Keep the 60 Cx or upgrade to Oregon?

December 31, 2008

I absolutely love my Garmin GPSMap 60 Cx (for work and geocaching). The accuracy is great and I like the features it has. The only thing it is potentially lacking in is the geocache manager software (or lack thereof). I'm really considering getting a Garmin Oregon 400t but don't want to sacrifice any accuracy or features for a better geocache manager. Give me your thoughts...

1.1k · December 31, 2008

Nothing has been created since the 60X/76X series that OVERALL is better.

Apparently, even Garmin doesn't like it's own Colorado, and the new brand chipset in the Oregon has a WAAS problem, and the E-Trex H series has a drift problem .........and the Delorme PN-40 has the same WAAS problem as the Oregon.....

Save your money and enjoy your 60 for a while longer until a clear cut better unit comes out.......it will be a while......

December 31, 2008

I thought the same as Grasscatcher, and to an extent, still do.

That said, I've have my Oregon 400T for a few weeks now, and have migrated almost exclusively to it for caching. My 60CSx is never far away, however.

To me, the real high point of caching is finding new places, and having all the cache information from GC.com makes that a richer experience. The CSx can't give me that, in a single device. However, the CSx *IS* a "better" GPS unit, and if I were only to have ONE, it would be the CSx, hands down. The only real value of the 400T over the CSx is its ability to display all that cache information, for everything else, the CSx is better. Oh..and the maps are prettier on the 400. Shaded relief is B-E-A-utiful!

I have never enjoyed caching more than I do now, and I credit the 400T with that. Even those lame urban nanos can be interesting to me now, because I know why the spot was interesting to the person who placed the cache....or not.

Edited December 31, 2008 by bunkerdave

January 1, 2009

I'll admit the lure of true paperless is hard to resist. I just don't know if it is worth paying $600 for it...

January 1, 2009

I'll admit the lure of true paperless is hard to resist. I just don't know if it is worth paying $600 for it...

Amazon.com has the Oregons for about $100 less than you list here and does not charge shipping.

I have the same dilemma as you, in that I can't decide which one to buy. I am having both sent out, except that the Oregon I am looking to buy is a 300 and not a 400 (basically a 400 without topos and some memory), for slightly less than $400. I decided on the 300 because I know I don't need topos now and if I decide I want them, they can be added later.

The questions I have been asking myself are:

What is this gps going to be primarily used for? Answer, 95% geocaching. Therefore, I'm leaning heavily toward the Oregon esp. after having a nice email trade with BunkerDave about his experiences with it. The things he didn't like about it seemed to be overwhelmed by his comments about how NICE it was for geocaching. That is awfully tempting. I currently carry three electronic devices with me when I cache, gps, iPod, and cellphone, and I am trying to pare down the crap I have to lug around.

However... and a big however... I'm older, and the eyesight is going. So the reported dimness of the Oregon screen is a huge factor for me. The only way to determine if this is going to be a real problem is to put some batteries in one and look at it - outside, and not in a store display counter. If it's truly as dim as they say, then I'll keep my iPod for going paperless, and go with the CSx.

I guess you just have to analyze which one is going to apply most to your end usage.

I'll check back into this thread after I get both devices and tell you which one I went with.

January 1, 2009

Can anyone who's got an Oregon... BunkerDave, I'm calling on you... tell me if the WAAS problem is that severe? Have you noticed any accuracy problems that you would consider out of the norm?

January 1, 2009

Bunkerdave,

I have an Oregon 400T the wife gave me for Christmas and I love it.

The only problem so far is trying to open the "current.gpx file in GeoBuddy.

When I try to open the current.gpx file in GeoBuddy I get an error message.

"The open command could not be completed. The fileCurrent.gpx could not be opened.

This XML file contains one or more errors. Error 0xC00CE508 on line a, position 1061

Reason: An invalid character was found in text content."

I thinks there was a similar problem when the Colorado came out.

Any suggestions?

Pat

3k · January 1, 2009

Pat,

This error is usually caused by a bogus character in a waypoint name or description field. If you open current.gpx in a text editor you can usually find the character (in notepad they usually look like a square) and remove it so that the gpx file can be opened in EGPS (or Geobuddy).

