Otherwise, the vast majority of experience is not good.

 

There is a wiki space that documents things very well too.

 

I'm sorry, but you are wrong....

 

The vast majority have no problems and don't post a thing. Forums attract people that have problems and ones that like to complain. If you go and talk with a big supplier like GPS Central, they will tell you the same thing. Return rates are no different than any other GPS.

 

I know many people who have Colorados and have no problems beyond the known programming bugs, of which there are just as many on the Oregon.

 

As you have never used a Colorado with the current firmware, I suggest you just move on and assume that you have no clue what you are talking about.... Leave the discussion to people that actual own and use the units.

[+Tequila]

If you take the time to work your way through the volumes of threads in this forum, there are dozens of horror stories from dozens of peolpe with Colorados. I would suggest there are a couple of serious lovers who seemed to have gotten lucky with their CO's. Otherwise, the vast majority of experience is not good.

 

There is a wiki space that documents things very well too.

 

I'm sorry, but you are wrong....

 

The vast majority have no problems and don't post a thing. Forums attract people that have problems and ones that like to complain. If you go and talk with a big supplier like GPS Central, they will tell you the same thing. Return rates are no different than any other GPS.

 

I know many people who have Colorados and have no problems beyond the known programming bugs, of which there are just as many on the Oregon.

 

As you have never used a Colorado with the current firmware, I suggest you just move on and assume that you have no clue what you are talking about.... Leave the discussion to people that actual own and use the units.

 

I have never seen firmware that would address waterproof issues. AND, yes, there is an issue. And yes, it is acknowledged by Garmin. They are developing a new back cover.

 

Bass Pro Stores refused to stock the CO because of the bugs. And if you talk to REI, you will find they had a larger than normal return rate.

 

I have owned six Garmin GPS units AND this is the first one that I ever had a problem with.

 

You are correct that I never used one with the new firmware and I agree that it appears to have fixed the drift problem. But there were/are lots of other problems with the CO.

 

Garmin has never addressed the issue with the backlight having to be reset every time you power it on. The OR remembers the settings. Garmin acknowledged there is a problem with units suddenly refusing to boot with "System Software Missing".

 

In the Greater Toronto Area, half of the CO owners experienced significant problems and several have been successful in having Garmin replace them with OR's. I doubt any company would replace that many CO's if the unit was as good as you state.

 

We can agree to disagree. I am simply providing my experience so that others can make an informed decision on what to purchase. I would encourage anyone to go to their retailer and try each one and see what they like. Clearly, the interface (rotary wheel vs. touchscreen) is probably a significant matter of personal choice. I would also encourage anyone to completely understand the store's return policy and make sure they can return the CO if they don't like it.

[snomchfun]

If you take the time to work your way through the volumes of threads in this forum, there are dozens of horror stories from dozens of peolpe with Colorados. I would suggest there are a couple of serious lovers who seemed to have gotten lucky with their CO's. Otherwise, the vast majority of experience is not good.

 

There is a wiki space that documents things very well too.

 

I'm sorry, but you are wrong....

 

The vast majority have no problems and don't post a thing. Forums attract people that have problems and ones that like to complain. If you go and talk with a big supplier like GPS Central, they will tell you the same thing. Return rates are no different than any other GPS.

 

I know many people who have Colorados and have no problems beyond the known programming bugs, of which there are just as many on the Oregon.

 

I know of at least 6 colorados returned to gps central and 4 were mine. My friends and I have owned many Garmin products over the years and have never had any returned , so I don't think it's unwise to be skeptical.

As you have never used a Colorado with the current firmware, I suggest you just move on and assume that you have no clue what you are talking about.... Leave the discussion to people that actual own and use the units.

 

I have never seen firmware that would address waterproof issues. AND, yes, there is an issue. And yes, it is acknowledged by Garmin. They are developing a new back cover.

 

Bass Pro Stores refused to stock the CO because of the bugs. And if you talk to REI, you will find they had a larger than normal return rate.

