Jump to content

Is the GPS 60Cx and GPS 60CSx the exact same (excluding compass and altimeter)?


passdump
Followers 0

Recommended Posts

I was looking at the 60CSx but when thought about it I realized I am not really that bothered with the electronic compass feature and the barometric altimeter.

 

Excluding the electronic compass and the barometric altimeter am I correct in thinking that the 60Cx is the exact same as the 60CSx in every other way? i.e. same Sirf chip, antenna etc

 

Is there a web page that would have the exact Sirf chip spec information on it for the 60Cx and 60CSx. The Garmin specs only give general info.

 

Thanks :laughing:

Link to comment

You are correct. They are the same except for the altimeter and the e-compass.

 

I started with a 60cx which as it was cheaper. But unfortunately it died a horrible death so I replaced it. The only thing in stock from where I got it was a 60csx.

 

I don't use the e-compass and have no real use for the altimeter. If the price point is close, then might as well get the 60csx. But for caching, routing, etc, they are the same unit.

Link to comment

Just FYI,

Also note that "internally", the 76 series is exactly the same as the 60 series.

Visual and external differences between the two different series is buttons above the screen vs buttons below.

The reason I bring it up is because , right now on Amazon the 76 Cx is advertised for $171.72 VERY good price! Operationally and accuracy wise they are the same.

Link to comment
Also note that "internally", the 76 series is exactly the same as the 60 series.

Visual and external differences between the two different series is buttons above the screen vs buttons below.

The reason I bring it up is because , right now on Amazon the 76 Cx is advertised for $171.72 VERY good price! Operationally and accuracy wise they are the same.

Is that really true?

 

Does the 76 have the Quad Helix antenna inside its case?

 

Perhaps you'd also comment on just what a Quad Helix antenna is, and why its better/preferred over a patch antenna.

 

Thanks

Link to comment

I see a lot of notes where cachers say they never use their electronic compasses. I tend to cache in terrain where it is very difficult to maintain a steady walking pace, i.e. rocky, hilly, mountainous terrain. If you have the compass calibrated and set up correctly it will continue to point to the direction of the geocache even under difficult conditions. If you only plan to cache where you can maintain a steady driving/walking speed up to the cache location, the electronic compass will probably not be important to you and the compass heading, as computed from the satellites will get the job done for you.

Link to comment
Also note that "internally", the 76 series is exactly the same as the 60 series.

Visual and external differences between the two different series is buttons above the screen vs buttons below.

The reason I bring it up is because , right now on Amazon the 76 Cx is advertised for $171.72 VERY good price! Operationally and accuracy wise they are the same.

Is that really true?

 

Does the 76 have the Quad Helix antenna inside its case?

 

Perhaps you'd also comment on just what a Quad Helix antenna is, and why its better/preferred over a patch antenna.

 

Thanks

It is true, I don't know the technical explanation and I don't think the perceived advantage of the quad helix antenna is real anymore with the latest generation of high sensitivity receivers with the patch antenna. (I own and use the 76CSx).

Link to comment
Also note that "internally", the 76 series is exactly the same as the 60 series.

Visual and external differences between the two different series is buttons above the screen vs buttons below.

The reason I bring it up is because , right now on Amazon the 76 Cx is advertised for $171.72 VERY good price! Operationally and accuracy wise they are the same.

Is that really true?

 

Does the 76 have the Quad Helix antenna inside its case?

 

Perhaps you'd also comment on just what a Quad Helix antenna is, and why its better/preferred over a patch antenna.

 

Thanks

 

According to specs on Garmin website, both 76 and 60 have quad helix antenna.

Link to comment

Excellent information. :D

 

@ Grasscatcher: That's a great tip. I didn't know that "internally", the 76 series is exactly the same as the 60 series.

 

Is it just me or does the screen on the 76 Cx look much smaller than the 60Cx?

 

However according to the specs the 76Cx screen is 4.1 x 5.6cm which actually makes it bigger than the 60Cx 3.8 x 5.6cm !!!

