Delorme pn-40 vs Colorado 400 T

March 9, 2009

Delorme pn-40 vs Colorado 400 T. I would like to hear from owners of each of these GPSrs. Are you happy with the one you have? What are the disadvantages if any of the particualr model you own?

1.9k · March 9, 2009

It's about the MAPS!!!

Whether you choose a Garmin or a Delorme, it's the maps which you care about. Those maps give context to your position. I'd suggest if you consider a Colorado, forget the 400T and its 100K maps, rather get a 300 and add 24K Topos.

The PN-40 has the same screen as the Vista HCx.

March 9, 2009

Would be nice to know where this photo was taken in case anyone would like to do their own comparisons.

2.1k · March 9, 2009

Delorme pn-40 vs Colorado 400 T. I would like to hear from owners of each of these GPSrs. Are you happy with the one you have? What are the disadvantages if any of the particualr model you own?

Possibly I could help by asking for a little more definition regarding the question in the hopes that such would evoke more helpful respones.

Do you mean owners that have one of each, that is both, a PN-40 and a Colorado 400T?

If so, I expect that you will receive valid and credible responses that I would deem as most reliable.

OTOH, if you mean those that have one or the other, but not both, well........

March 9, 2009

To answer the question, I have a Colorado 400T and am very happy with it. It has some really cool features and having the entire topo U.S. already loaded on it I do not have to connect to the computer to load the area where I will be traveling. They are all there. I have CN NT 2008 loaded on mine as well. I do view maps on my computer to look for areas I want to go. I can view my older topos, CN, or base maps on my computer.

I would recommend going to a store where you can check out both units in your hand and decide what you want. I have heard really good things about the Delorme and Garmin has a good reputation as well. There are pros and cons to both. It just depends which one fits your needs the most.

March 10, 2009

I don't know about the Colorado 400 T, but I can tell you I just purchased a DeLorme PN-40, and I love it except for ONE very handy feature that is missing. That is the two ways to create a waypoint on PN40 is to either physically be at the location, and create a waypoint on the GPS or download it from a computer. Well, with my Garmin Etrex Legend, I could create a waypoint at my current location, then go into the coordinates field, and edit them to whatever I wanted, thus If I already know the coordinates in some far off place, and want to put that place in my gps ahead of time, I did not need a pc/map to download it from. With the difference between a PN40 and Garmin Etrex in both Specs and price, I would think Delorme should have included this feature. I am hopeful they will correct it in a software/firmware update.

5.3k · March 10, 2009

If you create a waypoint on the PN-40 for your current position, use the rocker switch to move focus to the coordinates and hit Enter. You can then edit the coordinates to whatever you want.

2.1k · March 10, 2009

I am hopeful they will correct it in a software/firmware update.

Not needed, see embra's post above.

Then, to create Waypoint, press the key with the "Push Pin" symbol.

Also, if you need more help, check the DeLorme forum:

http://forums.delorme.com/

or, the wiki link in embra's post.

Edited March 10, 2009 by Team CowboyPapa

March 10, 2009

Long story short, I have owned both units and it is about which one just works. I sent the Garmin Colorado 400t back for a refund and kept the Delorme PN-40. Without bashing Garmin (I own 5 other Garmin GPS units), the Colorado just had too many problems and bugs, it was useless for Geocaching. I tried updating the firmware and doing work-arounds but in the end it just did not measure up. I went back to my 60CSx until Delorme released the beta firmware for the PN-40. Once I got the PN-40 and updated to the beta firmware it has been terrific. None of the issues that afflicted the Colorado and it is seeing 6ft. EPE when I am out and about. With the paperless caching that the beta firmware offers it is the perfect geocaching/hiking GPSr for me.

Edited March 10, 2009 by kd4crs

March 10, 2009

the Colorado just had too many problems and bugs, it was useless for Geocaching

I find it hard to get my brain around comments like this, as they don't spell out the problems or deficiencies the user had with the unit. Early on there were some issues with the Colorado, and those have largely been taken care of with firmware updates.

IMO, the Colorado 400t is great for geocaching - great info for paperless caching, ability to read GPX files automatically, and built-in topo maps of the US. Geocaching mode works well, and I've had zero problems with the compass - I know it's limitations (hold horizontal) and re-calibrate every time I change batteries.

