Time to update - 60csx/Vista/colorado/oregon?

[mlandman]

Hello, this is my first post. I know that this is an oft asked question, and my use is a bit OT...but you folks use GPSes more than most.

 

I have a 5 year old Vista and it is time to update. My primary use is wilderness hiking, in potentially rough/wet conditions. I have a Nuvi for my car, so road directions to the trailhead is not a significant concern.

 

My concerns are with capabilities:

• Abilities to load 3rd party maps (GPS File Depot, et. al.)

• Battery life (I go out for 5 – 7 days)

• Memory expandability

• Weight (including replacement batteries, I am one of those gram weenie light weight hikers)

• Route loading at home and viewing in the field.

• Ability to get a satellite fix in less than ideal conditions (heavy wet tree canopies, tight canyons, etc.)

• Ability to correct routs/way-points to match reality on the ground

 

Am I missing other important criteria?

 

The models I am seriously considering are as follows, in alphabetic order:

 

• Colorado 300

• GPS Maps 60 Csx

• Oregon 300

• Vista Hcx

 

Are there other models I should list, and why?

 

I have reviewed many web pages and I think this is where they stand…

• The 60 Csx can not load 3rd party maps. Is this correct? Can the others? I think the Vista can, but what about the Oregon and the Colorado?

• The Vista wins on the battery life and weight.

• The Oregon is the hardest to see in many lighting conditions.

• The Colorado can display only 1 route at a time (is this fixed in the current firmware?).

• All 4 will “see” only 2 GB on a memory card. I have read some reports that the Colorado can see 4 GB, but there seams to be conflicting reports on this. 2 GB is a lot of maps, so this might not be an issue.

 

Any additional opinions/feedback/comparisons/options/comments will be greatly appreciated.

 

Also, has anyone tried portable solar battery chargers (Silva, PowerFilm, etc.)? What is your experience with them?

 

Thanks,

Michael

Edited January 9, 2009 by mlandman

[+Red90]

Get a Vista HCX.

 

They can all use 3rd party maps. For "your" use, they will all function the same. The Vista is the smallest, lightest and has the longest battery life.

 

If you are in the USA, you should also look at the Delorme units. Aerial photos might or might not be of interest to you.

[+Rockin Roddy]

Yep, if in the USA, check out the DeLorme PN-40!

[+Rockin Roddy]

Yep, if in the USA, check out the DeLorme PN-40!

[mlandman]

Get a Vista HCX.

If you are in the USA, you should also look at the Delorme units. Aerial photos might or might not be of interest to you.

I have found Aerials to be useful in the desert, looking for balds and above treeline. Out side of that, a topo tells me more.

 

"For "your" use"

Who knows, I might go cacheing too.

Ya never know!

[+intolerable]

Hello, this is my first post. I know that this is an oft asked question, and my use is a bit OT...but you folks use GPSes more than most.

 

I have a 5 year old Vista and it is time to update. My primary use is wilderness hiking, in potentially rough/wet conditions. I have a Nuvi for my car, so road directions to the trailhead is not a significant concern.

 

My concerns are with capabilities:

• Abilities to load 3rd party maps (GPS File Depot, et. al.)

• Battery life (I go out for 5 – 7 days)

• Memory expandability

• Weight (including replacement batteries, I am one of those gram weenie light weight hikers)

• Route loading at home and viewing in the field.

• Ability to get a satellite fix in less than ideal conditions (heavy wet tree canopies, tight canyons, etc.)

• Ability to correct routs/way-points to match reality on the ground

 

Am I missing other important criteria?

 

The models I am seriously considering are as follows, in alphabetic order:

 

• Colorado 300

• GPS Maps 60 Csx

• Oregon 300

• Vista Hcx

 

Are there other models I should list, and why?

 

I have reviewed many web pages and I think this is where they stand…

• The 60 Csx can not load 3rd party maps. Is this correct? Can the others? I think the Vista can, but what about the Oregon and the Colorado?

• The Vista wins on the battery life and weight.

• The Oregon is the hardest to see in many lighting conditions.

• The Colorado can display only 1 route at a time (is this fixed in the current firmware?).

• All 4 will “see” only 2 GB on a memory card. I have read some reports that the Colorado can see 4 GB, but there seams to be conflicting reports on this. 2 GB is a lot of maps, so this might not be an issue.

