Oregeon VS Colorado

[+markjsolomon]

So I mainly use my handheld for caching, actually that is all I use it for. I have become addicted to paperless after using the eXplorist 500 LE and now looking to go to the garmin line.

 

So what really is the difference? I know that one is a touch screen but is there really any other features that I might be missing from one to the other?

 

As well how do there wear? meaning I heard that the wheel has popped off a bunch of Colorados and the screen is poor on the oregeon in direct light? any other downfalls?

 

how is the reception in comparison for both and as well is it the same paperless software for both?

[+Maingray]

http://garminoregon.wikispaces.com/Colorado+vs+Oregon

 

Lots more updates for the OR recently which has increased functionality since that table, but we assume garmin will apply those to the CO soon as well.

 

You juts gotta try them...touchscreen versus wheel. I personally much prefer the screen. There are lots of subtle differences in the interface as well.

Edited April 7, 2009 by Maingray

[+RonFisk]

http://garminoregon.wikispaces.com/Colorado+vs+Oregon

 

Lots more updates for the OR recently which has increased functionality since that table, but we assume garmin will apply those to the CO soon as well.

 

You juts gotta try them...touchscreen versus wheel. I personally much prefer the screen. There are lots of subtle differences in the interface as well.

I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for the Colorado updates. I've been waiting over a year for some (what I consider) critical updates to the Colorado and still no changes. It seems like Garmin has written the Colorado off. They don't even respond to my emails anymore...

[+Tequila]

General consensus is that the Colorado is Dead!!!

[+xshooter]

So I mainly use my handheld for caching, actually that is all I use it for. I have become addicted to paperless after using the eXplorist 500 LE and now looking to go to the garmin line.

 

So what really is the difference? I know that one is a touch screen but is there really any other features that I might be missing from one to the other?

 

As well how do there wear? meaning I heard that the wheel has popped off a bunch of Colorados and the screen is poor on the oregeon in direct light? any other downfalls?

 

how is the reception in comparison for both and as well is it the same paperless software for both?

 

The Colorado is a fine unit. I wouldn't have an Oregon, don't like the interface.

 

People are whining about the features the OR has that the CO does not

.

They are two different models. Just like you wouldn't buy a Chevy Malibu and then trash talk Chevy because they won't update it with a Corvette engine just because you want more power.

 

Garmin is still supporting the Colorado and will for a long time to come. They do answer emails about the Colorado and say that an update is coming out soon.

 

With all the updates for the Oregon and problems that have been reported with those updates I would be a little uneasy about installing them on my unit.

[+Tequila]

So I mainly use my handheld for caching, actually that is all I use it for. I have become addicted to paperless after using the eXplorist 500 LE and now looking to go to the garmin line.

 

So what really is the difference? I know that one is a touch screen but is there really any other features that I might be missing from one to the other?

 

As well how do there wear? meaning I heard that the wheel has popped off a bunch of Colorados and the screen is poor on the oregeon in direct light? any other downfalls?

 

how is the reception in comparison for both and as well is it the same paperless software for both?

 

The Colorado is a fine unit. I wouldn't have an Oregon, don't like the interface.

 

People are whining about the features the OR has that the CO does not

.

They are two different models. Just like you wouldn't buy a Chevy Malibu and then trash talk Chevy because they won't update it with a Corvette engine just because you want more power.

 

Garmin is still supporting the Colorado and will for a long time to come. They do answer emails about the Colorado and say that an update is coming out soon.

 

With all the updates for the Oregon and problems that have been reported with those updates I would be a little uneasy about installing them on my unit.

 

I think the CO vs OR comparison to Malibu vs Corvette is pretty much bang on.

[+StarBrand]

I own a Colorado 300 and an Oregon 200.

 

The Colorado had some serious issues when new but the updates have corrected almost all of that. The Oregon's updates are more frequent but some recent updates did strange things to accuracy only to be corrected later. I think the Colorado will see a major update soon after the Oregon has one.

 

I generally like both units and find both to be easy to learn and easy to use. With the latest updates, both are highly accurate. The paperless Geocaching functions are very similar but the Colorado has a few screens the Oregon does not and is a bit easier to navigate for caching. The Oregon's touch screen interface is just plain awesome and very natural to use. Both roughly feel the same in your hand but the Colorado is easier for one handed use.

 

However, I consider the Colorado to be my "goto" unit. Twice now it has outperformed the Oregon in tough conditions. Once last fall in high winds and thick tree cover, the leaves were swirling off the trees and around us. The Oregon kept losing sat lock and was a bit jumpy. The Colorado stayed rock steady and tracked us perfectly. Probably the stub anntena is the difference.

 

So - I personally give a slight edge to the Colorado.

[+lookn4gz]

Oregon is easy to add field notes with the touch screen. Which i enjoy for caching.

[+Red90]

The paperless Geocaching functions are very similar but the Colorado has a few screens the Oregon does not and is a bit easier to navigate for caching.

 

For caching use this is my main reason to prefer the Colorado. My second big reason is the external antenna, which I need for mapping data collection while driving.

 

Oregon is easy to add field notes with the touch screen. Which i enjoy for caching.

 

This is the main pro for the Oregon and it depends if you like to take field notes or not. The second main pros are mentioned above in that they have added features to the Oregon and not to the Colorado. It is to be seen if this changes or not.

[flyjazz]

The paperless Geocaching functions are very similar but the Colorado has a few screens the Oregon does not and is a bit easier to navigate for caching.

 

For caching use this is my main reason to prefer the Colorado. My second big reason is the external antenna, which I need for mapping data collection while driving.

 

Oregon is easy to add field notes with the touch screen. Which i enjoy for caching.

 

This is the main pro for the Oregon and it depends if you like to take field notes or not. The second main pros are mentioned above in that they have added features to the Oregon and not to the Colorado. It is to be seen if this changes or not.

 

My guess is that once the beta testing is done on the software enhancements for the Oregon,you will see it released as a software update 3.0 on both the units.