There must be some kind of optical illusion going on with the housing of the 76Cx.

 

@Red90: Excellent photo. :D I love seeing the internals of GPS units. The quad helix antenna is clearly visible.

Link to comment

Excellent information. :D

 

@ Grasscatcher: That's a great tip. I didn't know that "internally", the 76 series is exactly the same as the 60 series.

 

Is it just me or does the screen on the 76 Cx look much smaller than the 60Cx?

 

However according to the specs the 76Cx screen is 4.1 x 5.6cm which actually makes it bigger than the 60Cx 3.8 x 5.6cm !!!

There must be some kind of optical illusion going on with the housing of the 76Cx.

 

@Red90: Excellent photo. :D I love seeing the internals of GPS units. The quad helix antenna is clearly visible.

 

Just another aside....

76 screen is barely bigger, not noticeable.

"Buttons above" make it easier/more secure to operate one handedly.

IMHO, there is still no unit "available now" that surpasses the 76CSx or 76Cx. That includes the Colorado/Oregon series.

The 60-76's have the SIRF lll chipset , no "drift" problems, no WAAS problems, just less problems overall.

 

Before anyone gets their tail over the dashboard over my opinions, I'm only interested in overall accuracy, accurate track logging, external antenna capability and waypoint accuracy . I really couldn't care less about "Paperless" geocaching.

Link to comment

Just another aside....

76 screen is barely bigger, not noticeable.

"Buttons above" make it easier/more secure to operate one handedly.

IMHO, there is still no unit "available now" that surpasses the 76CSx or 76Cx. That includes the Colorado/Oregon series.

The 60-76's have the SIRF lll chipset , no "drift" problems, no WAAS problems, just less problems overall.

 

Before anyone gets their tail over the dashboard over my opinions, I'm only interested in overall accuracy, accurate track logging, external antenna capability and waypoint accuracy . I really couldn't care less about "Paperless" geocaching.

My feelings exactly.

Link to comment

"IMHO, there is still no unit "available now" that surpasses the 76CSx or 76Cx. That includes the Colorado/Oregon series.

The 60-76's have the SIRF lll chipset , no "drift" problems, no WAAS problems, just less problems overall.

 

Before anyone gets their tail over the dashboard over my opinions, I'm only interested in overall accuracy, accurate track logging, external antenna capability and waypoint accuracy . I really couldn't care less about "Paperless" geocaching."

 

Very well said! I couldn't agree more

Edited by roadrage64
Link to comment

I see a lot of notes where cachers say they never use their electronic compasses. I tend to cache in terrain where it is very difficult to maintain a steady walking pace, i.e. rocky, hilly, mountainous terrain. If you have the compass calibrated and set up correctly it will continue to point to the direction of the geocache even under difficult conditions. If you only plan to cache where you can maintain a steady driving/walking speed up to the cache location, the electronic compass will probably not be important to you and the compass heading, as computed from the satellites will get the job done for you.

Or perhaps, like me, they will only use the map.

 

I have a 60 Cx and got to try out a CSx for a few weeks. I have come to the conclusion that Electronic or computed I don't like the compass at all and have always prefered to use the map. Made getting a Cx a no brainer.

 

YMMV

Link to comment

Just another aside....

76 screen is barely bigger, not noticeable.

"Buttons above" make it easier/more secure to operate one handedly.

IMHO, there is still no unit "available now" that surpasses the 76CSx or 76Cx. That includes the Colorado/Oregon series.

The 60-76's have the SIRF lll chipset , no "drift" problems, no WAAS problems, just less problems overall.

 

Before anyone gets their tail over the dashboard over my opinions, I'm only interested in overall accuracy, accurate track logging, external antenna capability and waypoint accuracy . I really couldn't care less about "Paperless" geocaching.

My feelings exactly.

I regularly cache with other cachers that have a PN-40, Colorado and Oregon. The paperless is nice but I am usually finding the cache in the same time they are looking up the details.

 

I really agree with the "just less problems overall" part of the statement.

