60csx or Oregon 400t if you can have either

[+waumpuscat]

I can get either one but I want something with the best map capability and mapping ability while not compromising reception too much. I have searched and read about the 60csx and it's awesome reception but I am not sure of other differences. I am just trying to get the best I can since the rei price is so good. Thanks

[+Tequila]

The 60CSx is a work horse but it is older technology.

 

The OR has a much larger screen and I think better resolution.

 

Based on your criteria, I recommend the OR

[+waumpuscat]

either one have any advantage when it comes to downloading maps and making maps of a given area?

[+wkmccall]

I can get either one but I want something with the best map capability and mapping ability while not compromising reception too much. I have searched and read about the 60csx and it's awesome reception but I am not sure of other differences. I am just trying to get the best I can since the rei price is so good. Thanks

 

Probably see the differences here

[+sim_v]

I'm european.

I do the same comparison between 60csx and 400t.

I owned a Magellan 315 a Sportrak and owns a Eagle Explorer plus an IGN'Evadeo wich use a touch screen technology like Oregon.

 

After speaking, reading a lot of forums and try the both units I decide to buy the 60csx.

 

Here are my conclusions :

+ Experience, I meet a French geocacher (1000+) that switched from 60 to Oregon 300 : he's not happy with screen visibility with sunny weather and easy screen scratching. He wants go back to gpsmap.

I do exactly same reproach to the IGN unit !

 

+ I think that touch screen technology is not optimum outside and good old keys are the best way to manipulate the device without error.

 

+ 60csx reception and accuracy are best

 

- 60csx is bigger, offer less resolution screen than oregon

 

- Oregon permits paperless geocaching

Edited May 6, 2009 by sim_v

[+searchjaunt]

If you want paperless caching in one device only, I would opt for the 400 or even better a 300 with the topos you really need (and add some memory).

Otherwise I would go for the 60csx

[+2Wheel'in]

I am fortunate enough to have both the 60CSx and an Oregon 400t. Since receiving the Oregon (6 months ago) my 60CSx was relegated to "backup" status, and I haven't used it since. Yes, the Oregon has a few "quirks & wrinkles", but Garmin has and is addressing those. I use the Oregon for both geocaching and vehicle navigation, and am delighted with its performance.

 

Bill

[+Maingray]

 

- Oregon permits paperless geocaching

 

Exactly.

 

 

The Oregon.

[+Redwoods Mtn Biker]

Since receiving the Oregon (6 months ago) my 60CSx was relegated to "backup" status

 

Same here.

 

What kind of "mapping" are you going to do? That could lead you to a 60CSx instead.

[+waumpuscat]

Since receiving the Oregon (6 months ago) my 60CSx was relegated to "backup" status

 

Same here.

 

What kind of "mapping" are you going to do? That could lead you to a 60CSx instead.

 

I have 122 acres of woods, ridgetops and trailways that I am anxious to create as detailed as map as would be practical to do. I have had a legend but am unfamiliar with the latest and greatest generation of gps units. I have read and read til I am exhausted. I love geocaching with the kids but have a slightly higher priortiy on the property but still would love to kill this thing with one whack and get the best overall unit without sacrificing too much on either the mapping or geocaching. To complicate things a bit further, I use a macbook pro and that seems to be a whole new issue in itself. I have been trying to download the appropriate software and maps off of gpsfilesdepot but have been unable to open anything with mapmanager. Wish there were a class I could go to. Oh well, still reading and trying to decide, I appreciate all of your input, it is helping.

[+azurecrayon]

ive been having this same debate over the past month. yesterday i drove 160 miles round trip to finally pick up the oregeon 400t i decided on. they had both tho so i looked at them, and still wanted the oregon with its larger/touch screen, smaller overall size and weight. i am a complete touch screen freak, trying to use my husbands non touch screen cell drives me nuts when ive used a touch screen cell for almost two years now. so the oregon was the right one for me. that combined with the 399.99 price tag, which is an excellent deal on the oregon.

 

i got my oregon 400t at rei. i bought a membership as well, and after tax it came to 444, and has a $50 rebate so will end up being $394. i went with rei because they have a lifetime satisfaction guarantee on what they sell. could have gotten it a little cheaper online after the rebate, but that guarantee is worth money to me.