The big difference for me (and I don't own a PN-40, but have played with it) is the screen size and text size - on the CO, it's much more readable. If the PN-40 had a bigger screen, I'd be much more attracted to the unit.

Ultimately, it might come down to where you're coming from, as the prejudices you bring from your current model GPSr might sway you one way or the other. For instance, my one big beef with the Garmin CO/Oregon is that I can't have multiple 2000 cache GPX files onboard and choose which one I want active - I could do that on the Explorist. But those who come from the Garmin 60 series don't miss that, as they never had the ability. If you come from the Etrex line, you might not mind the smallish screen on the PN-40.

The sat imagery on the PN-40 is sweet, and their support is top notch, so those are two big pluses for the PN-40. But I'm still holding out for the PN-40 XL with the bigger screen

2.1k · March 10, 2009

....... If you come from the Etrex line, you might not mind the smallish screen on the PN-40.

Good point, as my first handheld was the PN-20, with the same screen as the -40, I don't see it as a drawback.

The sat imagery on the PN-40 is sweet, and their support is top notch, so those are two big pluses for the PN-40. But I'm still holding out for the PN-40 XL with the bigger screen

And then the reverse of the above, as I went out spur of the moment with a fellow cacher to a nearby area this weekend. I didn't have time to take advantage of the $30 annual subscription to download the Hi-Res aerial photo imagery for that area. Having cached exclusively with that imagery for the last several months, I sorely missed it.

2.1k · March 10, 2009

I found the Colorado hard to operate using the rocker, entering text was tedious even compared to the up /down buttons on 60 etc (why i much prefer the OR). People with big hands like the CO as you can use the whole thing single handedly.

If street routing to caches is your bag, the CO / OR are the bees knees with a copy of City navigator installed. no need to have a separate car unit. Plenty of topo resources nowadays, for free. Consider getting a 300 (CO / OR) and use a free topo map. You'd lose the shading. Price it out.

If you would prefer aerial imagery in your hand, PN-40 is better clearly.

Accuracy, both very similar.

Screen size..well. Not too hard to figure that out. The PN-40 is brighter though.

Battery life will be better on the CO /OR.

Paperless caching on the CO still better than the PN-40 current offering..child waypoint handling direct from PQs, icons, logging via field notes, blah blah. Expect the PN-40 to catch up very soon. Bigger screen lends it self better to paperless though. Full GSAK export.

The unit "profile" system is the key to using the CO / OR units.. learn how to use profiles and your caching experience will be a better one.

Whats your previous GPS?

Edited March 10, 2009 by Maingray

2.1k · March 10, 2009

And then the reverse of the above, as I went out spur of the moment with a fellow cacher to a nearby area this weekend. I didn't have time to take advantage of the $30 annual subscription to download the Hi-Res aerial photo imagery for that area. Having cached exclusively with that imagery for the last several months, I sorely missed it.

Yup!!!! You KNOW you thought of me when that happened. Go on, admit it!

March 10, 2009

OK, I'll chime in on this tired topic just once more.

I do own both a CO 400t and a PN-40. Early adopter for both. Both units have their strengths and weaknesses. I think it comes down mostly to personal preference and cost at this point in their product life cycles. I strongly recommend that you visit a local retailer (or a local geocaching event, if you're a cacher) where you can see and handle both units in outdoor conditions.

These are the things that I see as significant differences (in my opinion -- YMMV) between the units.

1) Cost. The CO is likely to be cheaper with current fire sales. However, you do have to take into account the cost of additional cartography such as CN. In addition to topos for the US (similar to those on the CO), the PN-40 comes with routable road maps for the US. Might be a wash depending on CO prices.

2) International map coverage. Advantage CO. DeLorme has no non-US cartography. This is a deal killer if you intend to use the unit outside the US.

3) Water resistance. The PN-40 seems to be reliably waterproof. The CO is not. As far as I know, some of these issues were addressed in later production runs. But if you have an early unit, either because you bought early or because it's been on the shelf for a while, you're out of luck until it leaks. Then Garmin will replace it under warranty. I keep a plastic bag handy for my CO.