January 1, 2009

Can anyone who's got an Oregon... BunkerDave, I'm calling on you... tell me if the WAAS problem is that severe? Have you noticed any accuracy problems that you would consider out of the norm?

I've only owned/used my Oregon 400t for a few days, but have taken it out in the field 5 or 6 times...each time accompanied by my 60CSx for side-by-side comparison. Both GPS units acquire the WAAS satellite (SVN 51, I'm in the DC Metro area)...the 60CSx seems to acquire it a bit faster. Both units hold the WAAS satellite well, and I receive differential indication (D's) in the power bars of all of the other acquired satellites. EPE is comparable to within a foot or two...sometimes one has lower EPE, and then the other. I haven't noticed a WAAS problem. I used the 400t the other day for geocaching, and it held strong signals...including WAAS under winter tree cover here in the mid-Atlantic. As I said though...I've only been using the 400t for a few days.

Bill

January 2, 2009

Got an OR 400t for Xmas and have used it for about 8 caches. Before that I had the 60cx and before that the IIIplus. My 60cx had developed some kind of problems with the batteries so it really need to be replaced. I don't miss the III plus but I kind of think the 60cx is actually better for caching for caching than the OR. I am missing some features from the 60cx on the OR. Maybe I'll get over it.

You can't seem to edit the geocaches on the geocache menu. You can't delete them there either. All you can do is select them. Maybe you can edit the coords for a geocache on the waypoint manager. But it's not a slick as the 60cx.

Other things I've read on other forums aren't making me feel real good about the OR either. If you can't average a waypoint postion with the OR I don't what they were thinking there. I see the lack of position averaging as a major loss. The WAAS thing doesn't sound good but so far I havn't noticed a problem. But my old III plus did not have WAAS and the positions I get with it always compare real good with the 60cx.

The screen brightness is also an issue. I put a screen saver on there and that doesn't help either. It definately is difficult to read without the backlight, and the backlight becomes disabled frequently with alkaline batteries. I'm used to using "dollar store" alkalines with the 60cx. If I am constantly running out of juice and have to get lithium or NiCd that's a little annoying.

Another thing I don't like about the OR is that when it is connected to the computer you can't do anything with it. You can't seem to use any of the menus.

It did'nt come with any software so you will need to get something if you don't have other garmin maps or the trip and waypoint manager. Seems like new users should have gotten something for the PC.

It's nice to have the cache pages on the unit. But I have a pocket PC and a smartphone. I'll leave the pocket PC at home but I'll always have the cell phone and if I need to call up the web page I can do it there.

I'm not sure the OR is ready for prime time. Maybe the CO was better. But the 60csx or cx would be a great choice for heavy duty geocaching.

January 6, 2009

Got the new Oregon in hand, as of today.

Whoa baby... nice ergonomics, feels good in the hand, and darned good looking! Appearance-wise, it beats the 60CSX hands down (yeah, I know, but I'm an artist by trade, and aesthetics are important to me). Plus, it works well for a left-hander, and I can't say that about many products.

Averaging waypoints... is that really an issue? All an automatic waypoint averaging feature does is take the same series of several waypoints that I can easily do by hand and compare them, which I can also do. I don't find this much of a chore. I did manual waypoint averaging on my old blue Legend and it worked pretty good. That's a feature I just don't care about, because I can compensate for it. For some people, who place a lot of caches, yeah, maybe they would find this troublesome, but I don't do waypoint averaging enough that this is a big deal for me.

About screen brightness: I did what the "garmin oregon wiki" website suggested, and uploaded a blank white screen which I swapped out for the dark textured pictures that came with the unit. This improved things a lot. Then, I turned backlight on constant mode, per BunkerDave's suggestions. It didn't help too much at all, UNTIL I figured out how to crank the backlight up all the way. Now the screen is quite bright and readable, although it isn't probably as bright as it could be if it were an ideal world. However, I can live with this if the battery life is enough for an average day of caching before I have to change them. I guess I look at it this way: instead of thinking of the backlight constantly on, think of it as normal screen mode... THEN you turn the backlight off when you want Power Saving mode!