 

I have owned six Garmin GPS units AND this is the first one that I ever had a problem with.

 

You are correct that I never used one with the new firmware and I agree that it appears to have fixed the drift problem. But there were/are lots of other problems with the CO.

 

Garmin has never addressed the issue with the backlight having to be reset every time you power it on. The OR remembers the settings. Garmin acknowledged there is a problem with units suddenly refusing to boot with "System Software Missing".

 

In the Greater Toronto Area, half of the CO owners experienced significant problems and several have been successful in having Garmin replace them with OR's. I doubt any company would replace that many CO's if the unit was as good as you state.

 

We can agree to disagree. I am simply providing my experience so that others can make an informed decision on what to purchase. I would encourage anyone to go to their retailer and try each one and see what they like. Clearly, the interface (rotary wheel vs. touchscreen) is probably a significant matter of personal choice. I would also encourage anyone to completely understand the store's return policy and make sure they can return the CO if they don't like it.

[snomchfun]

If you take the time to work your way through the volumes of threads in this forum, there are dozens of horror stories from dozens of peolpe with Colorados. I would suggest there are a couple of serious lovers who seemed to have gotten lucky with their CO's. Otherwise, the vast majority of experience is not good.

 

There is a wiki space that documents things very well too.

 

I'm sorry, but you are wrong....

 

The vast majority have no problems and don't post a thing. Forums attract people that have problems and ones that like to complain. If you go and talk with a big supplier like GPS Central, they will tell you the same thing. Return rates are no different than any other GPS.

 

I know many people who have Colorados and have no problems beyond the known programming bugs, of which there are just as many on the Oregon.

 

I know of at least 6 colorados returned to gps central and 4 were mine. My friends and I have owned many Garmin products over the years and have never had any returned , so I don't think it's unwise to be skeptical.

As you have never used a Colorado with the current firmware, I suggest you just move on and assume that you have no clue what you are talking about.... Leave the discussion to people that actual own and use the units.

 

I have never seen firmware that would address waterproof issues. AND, yes, there is an issue. And yes, it is acknowledged by Garmin. They are developing a new back cover.

 

Bass Pro Stores refused to stock the CO because of the bugs. And if you talk to REI, you will find they had a larger than normal return rate.

 

I have owned six Garmin GPS units AND this is the first one that I ever had a problem with.

 

You are correct that I never used one with the new firmware and I agree that it appears to have fixed the drift problem. But there were/are lots of other problems with the CO.

 

Garmin has never addressed the issue with the backlight having to be reset every time you power it on. The OR remembers the settings. Garmin acknowledged there is a problem with units suddenly refusing to boot with "System Software Missing".

 

In the Greater Toronto Area, half of the CO owners experienced significant problems and several have been successful in having Garmin replace them with OR's. I doubt any company would replace that many CO's if the unit was as good as you state.

 

We can agree to disagree. I am simply providing my experience so that others can make an informed decision on what to purchase. I would encourage anyone to go to their retailer and try each one and see what they like. Clearly, the interface (rotary wheel vs. touchscreen) is probably a significant matter of personal choice. I would also encourage anyone to completely understand the store's return policy and make sure they can return the CO if they don't like it.

 

sorry, this was my reply

 

know of at least 6 colorados returned to gps central and 4 were mine. My friends and I have owned many Garmin products over the years and have never had any returned , so I don't think it's unwise to be skeptical.

As you have never used a Colorado with the current firmware, I suggest you just move on and assume that you have no clue what you are talking about.... Leave the discussion to people that actual own and use the units.

[+tannerk]

Just a quick update. So far turning off "lock to roads" and turning off the compass has greatly improved the accuracy of the Colorado. I haven't had much time to do much testing but the little I have done is very promising. May keep the Colorado after all.

 

Now with the compass turned off. Do you still need to calibrate it?