[+Redwoods Mtn Biker]

The 60CSx will be more accurate for mapping, but it isn't set up for paperless caching like the Oregon.

 

Do you have MapSource? You should be able to open most maps from gpsfiledepot by using the drop down map selection box.

[+WHO-DEY]

I have owned only two GPS's in my life. First was the 60csx, now I have the Oregon 400t. I liekd the 60, but LOVE the 400t. The paperless is such a lifesaver. And the accuracy is just as good, regardless of the random issues you may have read. For every 1 negative review or post, there are 100 happy cachers using the 400t with zero issues.

[+GerIRL]

I am fortunate enough to have both the 60CSx and an Oregon 400t. Since receiving the Oregon (6 months ago) my 60CSx was relegated to "backup" status, and I haven't used it since. Yes, the Oregon has a few "quirks & wrinkles", but Garmin has and is addressing those. I use the Oregon for both geocaching and vehicle navigation, and am delighted with its performance.

 

Bill

I'm in the same boat. I love my 60CSx and have never lost satellite lock under the heaviest tree cover. Rock solid, but not paperless. I now have a OR400t, since December, and with each beta software release, it has gotten better and better. With the recent addition of Waypoint Averaging, it's almost perfect. I have not used the 60CSx in a couple of months, but bring it everywhere for backup. Compare this link of comparative tracks recorded on both units while hiding a recent cache. In and Out - 60 in Orange and 400t in Blue http://www.fileden.com/files/2007/7/27/129...uarantoohil.pdf . Regarding screen visibility, while the OR is not anywhere near as bright as the 60, I have never had a problem viewing maps or cache data on it. The interchangeable profiles are great. I have City navigator with no track log recording for "automotive" and for my "geocaching" profile, I use the Topo maps with track recording. If I could only have one of the two, I guess I'd take the OR. Hope this helps.

[+debtodd007]

I was facing the same issue as you about 4 months back. I have friends with the 60csx. My previous handheld was a Rhino 120 which I've used for 3 years. Paperless geocaching was via a Palm Tungsteen E2.

 

Initially, I loved the Oregon 400t for driving and routing and map capacity, and profiles, but it sucked as a geocaching unit. The many years old Rhino 120 was much, much, much better.

 

Around beta 2.94? or there abouts (I've loaded so many beta's I haven't kept track) the Oregon 400t all of sudden settled down and become a GREAT geocaching unit. Now I love it. Beta releases seem to come out about once a month and each one just gets better and better.

 

While I'll always carry my old Rhino 120 as a backup unit, I've come to really like my Oregon 400t. While the debate between the 60csx and Oregon is really 50/50 now, I truly believe that Oregon units are about 2-3 beta releases away from surpassing 60CSS in ever area.

 

From my perspective, the only remaining deficiency in my Oregon is flyers in the track plots. (This one does bug me a bit as I keep lots of tracks of hiking, cross country skiing, and off road 4x4 driving tracks).

[+waumpuscat]

Are these beta things something I will be able to do with just a connection. I will be using a macbook pro and have been wondering what the heck do you do if you don't get software with the machine? I am living in the days of my Legend and confess that I am behind when it comes to the new gps models, but I am apprehensive about being able to use the unit with the macbook. So no software comes with the unit and my computer will recognize it when I plug in the usb?

[+Maingray]

Garmin are very strong on mac support in general

 

http://www8.garmin.com/macosx/

 

The beta versions of the OR firmware are installable by mac users

 

http://garminoregon.wikispaces.com/Versions

[+waumpuscat]

Garmin are very strong on mac support in general

 

http://www8.garmin.com/macosx/

 

The beta versions of the OR firmware are installable by mac users

 

http://garminoregon.wikispaces.com/Versions

 

I am confused I have successfully updated the software to version 2.80 but have been unable to find the Mac version of the beta 2.97 If I did a successful software update with the Garmin Webupdater do I have all of the most recent updates included in beta 2.97

[+waumpuscat]

Garmin are very strong on mac support in general

 

http://www8.garmin.com/macosx/

 

The beta versions of the OR firmware are installable by mac users

 

http://garminoregon.wikispaces.com/Versions

 

I am confused I have successfully updated the software to version 2.80 but have been unable to find the Mac version of the beta 2.97 If I did a successful software update with the Garmin Webupdater do I have all of the most recent updates included in beta 2.97