I LOVE THE GEOCACHING NOTES and the way they format into the device in such a readable organized manner. This could completely negate any need to take my iPod, or even my web-enabled phone with me. Since a big reason I wanted to get a new GPS was to pare down on the number of devices I take with me in the field, and I use a GPS 95% of the time for geocaching, this is HUGE. I have tried to figure out how to get GSAK to run on a Mac so I can do this in a 60CSX, and it's possible, but it's buggy, and I just don't want to mess with the bugginess of it. MacCaching is the only other real Mac software alternative, but it won't do the macros needed to get the notes into a 60CSX. So, being able to dump the pocket queries directly into the Oregon in mass storage mode and completely bypass a third-party software cache program altogether is a big deal.

I've got the 60CSX coming tomorrow, and I'll take a closer look at it before making a final decision, but so far, I'm really leaning toward the Oregon.

The total cost of this unit for me will be about $350. I don't think it's a bad price for the really really slick geocaching-specific features.

January 6, 2009

Oh one other thing, you can use the unit menus, etc. while connected to the computer. You just have to change the Garmin Serial mode setting to Spanner mode.

January 10, 2009

Other things I've read on other forums aren't making me feel real good about the OR either. If you can't average a waypoint postion with the OR I don't what they were thinking there. I see the lack of position averaging as a major loss. The WAAS thing doesn't sound good but so far I havn't noticed a problem. But my old III plus did not have WAAS and the positions I get with it always compare real good with the 60cx.

Did you see the link to this? It is a Wherigo cartridge that will do averaging on your Oregon. I tried it. It works! Not a perfect fix, but for those times when you need it, it's there.

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=209017

January 10, 2009

Can anyone who's got an Oregon... BunkerDave, I'm calling on you... tell me if the WAAS problem is that severe? Have you noticed any accuracy problems that you would consider out of the norm?

I got an Oregon 400t about a week ago. My previous GPSr was a Colorado 300. For the last week or so, I have been using the two units side-by-side. The Colorado has been getting it's "normal" WAAS lock and reporting accuracies ranging from 8 feet to about 23 feet. Sitting right next to it has been my Oregon. The Oregon also has WAAS enabled. Most of the time it does not report that it has a lock on any of the WAAS satellites. I have seen some of the other s sats reporting a WAAS correction, but most of the time not. Here is the fun part, the Oregon is generally reporting it's accuracy in the feet to 16 feet range. This morning, my Colorado was reporting a WAAS link and 90+% signal strength from 10 sats and still reporting an 18 feet accuracy. At the same time the Oregon had the same 10 sats locked, also with a 90+% signal strength, but it's accuracy was reporting 8 feet, even though there was no WAAS correction (or lock on any of the WAAS related satellites).

My Oregon has eventually gotten a WAAS lock on several occasions. In each of these occasions, they accuracy reported on the Oregon was generally very similar to that on the Colorado. Additionally, both GPSr units tend to report their position to be within 0.002 degrees lat & long of each other.

January 11, 2009

I thought the same as Grasscatcher, and to an extent, still do.

That said, I've have my Oregon 400T for a few weeks now, and have migrated almost exclusively to it for caching. My 60CSx is never far away, however.

To me, the real high point of caching is finding new places, and having all the cache information from GC.com makes that a richer experience. The CSx can't give me that, in a single device. However, the CSx *IS* a "better" GPS unit, and if I were only to have ONE, it would be the CSx, hands down. The only real value of the 400T over the CSx is its ability to display all that cache information, for everything else, the CSx is better. Oh..and the maps are prettier on the 400. Shaded relief is B-E-A-utiful!

I have never enjoyed caching more than I do now, and I credit the 400T with that. Even those lame urban nanos can be interesting to me now, because I know why the spot was interesting to the person who placed the cache....or not.

Grasscatcher is totally right.. personally i believe the 60CSx is (overall) the best hand held Garmin ever produced. If you look around on the forums for problems with units, you wont find as many with the 60CSx as you do with all the newer ones. I've used and seen TV reviews on multiple units such as the Colorado/Oregon etc, and although they look nice and have some attractive features they seem to be fraught with heavy compromises that for the price, are not acceptable.