 

Any additional opinions/feedback/comparisons/options/comments will be greatly appreciated.

 

Also, has anyone tried portable solar battery chargers (Silva, PowerFilm, etc.)? What is your experience with them?

 

Thanks,

Michael

 

I have a Vista HCx and use it for primarily hiking. Aside from the various technical problems I've had in the past with the unit, and still occasionally encounter, there's a couple of reasons why I'm looking to upgrade to a unit other than it.

 

The Vista HCx works much better when held flat, which is far from ideal when hiking. I attach it to my pack vertically and have to check it often to make sure that the track log isn't *too* far off. Usually, holding it flat for a few will get it back on trail.

 

The 60CSx sounds like it receives much better reception while strapped to a pack (ie, being held vertically). When hiking with others, I usually turn to whoever is carrying the 60CSx as their track log is almost always the best.

 

I'm unaware of any issues with the 60CSx and custom maps and know it runs at least some custom maps, as there is a popular trails map used by many 60CSx owners in the area here.

 

You might want to look at the PN-40. It sounds like a great unit, although has some shortcomings that I couldn't get past (not as POI friendly as Garmin units, which I rely on heavily). But the aerial imagery sounded like it would be *great* while out.

 

I haven't any experience with Garmin's newer models, although know people who have seemed to have quite a few issues with the Colorado. On the other hand, know at least one person who has had zero issues with his Colorado. For some reason, I can't get it into my head using an Oregon out hiking (it's the touchscreen...).

 

I've also never had any experience with the solar chargers, although hope someone else has and responds to that. Some reviews I've read on one charger indicated that you needed direct exposure to the sun for charging to occur at all, but that was months back and I couldn't tell you what actual charger that was.

 

Hope something here is useful

[+Red90]

"For "your" use"

Who knows, I might go cacheing too.

Ya never know!

 

What I'm getting at is the Colorado and Oregon are MUCH better for Geocaching use. BUT there are downsides for some of the things you are asking for, mainly battery life and size.

[mlandman]

"For "your" use"

Who knows, I might go cacheing too.

Ya never know!

 

What I'm getting at is the Colorado and Oregon are MUCH better for Geocaching use. BUT there are downsides for some of the things you are asking for, mainly battery life and size.

No offence taken...just pulling your leg.

[+Maingray]

Unless you really want paperless geocaching, the Vista HCX should be your choice. Great unit. PN-40 still too immature a product to trust just yet (IMO).

 

Oregon has been fine out hiking, I haven't even thought twice about it being a touchscreen and more sensitive....if i drop a screen and it fell on a rock or something I'd expect it to break regardless of touchscreen or not. I got a Invisible Shield on it as well. I like the OR as I much prefer the idea of an all-in-one auto-nav / paperless / hiking GPS. I finally gave up the Vista HCX + PDA combination.

Edited January 9, 2009 by Maingray

[MtnHermit]

Hi Michael,

 

I believe my GPS use is closest to your intended application. I'm a day hiker/backpacker where my longest GPS only backpack to date was 4 days. I got my first mapping GPS, a Venture Cx, 2-years ago and battery life was my number 1 priority. The now discontinued Venture Cx beats all your choices for battery life, but it had a poor receiver such that it frequently lost signal. Except for disrupting the track, this signal loss was more inconvenient, hardly safety related.

 

I've so adapted to the GPS that I no longer carry paper maps. I use the 24K maps by Above the timber instead. The GPS is so much more versatile and accurate than a paper map and compass.

 

I have reviewed many web pages and I think this is where they stand…

• The 60 Csx can not load 3rd party maps. Is this correct? Can the others? I think the Vista can, but what about the Oregon and the Colorado?

This is not correct. ALL Garmin units WILL display all compatible maps, including your Nuvi and older B&W units.

 

• The Oregon is the hardest to see in many lighting conditions.

The Oregon has the same display as the CO with the addition of two layers of resistive touch film, which reduces daylight visability, just like your Nuvi.

 

The problem with the above photo is it is not display optimized, the photo below shows how good the sunlight visibility can be.

 

 

From extended use, the CO is very good in sunlight, just not as good as the Venture/Vista.

 

• The Colorado can display only 1 route at a time (is this fixed in the current firmware?).

Substitute track for route and I believe this statement is correct.

