Oregon 400t vs GPSmap 60csx

[+Caching Cat]

Hello! This is my first post on the forum.

 

I am currently looking to replace my prehistoric Garmin GPS 12XL with something a little bit more modern - it has served me very well, but it is time to change.

 

I am keen to stick with Garmin and have narrowed the choice down to the 60csx or the Oregon 400t - both seem to have their advantages and disadvantages.

 

The 60csx is arguably the "standard" among Geocachers - certainly among those I have met in my area and it is available at a pretty advantageous price these days but it doesn't come with Topo maps as standard.

 

the Oregon is more expensive, but comes with Topo maps and has the added benefit of being able to do these new fangled Wherigo thingies - not sure if that is going to be something for me, but I would at least like to try them and see.

 

So - are there any other things that I should be thinking about? Are there any other advantages of the Oregon over the 60csx (or vice-versa)

 

I look forward to your replies.

[+vwaldoguy]

Oregon has a touch screen, with few buttons. 60CSx has buttons, and doesn't have a touch screen. Oregon allows for true paperless caching, including the ability to log your finds, then upload directly to the geocaching.com website. 60CSx can do a limited version of paperless caching, but not as nicely as the Oregon. Oregon can display shaded relief of the terrain, 60CSx cannot. Oregon can be very hard to read in direct sunlight. The 60CSx has its own brightness issues, but seems better than the Oregon.

[+vwaldoguy]

Note, you can also buy an Oregon 300, which doesn't have the topo maps preinstalled. You can however still add them, just like you can other maps. Topo maps are OK, especially if you have significant terrain issues. They do have streams, etc though, which is helpful to determine which side of the stream the cache is on (it's always on the other side). Personally, I have the 60CSx, and also have the Topo and City Navigator maps. I don't find much use for the Topo maps most of the time, but then again, we don't have many terrain issues where I live.

[BlueDamsel]

I had the same dilemma as you did before I bought my Oregon. I talked to folks who loved one over the other, and found out why they liked each device. I even talked to a local fellow who owned both, and whose opinion I respected.

 

It didn't solve my dilemma.... they both sounded great... finally, the question I asked myself was: "What will I, BlueDamsel, be using this for, most of the time?"

 

If your answer is over 75% geocaching, buy the Oregon.

 

If it is 75% non-geocache related hiking, hunting, boating, etc., get the 60CSx.

 

I actually bought both units and had them sent out. I just fell in love with the Oregon's touchscreen, and the brightness issues were non-issues once I followed the advice on gpsfix.com.

 

The 60CSx is a great gps. Yes, it is the standard. And Yes, if I had another couple hundred bucks burning a hole in my pocket, I'd buy one to have right next to my Oregon. But with limited funds, I determined that for geocaching, which is what I use my GPS for 95% of the time, I could not beat the paperless caching features of the Oregon. I've been using it for about two weeks, and I'm sold, baby, sold. It makes geocaching really, really fun.

 

Another two cents brought to you courtesy of

BlueDamsel

[+Tequila]

I have an Oregon 300 and a GPSMAP60CSx. They are both good units.

 

If I had to trust my life with one, it would probably be the 60. It is a proven product, well built, easily obtains a signal and will keep a signal under a heavy canopy. I am a K9 Search & Rescue volunteer and we use 60's for everything.

 

Having said that, the Oregon has certainly proven itself in terms of reliability and acquiring and keeping a signal. The screen on the Oregon is larger and higher resolution (I think). The OR is a newer product and supports paperless geocaching. For geocaching it is a dream. No more paper.

 

The bottom line is both units are good and you will be happy with both. If price is a consideration, you can probably get a 60 for less than an OR. If geocaching is a top priority, go for the OR.

 

Hope this helps.

[flyjazz]

Just to make your decison so much more difficult,why don't you also consider the Colorado. You'll no doubt here from a lot of critics but it's honestly a good unit with paperless geocaching. If you decide to give it a try,be sure to purchase it from a vendor that has a good return/exchange policy.

Edited January 21, 2009 by flyjazz

[+Caching Cat]

Many thanks for the replies.

