Out of the box...Garmin or DeLorme?

June 12, 2009

I'm shopping for my own GPS and getting less unconfused the more I research them. I've been using a Nuvi 250W (not mine) that has served relatively well (except around trees) and is easy to use. That being said, my current probables are PN-40, Colorado 300, or Oregon 300. I had the 60CSx on my list, but didn't like the feel & handling of it at the store. I have not yet gotten my hands on a PN-40 or Oregon.

My priorities are:

affordability;

screen large enough to see (eyes aren't that young any more);

geocaching (of course!), but likely not much back-country-ish stuff;

turn-by-turn navigation (for road trips and vacations, as well as getting to cache sites);

custom POIs;

good signal in tree cover and urban canyons;

power options (alkaline or rechargeable batteries, and car-charging is a must);

good battery life;

compass (altimeter is nice, but not necessary);

easy UI - I'm all for intuitive operating systems, but no dummy at learning something new;

able to input street addresses on the go;

light-weight, including accessories (charger, batts, etc.).

Some of my questions are:

1) How easy would caching be on an Oregon straight out of the box, as compared to a Nuvi or a PN-40? Would I be better off getting the 400t (on either model) or finding a bundle with topo mapping included? If I can get along (caching) with either 300 out of the box and can put off the expense of additional mapping, would this be better than trying to get to an street address on a PN-40?

2) I've read a lot about various chip sets, and have just gotten confused. What are the differences on these units, and how would they affect various uses? Do I really need to be concerned with this, given the units I'm considering? (What chip set is in the OR/COs?)

3) When I go on road trips for work, I sometimes look at aerials beforehand on Google Maps (or other sites) to see where I'll be in relation to other places. For anyone that's been using a PN-40, how much do you depend on these (on the PN-40) for your travels & caching?

4) How truly caching-friendly is the PN-40 versus the Garmin units? Accuracy, signal pick-up (I've had various Nuvis take 20 minutes at times...), downloading caches (and the data that's included - type, size, rating, logs, hints), field notes and found/DNF options.

Thanks for any help!

June 12, 2009

I have the PN40 and have never used any of the Gamin series GPSs. The 40 along with the recently release Cache Register make caching very simple. Create and run a PQ from GC.com, from your desktop bring up cache reg select the PQ and click synch. This will load your field notes of any finds and download and instal the new caches on the unit. I don't use much imagery for caching as I like a little challenge. If you are in an area that has the high detail maps you can see the actual location of the cache most of the time. I haven't had any problems with accuracy and normally I am spot on with the coords. Marking find/DNFs and field notes is pretty simple and DeLorme has provided some simple abbreviations and a place for a signature for you notes. I would highly recommend it. You can try a PN40 for 30 days and it you don't like it you can return it with no questions asked.

If you have a REI, Bass Pro or Cabelas nearby you can check the different units out.

June 12, 2009

Neither of them do turn-by-turn particularly well, but in general on-device turn-by-turn has never been DeLorme's strong point. Street Atlas Handheld's routing was basically useless, and the PN-40 pretty much started out as DeLorme throwing lots of hardware at SAHH. The PN-40 has diverged significantly since then, but road routing has never been a priority for them.

The Oregon 300's turn by turn is quite good, BUT not out of the box - you need City Navigator maps.

If you are willing to wait for budget to allow you to purchase CN to add turn-by-turn later, you can download free topo maps from http://www.gpsfiledepot.com/ for the Garmin units.

The impression I get is that the Colorado has sort of languished, with most of Garmin's focus being on the Oregon, so even though the Colorado has a better receiver, the Oregon is the way to go.

Both the Oregon and PN-40 use the same receiver chipset (STMicro Cartesio), unfortunately it's not a very good receiver. The PN-40's latest firmware update has helped a lot so it's ahead of the Oregon at the moment, but I wouldn't be surprised if STM feeds the same fixes to Garmin.

Garmin recently announced that they'd be using the MTK v2 chipset in future receivers - the MTK2 is a HOT chipset, I have a Bluetooth datalogger with it that is incredible, so you might want to see what Garmin releases in the next few months.