 

• All 4 will “see” only 2 GB on a memory card. I have read some reports that the Colorado can see 4 GB, but there seams to be conflicting reports on this. 2 GB is a lot of maps, so this might not be an issue.

I have all of Colo and Utah at 24K on a 1GB card with room to spare. More likely you'll run into the 2025 map segment barrier before the memory limit. I put a 8GB SDHC from my camera into a CO 300, no problem reading the maps. It even had image files still on it, no problems.

 

The CO & OR and most Nuvi's have a newer OS such that they can read more map files than just gmapsupp.img required by the Vista and 60/76 units.

 

I just bought the CO because the small display of Venture was limiting. This chart compares most current Garmin displays, the PN-20/40 is identical to the Vista.

 

Bottom line, I'd obsess less about a few ounces and get the best GPS, I have.

 

Anyway, more data for your CPU.

[+intolerable]

Hi Michael,

 

I believe my GPS use is closest to your intended application. I'm a day hiker/backpacker where my longest GPS only backpack to date was 4 days. I got my first mapping GPS, a Venture Cx, 2-years ago and battery life was my number 1 priority. The now discontinued Venture Cx beats all your choices for battery life, but it had a poor receiver such that it frequently lost signal. Except for disrupting the track, this signal loss was more inconvenient, hardly safety related.

 

Not trying to steal the thread, but I'm really interested in your experience with accuracy and other issues that some people seemed to have with the Colorado. I love the way the Colorado *looks* and the price is really hard to beat right now (less than a 60CSx!), but accuracy wise under the conditions that you describe (I'd mostly use it for hiking, caching while hiking and collecting track logs of trips), others have reported less than favorable results. My experience with the Vista HCx has been mostly disappointing in regards to this sort of usage and I'd hate to drop the money on a Colorado only to experience the same sort of disappointment

[MtnHermit]

Not trying to steal the thread, but I'm really interested in your experience with accuracy and other issues that some people seemed to have with the Colorado. I love the way the Colorado *looks* and the price is really hard to beat right now (less than a 60CSx!), but accuracy wise under the conditions that you describe (I'd mostly use it for hiking, caching while hiking and collecting track logs of trips), others have reported less than favorable results. My experience with the Vista HCx has been mostly disappointing in regards to this sort of usage and I'd hate to drop the money on a Colorado only to experience the same sort of disappointment

I've only had my CO 300 for a month, too much snow for anything serious. Hence I don't have an absolute answer . . . yet!!! I was more concerned with can I read and use the critter in sunlight, unequivocal yes. The touchscreen Nuvi was a maybe at best, with poor battery life and no spares.

 

Based on my early test, going to identifiable points on the 24K maps, I'm very pleased. I believe the latest firmwares have solved the base accuracy issue, but if you have a HCx, same chip, same accuracy or not.

 

Since I'm not a "Hide-n-Seeker" I don't need the kind of accuracy required for caching. I mostly navigate with my brain, the GPS holds the maps and tells me where to head next at points of confusion.

 

In truth, my Venture Cx was capable at all the above. So the CO 300 was as much for enhanced features and toy value as basic navigation. At $500 the CO 300 was a no way!!! At half that I bit. I purchased it from REI so I could send it back, Monday I'm planning to send in my rebate form.

[+intolerable]

Not trying to steal the thread, but I'm really interested in your experience with accuracy and other issues that some people seemed to have with the Colorado. I love the way the Colorado *looks* and the price is really hard to beat right now (less than a 60CSx!), but accuracy wise under the conditions that you describe (I'd mostly use it for hiking, caching while hiking and collecting track logs of trips), others have reported less than favorable results. My experience with the Vista HCx has been mostly disappointing in regards to this sort of usage and I'd hate to drop the money on a Colorado only to experience the same sort of disappointment

I've only had my CO 300 for a month, too much snow for anything serious. Hence I don't have an absolute answer . . . yet!!! I was more concerned with can I read and use the critter in sunlight, unequivocal yes. The touchscreen Nuvi was a maybe at best, with poor battery life and no spares.

 

Based on my early test, going to identifiable points on the 24K maps, I'm very pleased. I believe the latest firmwares have solved the base accuracy issue, but if you have a HCx, same chip, same accuracy or not.

 

Since I'm not a "Hide-n-Seeker" I don't need the kind of accuracy required for caching. I mostly navigate with my brain, the GPS holds the maps and tells me where to head next at points of confusion.