4) Availability and ease of use for imagery. Advantage PN-40. For $30/year, you can download and keep all the geo-referenced imagery you want -- B&W 1M aerials, color 1M aerials, color 10M satellite, and 1:24K USGS (7.5 minute) topos. For selected areas, NOAA charts and high-resolution (1 ft) B&W aerials are also available. Nothing comparable for the CO. In fact, as far as I know, the CO cannot display geo-referenced imagery at all.

5) Bells and whistles. This inlcudes things like an image viewer, the ability to display your altitude profile on the unit, the ability to display 3-D wireframe terrain on the unit, and so forth. Advantage Colorado. These functions are not available on the PN-40, so if they're important to you...

6) Paperless geocaching. Virtually a wash, at least once DeLorme releases the cache register utility for direct downloads of PQs. Screen flow in the field is virtually identical. Interaction with gc.com is virtually identical, both for Send to GPS and for using field notes to log finds. Until the cache register utility comes out, Colorado has a very slight edge in loading PQs, but that's about it. (Can load PQs with the PN-40, requires the use of contributed scripts, but no extra software.)

7) Compass. Advantage goes to the PN-40 with a 3-axis compass vs. 2-axis on Colorado. Don't have to hold the PN-40 flat to use the compass.

8) Tracking and stability. Minor advantage to PN-40. Less wandering in challenging multi-path situations. Less pointer swing with the compass enabled.

9) Screen readability. I'm not going there. The forums are full of rabid supporters (and bashers) of both units. Go see them both in field conditions and see which you like better.

10) Mac support. Not sure about this one since I use Windows. I do know that Topo 7 (the DeLorme equivalent of MapSource) requires Windows. Firmware updates are available for both platforms. Paperless geocaching support is (or will be) available for both platforms. I am not sure about the CO as I have never had reason to look into it.

11) Product support. Advantage DeLorme. Real people who actually know something answer the phone. Willingness to replace the unit and/or provide replacement parts is stellar, as is the speed with which things ship. DeLorme staff frequent the forums and actually pay attention to what's said -- both in terms of problems and suggestions for product improvements. Don't get me wrong -- Garmin support has been OK, but DeLorme goes the extra mile.

Bottom line: Unless one of those things is overwhelmingly important to you, it's personal preference and cost.

2.1k · March 10, 2009

Nice summary

*7) Yes, i often forget this...PN-40 = nicer compass.

*9) The key...go and try out.

*10) Mac support, totally fine for Garmin products http://www8.garmin.com/macosx/

*11) More than OK, Garmin very responsive to email and phone. Often replace stuff for free as well etc. Delorme has the forums. Now, if the OP has said Magellan....

8.9k · March 10, 2009

Battery life will be better on the CO /OR. You say better...how long do the batteries last in the CO/OR??

Paperless caching on the CO still better than the PN-40 current offering..child waypoint handling direct from PQs, icons, logging via field notes, blah blah. Expect the PN-40 to catch up very soon. Bigger screen lends it self better to paperless though. Full GSAK export. Have you tried the PN-40 since the update? Field notes are AWESOME, the paperless feature for the PN-40 is top-notch IMHO.

The unit "profile" system is the key to using the CO / OR units.. learn how to use profiles and your caching experience will be a better one.

Whats your previous GPS?

2.1k · March 10, 2009

Battery life will be better on the CO /OR. You say better...how long do the batteries last in the CO/OR??

http://www.gpsfix.net/?p=199

CO, 14-18 hours depending on backlight. I think that was with rechargeables?

Paperless caching on the CO still better than the PN-40 current offering..child waypoint handling direct from PQs, icons, logging via field notes, blah blah. Expect the PN-40 to catch up very soon. Bigger screen lends it self better to paperless though. Full GSAK export. Have you tried the PN-40 since the update? Field notes are AWESOME, the paperless feature for the PN-40 is top-notch IMHO.

I never said it was bad Yes i have used. I said it was similar, but the CO / OR still has more features for the paperless user as it stands. I don't really know what more can be added to the mature Garmin paperless though. Oh, they have a broken earthcache icon still. And I'd love custom icons on either unit to denote micro difficulty, previous logs etc.

8.9k · March 10, 2009

Paperless caching on the CO still better than the PN-40 current offering..child waypoint handling direct from PQs, icons, logging via field notes, blah blah. Expect the PN-40 to catch up very soon. Bigger screen lends it self better to paperless though. Full GSAK export. Have you tried the PN-40 since the update? Field notes are AWESOME, the paperless feature for the PN-40 is top-notch IMHO.