I owned a PN-40 for about an hour before it failed - the power supply circuitry in the PN-40 seems quite weak. Lots of failures, and even those that don't fail frequently experience lockups when transferring to and from vehicle power. I bought a Garmin Oregon 300 off the shelf at a local store because the PN-40 failed me right before a rather important geocaching weekend - the Garmin feels more solid, seems more reliable, and uses standard data transfer cables. Unlike the PN-40, you can load pocket queries onto it without using any special software at all (drag and drop the GPX to the unit's internal memory or MicroSD).

Edited June 12, 2009 by Entropy512

8.9k · June 12, 2009

Cutting to the quick...DeLorme is the ONLY choice if you're looking for "out-of-the-box".

I own a PN-40 and have not seen a single lock-up when transferring from auto or any other connection...ever. With Cache register, DeLorme is ahead of any other unit on the market...as stated by many in the forums. Have not had the chance to see if TOPO 8 has made routing any better, but I persoanlly have never had a gripe about the routing, it works just fine for me!

PN-40 has been touted as being very accurate, I have located a benchmark a few times, each time getting very accurate readings! I have no problem with WAAS, I almost always see a +/-5', gotta love that!

Aerials, gotta love that to!

Downloading info is simple as many will tell you (PN-40 users that is, others might tell you otherwise, maybe they haven't had the pleasure of using a PN or they might be biased). You get everything on the description including ALL the logs the 15,000 character limit can allow (which is almost always ALL the logs). You get the icons, the symbols etc...and of course, the rating/difficulty. Logging via field notes is AWESOME, I can't get over how much easier it has made caching for me!!

4.3k · June 12, 2009

...MTK2 is a HOT chipset, I have a Bluetooth datalogger with it...

Just a quick drift off topic and then I'll stay out of this one -- which data logger do you have? I'm looking for one to stick on my bike, separate from my usual GPS.

2.1k · June 13, 2009

Out-the-box, the Pn-40 is best value for money. Hoewever, I'd argue that for the some of the things you have listed as important, the PN-40 is the worst unit of the ones you have listed and there is no premium route to improve it.

Very GENERAL pros/cons in a nutshell from someone who has used both OR and PN-40 for caching:

OR:

Pros: Nice size rugged unit, large screen. Touchscreen is a pro in my book, very intuitive interface for caching. Fully paperless able to either drag and drop gc.com Pocket queries, native GSAk communication or cache-by-cache from gc.com pages. Full cache descriptions of caches plus child waypoint handling. Make comments and upload back at home on gc.com. Active and responsive development team. Very large community of free US and international maps available. Mac versions of all software + maps available. Wireless communication with other ORs or COs. High accuracy. Good battery life.

Cons: screen is dull compared to PN-40. Feels a little dumbed down in straight GPS-features compared to PN-40, but there have been many additions to the features over the last few weeks. In box basemap is poor, but premium mapping solutions allow this unit to auto-ruote extremely well with huge POI coverage, much like a car nuvi. Many many free pre-cut easy-to-install maps now available covering the whole world.

PN-40:

pros: Quality aerial + topo imagery available for a cheap subscription. With a new (unsupported) Beta, fully paperless able to either drag and drop gc.com Pocket queries, via macros, cache-by-cache from gc.com pages or soon through a PQ-based applet that will push many cache descriptions to the unit (one time $10 fee). Full descriptions of caches. Make comments and upload back at home on gc.com. Active and responsive development team. Routeable basemap included. High accuracy. Orange!

Cons: reliability is still a big hmmm based on quite a few posts recently. Battery life poor out the box. Build quality feels poor. Small screen. If you travel and want the imagery prepare to buy lots of SD cards and time to cut and prep subscription maps. Routeable basemap included is VERY poor for road navigation (topo based inaccuracies (think 100s of feet away from where the road really is), poor POI coverage and the roads are VERY innacurate.. e.g no one -way designation, State-road designation rather than real names in some cases) and no premium option to improve this. Maps available are limited to USA, unless you want to scan your own and buy a $99 mapping software upgrade. Mac support via Parallels. Topo is too central still for it's map operation past the included pre-cut maps, and it's a wacky program (flame on!). Orange!

I went with the OR because I'm a freak who refuses to use a separate car unit for routing, and I felt the paperless mode is more mature than the PN-40. It still feels better using the OR's caching UI...has a few more extras like cache run totals, permanent pointer on a geocaching "dashboard' pointing to the nearest geocacheregardless of where you are navigating to and road to hiking transition is well handled by single click profiles. I also just fell in love with the touch screen, being able to touch a cache on a scrollable map and bring up full cache info was worth the price of admission to me, over the similar Colorado.