Edited by AndrewRJ
Link to comment

Excellent information. :D

 

@ Grasscatcher: That's a great tip. I didn't know that "internally", the 76 series is exactly the same as the 60 series.

 

Is it just me or does the screen on the 76 Cx look much smaller than the 60Cx?

 

However according to the specs the 76Cx screen is 4.1 x 5.6cm which actually makes it bigger than the 60Cx 3.8 x 5.6cm !!!

There must be some kind of optical illusion going on with the housing of the 76Cx.

 

@Red90: Excellent photo. :D I love seeing the internals of GPS units. The quad helix antenna is clearly visible.

The 60 and 76 are about the same height, but the 76 is bulkier. Think 1980s Zenith TV remote control. That's why it (barely) floats. Also, the 76 has no provision for a belt clip. The 60 does.

 

And when it comes to quad-helix vs. patch, it's not possible to make a blanket statement about which is better or worse. Many auxiliary GPS antennas are patch. A good patch antenna will beat out a bad quad-helix, and vice-versa. Performance can even depend on the satellite configuration - birds overhead vs. near the horizon. The eTrex H models have patch antennas, and I haven't heard complaints about them.

Link to comment

Prime Suspect,

You haven't heard of E Trex H problems? You have GOT to be kidding !

 

Look closely at any track logged in semi difficult conditions by an etrex h ..........ever hear of the "drift" problem? Track will go ambling off and then suddenly "snap back" to reality either on it's own or when power is cycled off/on.

 

That condition was present even before the "h" model, but the higher sensitivity h just made it worse.

 

Common thread? ......both have Patch antenna.

Link to comment

Here's a recent tracklog from my Colorado 300, hiking into Dark Canyon last week:

 

SundanceTrail.gif

 

I had no problem all the way to the canyon floor, but when I entered the narrows it went nuts. I believe the CO has the same Mediatek chip as the eTrex H, but adds a quad helix antenna. Comments?

Link to comment

Prime Suspect,

You haven't heard of E Trex H problems? You have GOT to be kidding !

 

Look closely at any track logged in semi difficult conditions by an etrex h ..........ever hear of the "drift" problem? Track will go ambling off and then suddenly "snap back" to reality either on it's own or when power is cycled off/on.

 

That condition was present even before the "h" model, but the higher sensitivity h just made it worse.

 

Common thread? ......both have Patch antenna.

The "drift" problem that I have seen reported for some Vista HCx units does not seem to affect ALL eTrex "H" series. (There even seem to be plenty of Vista HCx owners who have never noticed it - I don't know whether that is because their unit doesn't have the problem, or it actually does have it, but they have been lucky never to have experienced a case significant enough for them to notice.)

 

I have a Summit HC (which I have always kept patched up to the latest release software and firmware), and I have NEVER seen the infamous "drift". I examine my track files pretty closely (because most of GPS use is for fieldwork, rather than geocaching), and since most of my trips are "out and back" in fairly rough terrain, I am pretty sure if my unit was prone to occasional drift, I would have spotted it by now (either on the map-screen because I have it zoomed in pretty close most of the time, or else back in the office when I examine my track-logs and waypoints). My unit gives me excellent fixes in all sorts of reception conditions, all of the time. I usually see 3 - 4 m EPE in open conditions, maybe 6 - 7 m EPE under tree cover (and yes, I am quite aware that EPE does NOT equate to actual accuracy!), and I don't even have the benefits of WAAS, being based in Australia. My "out and back" tracks typically lie on top of each other to within a couple of metres - comparable to the width of the tracks I am walking.

 

I am not sure you can conclude that the "drift" issue is therefore a symptom of the patch antenna - it's possible, but without some scientific testing, and / or until Garmin comes clean on the issue, we don't really know whether it's the antenna, the chip-set, the firmware, the software, sub-optimal reception conditions (heavy cover, multi-path, etc), WAAS On vs. WAAS Off, low battery voltage, disposition of satellites overhead, a combination of all of the above, or even something else altogether.