I never said it was bad Yes i have used. I said it was similar, but the CO / OR still has more features for the paperless user as it stands. I don't really know what more can be added to the mature Garmin paperless though. Oh, they have a broken earthcache icon still. And I'd love custom icons on either unit to denote micro difficulty, previous logs etc.

Not sure exactly what you mean here, so this might not be what you were talking about, but the PN-40 does have a set-up pretty much like the cache page, there's the diff/terr, size and other info just like it appears on the cache page. When you get to the logs, they show the smiley or frown and give all the logs it will hold (up to 15,000 character, not just last 5 logs). All in all, the page looks much like the actual cache page devoid of any pics and the side menus etc...oh, and the TB/coin inventory is shown as well!

I don't know how the pages look on the Garmins, so this all may mean nothing to you?

The battery isn't an issue for me since I am usually close to my Jeep, but it could make a difference to someone backpacking for a week or so! Several sets of batteries do get cumbersome, but it's doable! Maybe invest in a solar system like the Coleman I saw recently!!

2.1k · March 10, 2009

Not sure exactly what you mean here, so this might not be what you were talking about, but the PN-40 does have a set-up pretty much like the cache page, there's the diff/terr, size and other info just like it appears on the cache page. When you get to the logs, they show the smiley or frown and give all the logs it will hold (up to 15,000 character, not just last 5 logs). All in all, the page looks much like the actual cache page devoid of any pics and the side menus etc...oh, and the TB/coin inventory is shown as well!

I don't know how the pages look on the Garmins, so this all may mean nothing to you?

Like I said, the same! I've used both. Both of these units perform the same general paperless functions. Different icons as per gc.com, abilitly to log via field notes (found, DNF, unattampted, needs maintenance) etc etc. I just feel like the CO / OR handles child waypoints a lot better (at the moment!) and has better native PQ / GSAK support

From the CO, as on topic: (the OR has more glitzy stuff as well, like a running total of how many caches you found, time since last cache, constant mini compass always pointing to the nearest unfound cache and other junk):

Edited March 10, 2009 by Maingray

2.1k · March 10, 2009

And then the reverse of the above, as I went out spur of the moment with a fellow cacher to a nearby area this weekend. I didn't have time to take advantage of the $30 annual subscription to download the Hi-Res aerial photo imagery for that area. Having cached exclusively with that imagery for the last several months, I sorely missed it.

Yup!!!! You KNOW you thought of me when that happened. Go on, admit it!

Well, MG, I'm not sure one way or the other, but I sure will in the future!

3k · March 11, 2009

The unit "profile" system is the key to using the CO / OR units.. learn how to use profiles and your caching experience will be a better one.

Normally I stay off these threads but I couldn't help but wonder why the profile support in the OR/CO doesn't jump out as big advantage for the Garmin? This is one feature on the OR/CO that I probably miss the most going to another GPS like the 60csx. Maybe most people don't use their units in multiple activities or just don't bother with different settings but I have a bunch of profiles that I regularly use to customize the unit for each activity (even time of day) and profiles makes this so much easier.

5.3k · March 11, 2009

Profiles seem like a good, solid plus to me. I recall that Chip (one of Team Delorme) had expressed an interest in the concept, but any implementation of that on the PN-40 is out there in the hazy future.

March 11, 2009

the Colorado just had too many problems and bugs, it was useless for Geocaching

I find it hard to get my brain around comments like this, as they don't spell out the problems or deficiencies the user had with the unit. Early on there were some issues with the Colorado, and those have largely been taken care of with firmware updates.

Here are some of the specific issues I had which were persistent through several firmware updates and repeated compass calibrations:

Screen visibility was constantly a problem, I had to run the unit with the back light one notch back from full brightness in order to see the screen well enough to use the unit. Due to this battery life was abysmal. It would take much longer to acquire a lock than my 60csx, changes of direction would confuse it and cause the map to freeze and jerk about wildly for several minutes until it would recover, and the accuracy was always 10-20 feet worse than my 60csx. I ended up returning the unit for a refund since it was essentially useless for geocaching, the main purpose I purchased it for. In the end, the Colorado was simply more trouble than it was worth to me, so I sent it back.