Bottom line... both PN-40 and Oregon do paperless caching extremely well, I think both units are now pushing the envelope as to what is achievable for paperless caching. PN-40's unique forte is the aerial imagery. Oregon's forte is the UI, and the fact (for me) that it's more than a competent road auto-router (with a premium U$ road map).

They are both very different beasts to the 60C(s)X.

One of the posters up there said that "Neither of them do turn-by-turn particularly well"... um no. The Garmin units are VERY good at that with $City navigator, but it won't route out the box. With CN, they are essentially a mini-Nuvi unit. He also said "oth the Oregon and PN-40 use the same receiver chipset (STMicro Cartesio), unfortunately it's not a very good receiver. The PN-40's latest firmware update has helped a lot so it's ahead of the Oregon at the moment, but I wouldn't be surprised if STM feeds the same fixes to Garmin.". I'd like to see evidence that this chip is worse than the sirf chip... it's hard to show a difference, and the cartesios have many more features than the sirf eg empheresis prediction. I would also argue that the OR firmware is equivalent with the PN-40 now for accuracy / WAAS... I'd actually think they are on par now. The OR / PN-40 is certainly as good as the Sirf for accuracy... a slight drift issue might exist at slow speeds, but i haven't experienced this while caching.

Bottom line: Both the OR and PN-40 are VERY GOOD, HIGH SENSITIVITY units.

Edited June 13, 2009 by Maingray

18.9k · June 13, 2009

I have a Colorado 300 and an Oregon 200.

For the uses you listed overall - I think the Oregon would be the best bet. Killer easy to use touch screen interface and easy to learn Geocaching features. Add city Nav for navigation on streets and you are all set. Only real big issue is the expense of all of it.

I think the Delorme PN series has an awful lot of potential but I had some problems with reception and very short battery life when I tested a PN-40. I just can't recommend it right now.

The new Lowrance Endura series looks very promising but isn't out yet and no reviews. I'll let you know more in a month :rolleyes: .

June 13, 2009

just commentting on one thing. I own a Oregon 400t, straight out of the box, not addition maps and found street navigation (Australia) great, it seems to have all the streets (havent come across any that has not been added as yet) already in the unit(no city navigator) and turn by turn working wonderful, it gets me to where i need to go, has plenty of POI, one day im sure Garmin will release a Voice prompt handheld unit, but for now the Beeps are fine.

2.1k · June 13, 2009

I think the Delorme PN series has an awful lot of potential but I had some problems with reception and very short battery life when I tested a PN-40. I just can't recommend it right now.

You probably had a bad unit. It happens to every manufacturer. DeLorme's customer service is stellar and they'll take care of you if this happens.

Battery life in the case of my PN-40 has exceeded my expectations, and I've never had reception problems that I couldn't attribute to environmental factors (like standing under power lines).

June 13, 2009

PN-40:

pros: .....With a new (unsupported) Beta, fully paperless able to either drag and drop gc.com Pocket queries, via macros, cache-by-cache from gc.com pages or soon through a PQ-based applet that will push many cache descriptions to the unit (one time $10 fee)......

Cons: ......Build quality feels poor...... Routeable basemap included is VERY poor for road navigation (topo based inaccuracies (think 100s of feet away from where the road really is), poor POI coverage and the roads are VERY innacurate......

......The Garmin units are VERY good at that with $City navigator, but it won't route out the box. With CN, they are essentially a mini-Nuvi unit......

Some good info on both units but I would like to correct a few bits of Maingray's info on the 40 that are a little out of date.

The beta referred to has been officially released for over a month and is supported and is installed in units shipping from retailers. The PQ based applet was released to public several weeks ago and is getting mostly glowing reviews from users (nothing's perfect)

The build quality feel is obviously a personal thing. I feel the build quality is as good as my 60csx. I've dropped both of them a number of times and they've held up fine. As to road navigation, I absolutely agree the Garmins are better but I believe the high innacuracy Maingray refers to for the 40's road maps is not the case across the entire U.S. I don't use mine for road routing often but when I have, the accuracy has been OK in my area.