Link to comment

I have tested a 60Cx, a 60CSx, and a Vista HCx side-by-side in heavily tree canopied terrain in Western Washington. My primary objective is creating accurate track logs, not finding something. Without question, the Vista HCx was consistently the worst performer in accurately recording tracks. The 60Cx and the 60CSx performed very closely; I could not detect a discernable difference between the two after a few weeks of testing.

Link to comment

Prime Suspect,

You haven't heard of E Trex H problems? You have GOT to be kidding !

 

Look closely at any track logged in semi difficult conditions by an etrex h ..........ever hear of the "drift" problem? Track will go ambling off and then suddenly "snap back" to reality either on it's own or when power is cycled off/on.

 

That condition was present even before the "h" model, but the higher sensitivity h just made it worse.

 

Common thread? ......both have Patch antenna.

This reply is largely a copy of my post #92 on the "Delorme PN-40" thread, but I thought it was relevant to this discussion as well - sorry for the "double-post". I thought it might help to clear the air a little to provide some evidence that:

 

1. Patch antennas are not necessarily the poor relation to the quad-helix;

 

2. Unless you really NEED the absolute best quality tracks at all times, you don't need to get too fastidious about which way you hold your GPSr (if you have a modern high-sensitivity unit), and you probably don't really need to worry about an external antenna; and

 

3. Not all eTrex "H" series units suffer from the infamous "drift" issue when subjected to less than optional reception conditions.

 

My method was to turn on my Summit HC at home this morning, calibrate the altimeter, and put it in an outside pocket of my backpack. (I didn't notice whether it was facing up, down or sideways! ) I then put my backpack in the boot (trunk) of my sedan car, with the pocket holding my GPSr facing upwards. With the boot lid closed, the only signal it would get was through the front, rear and side glass, and then through the (empty) back seats - a pretty severe reception test, I would think. I then drove to work following my normal route, and on arrival, downloaded the tracklog into MapSource, clipped the start and end segments (for privacy reasons), and saved as GPX for sharing.

 

The result - the tracklog is a darn good fit to the actual route I took, accurate to within about 5 metres on the whole.

 

See for yourself. (Note - we drive on the left in Australia, I am going from west to east, and I was in the left-most lane most of the way, so my actual position was typically at the "top" of the road as viewed in these Google Earth screen captures.)

 

http://www.mediafire.com/?mbzzggz1mld

 

http://www.mediafire.com/?a5mmww3tz0j

 

http://www.mediafire.com/?zyjjtlz04gr

 

(Sorry, I just can't get the hang of embedding images in these forums! I'm afraid you'll have to follow the links to see the images.)

 

GPX file is here for anyone who wants to look in greater detail:

http://www.mediafire.com/?t4cj0ggy5zy

Link to comment

 

My method was to turn on my Summit HC at home this morning, calibrate the altimeter, and put it in an outside pocket of my backpack. (I didn't notice whether it was facing up, down or sideways! ) I then put my backpack in the boot (trunk) of my sedan car, with the pocket holding my GPSr facing upwards. With the boot lid closed, the only signal it would get was through the front, rear and side glass, and then through the (empty) back seats - a pretty severe reception test, I would think. I then drove to work following my normal route, and on arrival, downloaded the tracklog into MapSource, clipped the start and end segments (for privacy reasons), and saved as GPX for sharing.

 

The result - the tracklog is a darn good fit to the actual route I took, accurate to within about 5 metres on the whole.

I think if you follow the "drift" problem with the eTrex series, the Colorado and the Oregon you will find the drift happens most frequently at walking speeds. All of them seem to perform quite well at driving speed.

Link to comment

....and the "drift" problem seems to be random. (but more prevalent with slow speed and difficult conditions)

 

I recently worked on editing/trying to correct a series of (8)individual tracks from (8)consecutive days of hikes in dense forest.

All were done using a Vista Hx, by the same user, logged to card , all done correctly.