Through experience and a lot of reading on the net, I would state that the 60CSx is perhaps one of the most reliable and accurate units out their in its class. Even using the UK GB map (i know this is not as good as the US mapping!), its still spot on and provides me with more functionality than ill probably ever need for caching and walking.

I dont like touchscreens PERIOD. Totally inpractical when it comes to outdoor activities. Ive used my 60CSx in subzero temperature being wrapped up like a kipper, I can easily navigate its screens without going to screens i dont want.

Question: Do you have an iPhone/iPod? If you want paperless caching, for only a few £ or $ (whatever) you can have just that. I dont know about the rest of you, but no matter what im doing outdoors, my phone is always with me so its no big deal to look at it for the cach info instead of my GPS. Talking of iPhone, I know the iPhone has rubbish battery life but looking at it for cach info and using your GPS for ... well GPS'ing! you can cach all day along, not to mention the convenience of seeing two full screen uints at the same time!

I will eventually upgrade my 60CSx, but I dont see ANYTHING out there in its class that would make me do so at this time.

KEPP YOU 60CSx... its a great unit and (IMHO) better than all the newer ones.

Edited January 11, 2009 by stingray67

January 11, 2009

I dont like touchscreens PERIOD. Totally inpractical when it comes to outdoor activities. Ive used my 60CSx in subzero temperature being wrapped up like a kipper, I can easily navigate its screens without going to screens i dont want.

Question: Do you have an iPhone/iPod? If you want paperless caching, for only a few £ or $ (whatever) you can have just that. I dont know about the rest of you, but no matter what im doing outdoors, my phone is always with me so its no big deal to look at it for the cach info instead of my GPS. Talking of iPhone, I knowthe iPhone has rubbish battery life but looking at it for cach info and using your GPS for ... well GPS'ing! you can cach all day along, not to mention the convenience of seeing two full screen uints at the same time!

I would personally disagree with this; I actually quite like the touchscreen on the Oregon. It's winter here, of course, and we have had cold temperatures, and I've had no problems touching the correct button on the Oregon even with gloved hands. I've been"wrapped up like a kipper" too (I love this expression!) and haven't had any problems navigating with it. I think it's because the Oregon's touchscreen buttons are quite big... it's hard to miss them even with your gloves on. I think the touchscreen issue is a personal preference. If you like touchscreens generally, you will like the Oregon. If you don't like them, then you won't like these either.

I think this poster's suggestion about iPod is a very good one. My previous setup was with an old Legend and an iPod and it worked great. I wouldn't have changed it except the Legend was 9 years old and starting to have problems. I'm not so keen on the phone/web idea. I also have a web-enabled phone, but find it's cumbersome for finding cache page info, plus, if you lose cell phone reception, you're out of luck. I much prefer the Oregon, or the iPod/GPSr-of-your-choice setup.

I probably would have chosen the 60CSx too, but I have the additional problem of needing Mac friendly devices, and the Oregon fits that bill much better than the 60CSx. Buying the 60CSx would have caused me a whole other set of problems which I have avoided with my Oregon.

I've been caching with it most every day for about a week now in all kinds of temperatures and lighting conditions, and it's worked beautifully.

BD

January 12, 2009

Well...I recently upgraded to a Oregon 400t from a 60csx and I TOTALLY love my Oregon. I use it for both navigation and geocaching and once you get the hang of it and its operation, it works great!! Not saying that I didn't really like the 60csx, but to have all the cache information and all the other points on it, I really have to say that I will not go back to my 60csx and I don't carry it with me either. I think if you go with the Oregon, you will love it. I do wish the screen was brighter, but I have not had a problem when it is on 100 % brightness.

January 13, 2009

I have had both and have an above average knowledge in using GPS I use a DAGR in the army quite a bit also. I bought a Oregon used it for 3 months and returned it for a 60 CSX. The only thing I missed is the paperless Geocaching other than that I will take a csx over the oregon anyday of the week for aquisition time and accuracy

Keep the 60 Cx or upgrade to Oregon?

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Join the conversation