Regarding your perceived shortcomings of the PN-40, a larger screen would be nice but as long as it works correctly, I can live with the screen it has. If you would like more details feel free to search the other posts I made regarding my experiences with the Colorado 400t.

Edited March 11, 2009 by kd4crs

6.4k · March 11, 2009

One of the things that makes the CO great paperless is the 5 different caching navigation screens, 3 of which can be accessed though a single button press. This is one of the main things I like better than the Oregon.

I have not used a PN-40 (no Canadian maps), but those who have one can compare. I assume the smaller screen can not really allow all of this info at once.

Main screen

Toggle Once to this one. I almost exclusively use this screen for cache finding.

And again to:

Edited March 11, 2009 by Red90

March 11, 2009

Long story short, I have owned both units and it is about which one just works. I sent the Garmin Colorado 400t back for a refund and kept the Delorme PN-40. Without bashing Garmin (I own 5 other Garmin GPS units), the Colorado just had too many problems and bugs, it was useless for Geocaching. I tried updating the firmware and doing work-arounds but in the end it just did not measure up. I went back to my 60CSx until Delorme released the beta firmware for the PN-40. Once I got the PN-40 and updated to the beta firmware it has been terrific. None of the issues that afflicted the Colorado and it is seeing 6ft. EPE when I am out and about. With the paperless caching that the beta firmware offers it is the perfect geocaching/hiking GPSr for me.

Thanks. This is some very helpful information. It sounds like the PN-40 is the all purpose unit I am looking for.

March 11, 2009

Whats your previous GPS?

I presently own a Garmin Etrex Venture Cx, without any extra maps loaded. I have never had a problem with it, but my wife mentioned the possibility of buying a new GPS next year. I figured I may as well start looking. I definitely want to go paperless.

March 11, 2009

Thanks for everyones input. The information given here has been very helpful. As I mentioned above, I won't be buying a new unit until sometime next year. A lot of changes can occur in a year. In the mean time I will continue my research.

5.3k · March 11, 2009

A year is a long time in GPS development. There will probably be some significant developments that may affect your decision...so it's nice to have the luxury of a leisurely search.

March 14, 2009

Long story short, I have owned both units and it is about which one just works. I sent the Garmin Colorado 400t back for a refund and kept the Delorme PN-40. Without bashing Garmin (I own 5 other Garmin GPS units), the Colorado just had too many problems and bugs, it was useless for Geocaching. I tried updating the firmware and doing work-arounds but in the end it just did not measure up. I went back to my 60CSx until Delorme released the beta firmware for the PN-40. Once I got the PN-40 and updated to the beta firmware it has been terrific. None of the issues that afflicted the Colorado and it is seeing 6ft. EPE when I am out and about. With the paperless caching that the beta firmware offers it is the perfect geocaching/hiking GPSr for me.

Thanks. This is some very helpful information. It sounds like the PN-40 is the all purpose unit I am looking for.

I've got a colorado, and it sounds like you were using it with the compass on. Mine did the same thing until I turned the electronic compass off. The screen brightness must be a personal preference thing because I can read mine just fine in sunlight with no back light. That being said, I'm currently trying to sell my CO to by a PN-40 as I would really like to try out the satellite imagery.

May 5, 2009

WOW, awsome and great discussion. I went to REI last week and spoke with the Delorme rep and was almost sold. Being military, I didn't like the fact that there are no out of the US maps, but my primary function is geocaching. What I'm hearing is there is:

1. Both go paperless (I'm hesitatnt about having to do firmware updates as I'm technologically unsavy).

2. Both chew up batteries

3. There is less glitches with the PN40, but you have to go get the downloads

4. Maps are better with the PN40

I own a Garmin 530 and had a Rino 120 (both are inferior to the 60CSx chip and suck at holding sat under cover). I just sold the 120 on e-bay to get the money for the next GPS. When I had a problem with the Garmin being 30' off, they sent me a new one with little to no questions asked. I"ve been happy with their customer service, but Delorme seems to go the extra mile. I think I'm sold on a PN40.

Thanks for the chatter guys.

Delorme pn-40 vs Colorado 400 T

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

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