 

I was tending towards the Oregon anyway and the replies seem to be confirming that opinion. I use GPS pretty much solely for Geocaching and so I think the Oregon will probably be more suited to my needs despite its higher price tag.

 

Flyjazz - I did consider the Colorado, but although I am sure it has many satisfied users and will probably build up a following with time - I decided it has too many reliability/software issues for my liking. Although I do accept that these may have been blown out of proportion somewhat.

[+Red90]

Flyjazz - I did consider the Colorado, but although I am sure it has many satisfied users and will probably build up a following with time - I decided it has too many reliability/software issues for my liking. Although I do accept that these may have been blown out of proportion somewhat.

 

There are no more reliability issues with the Colorado assuming current firmware than the Oregon. Both units still have some bugs, but they are fairly minor.

[+bunkerdave]

I would echo BlueDamsel. She actually inquired with me as to which unit she should keep, and I pretty much told her just what she's now discovered for herself. The Oregon is the best GPS for Geocaching, hands down. For pretty much everything else (where you don't need a lot of information about Geocaches) get the CSx. YOu can, however do just about everything with the Oregon that you can with the CSx.

 

One thing that I noticed the other day that might sway some: With the custom POIs in the CSx, I can do a filter by cache type. Then, using the "nearest containing" search I can further narrow it down by other criteria, such as container size. I took a friend out caching the other day with her kids, and wanted to only take them to REGULAR sized caches for the first few finds, and used the CSx to find those. This is another functionality that the Oregon cannot do. It is also rather cumbersome to search near a map point on the Oregon. You have to create a waypoint to do this, rather than just "searching near pointer" like the CSx does.

 

Just a couple more things that might help. I still carry both units, at all times. I do use the Oregon 99% of the time, however, and the CSx is mostly for those sorting functions, and for doing multi/offsets and such. I just am more comfortable with how it does things, for now.

[NitroSteel]

I am also contemplating a new GPS purchase and am down to the 60csx and Oregon 300. I really like the terrain shading on the Oregon 300, but I haven't actually put my hands on one (can't find it locally). I have done alot of research, but just joined the forums. This post addresses most of my concerns very well. On the other hand, I have a couple of questions that will help me confirm my decision.

 

1) I don't geocache at all, I just hike and hunt and that's mainly what I want a GPS to help me with (I've used non-mapping Garmin's for years)

2) I want the best GPS I can get and don't mind spending the extra money on the Oregon 300 and maps versus the 60csx and maps. I just want to get the best.

 

These two things stated:

 

Is there any disadvantage to getting the Oregon versus the 60CSX (other than the cost) - is there something that the 60csx will do that the Oregon 300 won't?

 

I recently dismissed the Delorme PN-40 as a choice, honestly mainly because it just isn't a Garmin. I called Garmin customer service and asked them several questions, and I really feel good about buying another Garmin of some sort. Should I reconsider the Delorme PN-40 as an alternative to the two Garmin's mentioned above?

 

Thank you for your help.

 

NitroSteel

[+Maingray]

.

 

One thing that I noticed the other day that might sway some: With the custom POIs in the CSx, I can do a filter by cache type. Then, using the "nearest containing" search I can further narrow it down by other criteria, such as container size. I took a friend out caching the other day with her kids, and wanted to only take them to REGULAR sized caches for the first few finds, and used the CSx to find those. This is another functionality that the Oregon cannot do.

 

The newest firmware update added sub categories for custom POI to the Oregon, so this is now do-able.

[+Maingray]

I am also contemplating a new GPS purchase and am down to the 60csx and Oregon 300. I really like the terrain shading on the Oregon 300, but I haven't actually put my hands on one (can't find it locally). I have done alot of research, but just joined the forums. This post addresses most of my concerns very well. On the other hand, I have a couple of questions that will help me confirm my decision.

 

1) I don't geocache at all, I just hike and hunt and that's mainly what I want a GPS to help me with (I've used non-mapping Garmin's for years)

2) I want the best GPS I can get and don't mind spending the extra money on the Oregon 300 and maps versus the 60csx and maps. I just want to get the best.