 

As far as the Oregon is is more snappier locking the satellites? The colorado seems to take awhile, more then I would think it should. Not a biggie just thought I would ask.

 

Thanks all for the info and the help so far.

[+Tequila]

You are endorsing the CO after having to replace it four times???????????????? Interesting that one guy from Calgary got a perfect unit the first time and you took five attempts to get one.

 

I know what I am talking about. I had three CO's. And all three leaked. Two had drift problems. And one had "system software missing".

 

I acknowledged that the new firmware fixes the drift problem but that is not the only issue. The waterproof issue is still being worked by Garmin as is the "system software missing".

 

Do you like having to adjust the backlight every time you turn the unit on?

[snomchfun]

You are endorsing the CO after having to replace it four times???????????????? Interesting that one guy from Calgary got a perfect unit the first time and you took five attempts to get one.

 

I know what I am talking about. I had three CO's. And all three leaked. Two had drift problems. And one had "system software missing".

 

I acknowledged that the new firmware fixes the drift problem but that is not the only issue. The waterproof issue is still being worked by Garmin as is the "system software missing".

 

Do you like having to adjust the backlight every time you turn the unit on?

 

Definately not endorsing it.............I screwed my post up, sorry about the confusion. I am so happy to have moved on to the Oregon. Based on my experience ( and my friends ) I would run from the Colorado.

[+g-o-cashers]

Now with the compass turned off. Do you still need to calibrate it?

 

As far as the Oregon is is more snappier locking the satellites? The colorado seems to take awhile, more then I would think it should. Not a biggie just thought I would ask.

 

 

If the compass is off there is no need to calibrate.

 

If the Oregon has been off less than three days the acquisition time on the Oregon is faster than the Colorado. I seldom have my Oregon off for more than three days, so normally my Oregon is locked by the time you can see the first screen (and the Oregon also boots faster to the first screen -- about 5 seconds faster than the Colorado).

 

GO$Rs

[+tannerk]

 

If the compass is off there is no need to calibrate.

 

GO$Rs

 

That's what I thought but just wanted to be sure. Who would of thought the compass set to auto would be a problem.

[+Tequila]

You are endorsing the CO after having to replace it four times???????????????? Interesting that one guy from Calgary got a perfect unit the first time and you took five attempts to get one.

 

I know what I am talking about. I had three CO's. And all three leaked. Two had drift problems. And one had "system software missing".

 

I acknowledged that the new firmware fixes the drift problem but that is not the only issue. The waterproof issue is still being worked by Garmin as is the "system software missing".

 

Do you like having to adjust the backlight every time you turn the unit on?

 

Definately not endorsing it.............I screwed my post up, sorry about the confusion. I am so happy to have moved on to the Oregon. Based on my experience ( and my friends ) I would run from the Colorado.

 

LOL. Now it makes sense. Welcome to the wonderful world of Oregon.

[+tannerk]

Turn the compass OFF.

 

Hold the unit vertically and high when taking waypoint or trying to get maximum accuracy. This holds true for ALL quad helix units....

 

On the Oregon does horizontal or vertical position of the gps matter with a ceramic antenna?

[+g-o-cashers]

Garmin claims it doesn't really matter whether you hold it flat or top up. They did recommend against holding it bottom or side up. In might testing I can't see much difference either way.

 

http://garminoregon.wikispaces.com/Hardware#toc3

 

GO$Rs

[+minnesotabrad]

I ended up having issues with the wheel on the Colorado and changed to the Oregon as soon as it came out. I have been very happy with the decision.

[+tannerk]

Update. I went ahead a returned the Colorado and got the Oregon. I was still getting some strange results on getting to a waypoint and decided I was done with it. Sometimes it got me close other times it was still way off.

 

Anyway so far the Oregon has been great. Doing the same testing I done with the Colorado, the Oregon has got me consistently to a waypoint or very close to it.

 

One thing on the Oregon though is the GPS accuracy doesn't get as low as the Colorado did. It usually in the upper teens but it gets me to the waypoint more accurately then the Colorado.