 

In truth, my Venture Cx was capable at all the above. So the CO 300 was as much for enhanced features and toy value as basic navigation. At $500 the CO 300 was a no way!!! At half that I bit. I purchased it from REI so I could send it back, Monday I'm planning to send in my rebate form.

 

Thanks for the feedback regarding this. While I'm not super concerned with a GPS placing me on top of a cache, I am concerned about track logs as I sometimes get a bit obsessive about the details of a hike. The extra features on the Colorado are very tempting, especially at the prices that I'm seeing them at right now (sometimes cheaper than the 60CSx!)

[+GeekBoy.from.Illinois]

Not trying to steal the thread, but I'm really interested in your experience with accuracy and other issues that some people seemed to have with the Colorado....

 

Well, with the most recent software/firmware updates for the Colorado it has helped tremendously with the accuracy (at least for me). My Colorado 300 is consistently within about 10 feet of my wife's 60Cx after letting the Colorado settle. It reminds me quite a bit of how our Magellan eXplorist 600 acted when compared to my old 60CSx. They end-up at the same place, it's just that the 60CSx (and 60Cx) gets there a little faster.

[Orion84]

I have a Vista HCx and use it for primarily hiking. Aside from the various technical problems I've had in the past with the unit, and still occasionally encounter, there's a couple of reasons why I'm looking to upgrade to a unit other than it.

 

The Vista HCx works much better when held flat, which is far from ideal when hiking. I attach it to my pack vertically and have to check it often to make sure that the track log isn't *too* far off. Usually, holding it flat for a few will get it back on trail.

 

The 60CSx sounds like it receives much better reception while strapped to a pack (ie, being held vertically). When hiking with others, I usually turn to whoever is carrying the 60CSx as their track log is almost always the best.

Isn't that just a matter of strapping it to your pack in a different way? I have a Vista HCx as well, and manage perfectly well to strap it onto my backpack in the ideal position (unit facing the sky). Maybe your pack does not enable you to mount your GPS in such a way, but that does not mean that strapping a Vista to your pack means per definition that it is held vertically. As the picture in my post in another topic here illustrates: http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php...d=3786623

 

It definitely may be something to take into account for mlandman, but if his backpack allows him to strap a GPSr to it, facing the sky, then it's no problem

[+intolerable]

I have a Vista HCx and use it for primarily hiking. Aside from the various technical problems I've had in the past with the unit, and still occasionally encounter, there's a couple of reasons why I'm looking to upgrade to a unit other than it.

 

The Vista HCx works much better when held flat, which is far from ideal when hiking. I attach it to my pack vertically and have to check it often to make sure that the track log isn't *too* far off. Usually, holding it flat for a few will get it back on trail.

 

The 60CSx sounds like it receives much better reception while strapped to a pack (ie, being held vertically). When hiking with others, I usually turn to whoever is carrying the 60CSx as their track log is almost always the best.

Isn't that just a matter of strapping it to your pack in a different way? I have a Vista HCx as well, and manage perfectly well to strap it onto my backpack in the ideal position (unit facing the sky). Maybe your pack does not enable you to mount your GPS in such a way, but that does not mean that strapping a Vista to your pack means per definition that it is held vertically. As the picture in my post in another topic here illustrates: http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php...d=3786623

 

It definitely may be something to take into account for mlandman, but if his backpack allows him to strap a GPSr to it, facing the sky, then it's no problem

 

I haven't really tried this since the drift issues, when it didn't seem to matter what one did, but I'm sure it would a make a difference. Unfortunately, strapping the GPS to the top of my pack or too high on my shoulder simply isn't always ideal, which I feel makes it not the best design for a hiking GPSr. But that's a good point for the OP to consider

[+Boggin's Dad]

For caching there the only things the colorado has going for it is the paperless caching option, and that is only carrying the cache details. It does not do averages when marking waypoints, it is not possible to change coordinates for multis/mystery caches. There is no on road routing to caches.Takes ages to load GPX files to it.

 

My Missus has the colorado, but it has to be used in conjunction with mine, for anything other than local traditinal caches.

 

I am more than happy with my paper (can make notes on them) and would not think about a colorado,

[+g-o-cashers]

There is a Wherigo cart that allows you average waypoints on the Colorado and you can most definitely autoroute to a geocache.