 

2 Days were error free.

2 Days only had minor errors

4 Days were totally "unfixable"

with unexplainable errors like (on a track that stays level at the base of a mountain) trackpoints veering off, but elevation (for those same trackpoints) staying correct.....

 

Go figure!

Link to comment

I have both the Map60CSx and Map60Cx, and the elevation in the tracklogs of the Map60Cx was pretty crappy, would show alot of elevation changes on flat ground, and Topofusion would show all the climbing I did, even though the land was perfectly flat. This is the reason I kept the 60CSx, and gave my sister the Map60Cx.

Link to comment
I have both the Map60CSx and Map60Cx, and the elevation in the tracklogs of the Map60Cx was pretty crappy, would show alot of elevation changes on flat ground, and Topofusion would show all the climbing I did, even though the land was perfectly flat. This is the reason I kept the 60CSx, and gave my sister the Map60Cx.
The Cx was NOT defective, it just had no barometric altimeter chip.

 

If you consider instantaneous satellite geometry, only satellites directly* overhead can provide accurate altitude. If you simple place the Cx stationary and watch the altitude it will drift +/- 20-30 ft.

 

*directly overhead is an inverted cone of 45-60 deg, an infrequent occurrence. By contrast, x-y position needs three or more satellites outside the same cone, an infinite likelihood if no obstructions.

Link to comment

I think if you follow the "drift" problem with the eTrex series, the Colorado and the Oregon you will find the drift happens most frequently at walking speeds. All of them seem to perform quite well at driving speed.

OK - fair enough. But I have never seen the "drift" problem on ANY of my Summit HC tracklogs - and my fieldwork is most definitely taking place at walking speeds (or lower).

Link to comment

Excellent information. :D

 

@ Grasscatcher: That's a great tip. I didn't know that "internally", the 76 series is exactly the same as the 60 series.

 

Is it just me or does the screen on the 76 Cx look much smaller than the 60Cx?

 

However according to the specs the 76Cx screen is 4.1 x 5.6cm which actually makes it bigger than the 60Cx 3.8 x 5.6cm !!!

There must be some kind of optical illusion going on with the housing of the 76Cx.

 

@Red90: Excellent photo. :unsure: I love seeing the internals of GPS units. The quad helix antenna is clearly visible.

The 60 and 76 are about the same height, but the 76 is bulkier. Think 1980s Zenith TV remote control. That's why it (barely) floats. Also, the 76 has no provision for a belt clip. The 60 does.

 

And when it comes to quad-helix vs. patch, it's not possible to make a blanket statement about which is better or worse. Many auxiliary GPS antennas are patch. A good patch antenna will beat out a bad quad-helix, and vice-versa. Performance can even depend on the satellite configuration - birds overhead vs. near the horizon. The eTrex H models have patch antennas, and I haven't heard complaints about them.

Although the 76 does Not have a BELT CLIP it does have the Lanyard holder I have it on a neck lanyard when caching but I also use a hand strap too. There is a slide in BIKE mount for the push bike and there is also a Bean bag mount for the car IT has an external antenna too which i use if I leave the unit in the trunk for just tracking the car ( Track days it is brilliant for recording laps and speeds cheaply as I have the unit lol)

we have 3 units 76 CSX Oregon 400t and Colarado 300

the 76 will let you MOVE caches when solving puzzles and the cache site is just a waypoint 300 and 400 NOPE

and they are all within in a foot of each other when seeking caches or even identicle so accuracy is not an issuethe Colarado is going to auction and I am keeping the 76 and 400 I was going to sell 76 but it is a lovely unit to use

it was described as BULKY earlier I had a 60csx and 76csx on trial I preffered the 76 and bought it it fits MY pockets an no antenna to break off screens looked same to me using them

the only issue is do you prefer buttons above screen or below any one who has had the opposite unit if they on 60 and pick up my 76 they ALWAYS have it upside down and Vice versa with me and the 60 but the antenna makes it obviuos

19042009198.jpg

 

19042009199.jpg

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Followers 0
×
×
  • Create New...