[+Tequila]

Update. I went ahead a returned the Colorado and got the Oregon. I was still getting some strange results on getting to a waypoint and decided I was done with it. Sometimes it got me close other times it was still way off.

 

Anyway so far the Oregon has been great. Doing the same testing I done with the Colorado, the Oregon has got me consistently to a waypoint or very close to it.

 

One thing on the Oregon though is the GPS accuracy doesn't get as low as the Colorado did. It usually in the upper teens but it gets me to the waypoint more accurately then the Colorado.

 

I typically get 3 - 4 meter accuracy with the OR.

[+g-o-cashers]

Make sure you have the latest Oregon software. 2.6 "fixed" the GPS accuracy field on the Oregon. In side by side tests it is very close to my Colorado now.

 

GO$Rs

[+tannerk]

Make sure you have the latest Oregon software. 2.6 "fixed" the GPS accuracy field on the Oregon. In side by side tests it is very close to my Colorado now.

 

GO$Rs

 

Maybe I should do a master reset. It had 2.2 and I did updated it to 2.6 as soon I got to a computer. How far was the gps accuracy of previous to the update? I didn't play much with it with 2.2 on it since I knew there was an update.

 

By the way, you have a great website and wiki.

[+g-o-cashers]

Prior to 2.6 I would typically see GPS accuracy in the 20'-30' range. Keep in mind this is just a number that the unit calculates based on what it thinks the error might be, it should be used to give you some relative feel for how good the signal conditions are, not as an absolute number.

 

Thanks for the nice words on the site and wikis.

 

GO$Rs

[+Tequila]

A friend, experiencing the waterproof issue with his CO, recently received the following response from Garmin.

 

"Water in the SD slot can damage the device, however, water in the battery compartment cannot enter the device unless there is some other underlying issue which we cannot assume there would be.

 

The unit is considered IPX7 and the battery compartment is considered IPX5 on the water proof scale. Neither this unit nor any of our other Outdoor devices are “waterproof” like a Timex watch or something of the like would be. Since the moisture in the battery compartment would not result in intrusion of water into the device I am not too concerned with it resulting in damage. Now, if the unit is exceeding its waterproof rating then we could expect for some damage to occur. As you can tell the engineers did not change the seal around the battery compartment given the information I just provided."

 

I did a quick check of the CO page on the Garmin website and it says IPX7; no mention of a separate rating for the battery compartment.

[+g-o-cashers]

Yeah, that would be news to me as well.

 

GO$Rs

[+tannerk]

Offically happy with the Oregon as of now. The past couple of days here have been really cloudy which I think affected the GPS accuracy some but with partly cloudy skies I was getting 8-9 ft instead of the mid-teens as far as accuracy. Both of which are within the units specs.

 

One thing that was interesting was no matter what the accuracy was telling me the Oregon got me the the waypoint I selected usually between 0-5ft.

 

Some of the thing I like over the Colorado so far is:

1. Interface -- Touchscreen way easier to move though the screens and enter data.

2. Compass seems to work better not by much doesn't seem to "stick" as the Colorado did.

3. Accuracy to waypoint -- more accurate and consistent over the Colorado

4. Fits better in the hand.

5. The brightness setting stay set to what you want.

 

What I don't like:

1. Display is dimmer but usable.

2. Cost more then the Coloardo

[+geokitebuggy]

I have both Colorado 400t and Oregon 400t. I've found several hundred caches with the Colorado and am approaching my first hundred with the Oregon. Both have the latest firmware. I now carry the Colorado along as a backup. I've never had to return either unit because of problems.

 

I use CityNavigator NT on both units to guide me near the cache. I find that the Oregon's ability to recalculate off road with just a couple of picks is about the most handy feature I use. I used to have to struggle with this in the Colorado. I rarely use the compass, preferring rather to zoom in deeply on the map and follow the purple line to the cache. I do leave the compass enabled in 'auto' mode on the Oregon so that the 'loose bearings' issue is not so annoying. On the Colo. I turned the compass off for the reasons that have already been mentioned above.