As to the Garmin handhelds and road routing, I used my 60csx for several years and it was more than satisfactory for my needs but the difference between it and my cheap Nuvi is night and day. Granted the Oregon has a larger display with touchscreen but I still can't believe anyone who has used a Nuvi, Tom Tom, or any other vehicle specific device would claim any off-road device was as good for that purpose.

18.9k · June 13, 2009

I think the Delorme PN series has an awful lot of potential but I had some problems with reception and very short battery life when I tested a PN-40. I just can't recommend it right now.

You probably had a bad unit. It happens to every manufacturer. DeLorme's customer service is stellar and they'll take care of you if this happens.

Battery life in the case of my PN-40 has exceeded my expectations, and I've never had reception problems that I couldn't attribute to environmental factors (like standing under power lines).

I don't think so - I have spoken with a number of PN-40 users that have the same difficulties with reception. Also what are you getting for battery life?? - I got like 4-6 hours per set of batteries - that is abysmal.

June 13, 2009

I think the Delorme PN series has an awful lot of potential but I had some problems with reception and very short battery life when I tested a PN-40. I just can't recommend it right now.

You probably had a bad unit. It happens to every manufacturer. DeLorme's customer service is stellar and they'll take care of you if this happens.

Battery life in the case of my PN-40 has exceeded my expectations, and I've never had reception problems that I couldn't attribute to environmental factors (like standing under power lines).

I don't think so - I have spoken with a number of PN-40 users that have the same difficulties with reception. Also what are you getting for battery life?? - I got like 4-6 hours per set of batteries - that is abysmal.

Battery life, of course depends on what type of battery you use. It is true that alkalines are abysmal but lithiums will get you more than 10 hours as will the custom Li-ion sold on Ebay by Cabornay (see the Delorme forums). Good quality Nimh should also do well. Nice thing about the Li-ion is that it can be charged in the unit. I don't think the Oregon has that feature (I'm sure I'll be corrected if I'm wrong). As to reception issues I think you'll find, as has been already pointed out, most have seen significant improvement with the latest firmware. Personally, I've never had problems with reception with the exception of not getting consistent WAAS lock. I now have that as well.

Having said all that, I'm sure the OP would be happy with the Oregon or the PN-40.

2.1k · June 13, 2009

I think the Delorme PN series has an awful lot of potential but I had some problems with reception and very short battery life when I tested a PN-40. I just can't recommend it right now.

You probably had a bad unit. It happens to every manufacturer. DeLorme's customer service is stellar and they'll take care of you if this happens.

Battery life in the case of my PN-40 has exceeded my expectations, and I've never had reception problems that I couldn't attribute to environmental factors (like standing under power lines).

I don't think so - I have spoken with a number of PN-40 users that have the same difficulties with reception. Also what are you getting for battery life?? - I got like 4-6 hours per set of batteries - that is abysmal.

As noted, your battery life depends upon what type of batteries you're using and other factors. I ran over 8 hours last weekend on a set of already partially-drained Lithiums (Energizer 4x), so total life for that pair was probably in the neighborhood of 10 hours.

I've never done a full, uninterrupted run-down test. Others have, and unless you were using alkalines or low-end rechargeables, 4-6 hours is not what I'd consider "normal."

June 13, 2009

Well, I have both. I use the PN-40 and my wife uses the Oregon. The differences as I see them are these.

The PN-40 is more accurate specially in the woods. Not more accurate by much, but 10-15 feet in heavy woods is a big deal when looking for a hidden cache. The PN-40 will zoom in further with is very helpfull. It will zoom into 10ft level as the Oregon will zoom to the 20ft level. This does make a diffence when you are close to GZ and don't know what direction to move to get closer.

The PN-40 is more sturdy. I have dropped it several times 10ft on concreat and it took it like a champ. I can't even imagine what would of happened to the Oregan.

Using cabs battery, the battery times in both are about the same. Being able to charge the battery while it is still in the unit (PN-40) is nice.

Now the Oregon is much easier to use. Has the wow factor. You can hand it to a newby and they can pick up on it very quickly.

The Oregon poorly lit screen is not a factor for me. It really is not that bad. It would not keep me from buying one.