 

These two things stated:

 

Is there any disadvantage to getting the Oregon versus the 60CSX (other than the cost) - is there something that the 60csx will do that the Oregon 300 won't?

 

I recently dismissed the Delorme PN-40 as a choice, honestly mainly because it just isn't a Garmin. I called Garmin customer service and asked them several questions, and I really feel good about buying another Garmin of some sort. Should I reconsider the Delorme PN-40 as an alternative to the two Garmin's mentioned above?

 

Thank you for your help.

 

NitroSteel

 

The 60CSX is a much better *GPS* than the Oregon in terms of sheer belt and braces GPS functionality..they dumbed down a lot of the GPS function in the Oregon, but beefed up the geocaching ability.

 

I would not dismiss the Delorme PN-40..if you stick to same areas and would like to see good topos and aerial imagery for a very reasonable price, check out the PN-40, or even the older PN-20. Delorme has VERY good customer support: http://forum.delorme.com/viewforum.php?f=131

Edited January 25, 2009 by Maingray

[+Zinnware]

Information on Accuracy between 60csx and Oregon 400t

 

Here is an example of a dart board with two darts. See the link below. An Oregon 400t (version 2.85) and a 60csx (version 3.70). The 60csx tracks are in red and the Oregon tracks are in green.

 

http://zinnware.com/HighAdv/Geocaching/GPS...7_GPS_Tests.pdf

 

Tracks were laid every second over a period of 2 hours and 40 minutes. This is roughly 9,600 samples. The GPSs were placed in the same location at the same time. Both had their WAAS turned on, but I do not think the Oregon 400t ever got a lock on WAAS. I can't be sure. The 60csx did get a lock. Note: the scale of the map in the lower left of the screen.

 

The 60csx tracks take up (GPS wandered) an area of approximately 50 square feet

The Oregon tracks take up (GPS wandered) an area of approximately 67 square feet.

 

What does this prove? Maybe the 60csx is about 34% more accurate and that Garmin needs to fix the WAAS on the Oregon 400t model.

[+g-o-cashers]

PDF link doesn't seem to work.

[+OienLabs]

PDF link doesn't seem to work.

I think he was trying to post this: http://zinnware.com/HighAdv/Geocaching/GPS...7_GPS_Tests.pdf

[+Timpat]

PDF link doesn't seem to work.

Didn't miss much. Looked like the spider webs created while sitting at the kitchen table kinda thing .

[+OpenTrackRacer]

For Geocaching, I think the Oregon wins over the Colorado or the 60CSx hands down. If you're not doing a lot of backcountry stuff then you can go with the 300 and download free maps or add Garmin maps. However, buying maps from Garmin can be expensive. Another thing to consider is that if you want routable maps on the Garmin units you have no choice but to purchase additional maps.

 

I have a 60CSx and the PN-40. I love my 60CSx but it's going up for sale as soon as I get everything together for it. The PN-40 has proven itself to me at this point for both Geocaching and general hiking/off-road navigation. The big selling point on the PN-40 are maps. It comes with routable topo maps for the entire US. In addition, for $30 a year you can download unlimited additional maps and imagery including USGS quads, color and black and white aerial imagery plus satellite views and NOAA charts. There is also high resolution imagery for 133 cities. It also comes with Topo USA desktop software which is very powerful. The new firmware for the PN-40 offers full paperless Geocaching and DeLorme support for pocket queries should be along shortly (there is a 3rd party workaround right now that is excellent).

 

Both the Oregon and the PN-40 offer less battery life when compared to the 60CSx. The PN-40 isn't touchscreen so entering data is a bit tedious (like on the 60CSx or Colorado).

 

Your best bet is to get your hands of some of these units and see what you think.

 

Good luck!

[pratzert]

 

I actually bought both units and had them sent out. I just fell in love with the Oregon's touchscreen, and the brightness issues were non-issues once I followed the advice on gpsfix.com.

 

Another two cents brought to you courtesy of

BlueDamsel

 

BlueDamsel,

 

Can you share what the advice was that you discovered on gpsfix.com which dealt with the brightness issue on the Oregon ?

 

I have been contemplating buying the 400c but am hesitant because of the brightness issue I keep reading about.

 

Thanks, Tim