 

One annoying behavior of the Colorado that I have not experienced frequently with the Oregon is that when standing still the Colo. would tell me I was 10 ft. from the cache in one direction and then suddenly tell me I was 20 ft. away in a different direction. I don't experience this behavior with the Oregon. When I stand still it doesn't jump around as much. I've taken them into the field side-by-side and they both took me to the same spot (within a few feet), so accuracy is not an issue for me.

 

I like the Oregon's touch screen much better than the RnR on the Colo. Outdoor screen brightness on both units is adequate. The Oregon's matte finish screen surface diffuses some of the light and makes it appear just slightly dimmer, but it doesn't show the fingerprints as much. Now if Garmin could come up with a display that was as bright as my 76CSx!

 

I have had no battery life issues with either unit. I use Powerex 2700 mAH NiMH cells from Thomas Distributing along with the MAHA MH-C9000 charger. Both units give me about 10 hours of continuous power-on hours. I haven't measured things with a stopwatch, but I perceive that the Oregon does slightly better in the power consumption area.

 

I would like to see a soft key on the Oregon that would allow one to view the cache description while navigating to the cache - in both on-road and off-road modes. You can do this by backing out of the map screen and entering the geocache screens, but directly would be nice. Also, after marking a cache as found, the find nearest selection should show the name of the cache at the top of the screen so you can read the description first and decide if it is, indeed, the cache you want to head to. Hopefully these things will be addressed in future firmware.

 

Since my experience has been with samples of n=1 for each unit, my comments/feelings are purely subjective. I would not discourage anyone from owning either unit, but my personal preference now lies with the Oregon.

[+Team Hoover Monroe]

Turn the compass OFF.

 

Hold the unit vertically and high when taking waypoint or trying to get maximum accuracy. This holds true for ALL quad helix units....

I've been through 5 colorado 300's and had Garmin replace it with an Oregon 300, hate to say it but my experience with the Oregon sofar is night and day better than the Colorado. Way easier to use, perfectly stable and is much much better on batteries.

 

What was your problem with the 5 bad colorados? Same issue or various?

#1 The unit would shut off when I hit the right button.

#2 The unit would'nt keep time, 2 hour battery llife and would randomly shut down

#3 Again the unit would randomly shut down ( with screen fade away )

#4 Couldn't get more than 4 hours battery life ( lithium or 2700 nimh ) + altimeter stopped working

#5 After 3 days completely fried, not even reset would get it going.

 

recieved a 6th, didn't even open it, traded it for Oregon ( which has been perfect after 2 weeks ) and still on same batteries..........

 

May I ask how you got Garmin to replace. I am on my 3rd unit now (and needs replacing!!) and all they are willing to do is replace them with a re-manufactured Colorado. I told them that I "know" people who have had them replaced through Garmin and they just say "No, we don't do that". I finally hung up on the guy. I ask for a Manager and they won't let me speak to anyone. At $20+ for overnight shipping, this is getting just stupid!! Any help would be appreciated.

[yogazoo]

I did one of these exchanges yesterday!

 

All I did was call them up, tell them my wife can not remove the battery cover on the Colorado(huge pain in the arse, especially with arthritis) and asked if there was a refund / replacement option because we physically cannot use this model of GPS anymore. The guy got approval from his boss and it was in the mail. That simple.

Edited November 25, 2008 by yogazoo

[+Team Hoover Monroe]

I did one of these exchanges yesterday!

 

All I did was call them up, tell them my wife can not remove the battery cover on the Colorado(huge pain in the arse, especially with arthritis) and asked if there was a refund / replacement option because we physically cannot use this model of GPS anymore. The guy got approval from his boss and it was in the mail. That simple.

 

Did they charge you anything for the upgrade/exchange?