This to me is where the biggest difference is between the two. It is a LOT easier to put caches on the Oregon. A lot. The PN-40 will only hole 1000 caches and must have a plugin or program to add caches. That is a big deal when you live in an area that has a lot of caches. The Oregon will hold 2000 and you can put an unlimited of caches as POI,s. This is done by just dropping the file on the gps, not software needed. I can load a total of 6500 caches on it in less than 45 seconds. In other words you can load it up with 2000 caches and then load you whole database on top of that and they are all on them. Now you can;t log them if they are a poi, but you still get all descriptions and logs. The PN-40 can't come close to that. Now some will say that with the TOPO software that comes with the PN-40 you can do some map layering and such to make it work. It is complicated and time consuming. Like I said, I can load the Oregon in less than 45 sec.

For me, if they ever get the Oregon as accurate as the PN-40 I am jumping ship. It will be a no brainier then. It is very frustrating when I am caching and we get out of the PN-40 foot print of caches and my wife is having to feed me coordinates so I can play also.

June 13, 2009

...MTK2 is a HOT chipset, I have a Bluetooth datalogger with it...
Just a quick drift off topic and then I'll stay out of this one -- which data logger do you have? I'm looking for one to stick on my bike, separate from my usual GPS.

i-Blue 747A+

I also have an Amod AGL3080, it is really easy to use but there is no way to tell whether WAAS is enabled and if it's on, and if it is not, no way to configure it. It drifted a lot when I used it.

June 13, 2009

One of the posters up there said that "Neither of them do turn-by-turn particularly well"... um no. The Garmin units are VERY good at that with $City navigator, but it won't route out the box. With CN, they are essentially a mini-Nuvi unit. He also said "oth the Oregon and PN-40 use the same receiver chipset (STMicro Cartesio), unfortunately it's not a very good receiver. The PN-40's latest firmware update has helped a lot so it's ahead of the Oregon at the moment, but I wouldn't be surprised if STM feeds the same fixes to Garmin.". I'd like to see evidence that this chip is worse than the sirf chip... it's hard to show a difference, and the cartesios have many more features than the sirf eg empheresis prediction. I would also argue that the OR firmware is equivalent with the PN-40 now for accuracy / WAAS... I'd actually think they are on par now. The OR / PN-40 is certainly as good as the Sirf for accuracy... a slight drift issue might exist at slow speeds, but i haven't experienced this while caching.

Bottom line: Both the OR and PN-40 are VERY GOOD, HIGH SENSITIVITY units.

The garmin IS pretty good with CN maps, but it is missing a few items:

1) Voice prompts at turns - Any road-oriented GPS has this.

2) Ability to search for CN POIs in a given area. You can do this for geocaches and some waypoints, but for POIs the "search in area" button is replaced by the "ABC (bring up a keyboard)" button.

That said, its turn-by-turn is lightyears ahead of any trail-oriented unit I've ever used, but someone looking for something that is on par with a TomTom or Nuvi will be disappointed. As much as I want to have one device that does it all, when I'm in the car I usually fire up Garmin Mobile XT on my phone.

As to the STM Cartesio vs. the SiRF III - My old Holux GPSlim236 locks just as fast as the PN-40 or Garmin did, so ephemeris prediction to speed up TTFF doesn't actually help that much.

The GPSlim236 locks SV 138 (the WAAS satellite) within seconds on my car's dash and almost immediately begins applying corrections.

The PN-40 took a while in an open field to lock 138, and only applied corrections to 2-3 sats. It frequently lost lock on 138.

The Oregon has yet to ever lock WAAS and apply corrections in any condition for me.

My i-Blue 747A+ (MTKv2) blows all of these away. Immediate lock on 138, effectively immediate application of corrections, and I can actually see on tracklogs when I switch lanes to pass someone in my car, and 95% of the time I can tell accurately which lane of the highway I was driving in.

June 13, 2009

Well, I have both. I use the PN-40 and my wife uses the Oregon. The differences as I see them are these.

The PN-40 is more accurate specially in the woods. Not more accurate by much, but 10-15 feet in heavy woods is a big deal when looking for a hidden cache. The PN-40 will zoom in further with is very helpfull. It will zoom into 10ft level as the Oregon will zoom to the 20ft level. This does make a diffence when you are close to GZ and don't know what direction to move to get closer.

The PN-40 is more sturdy. I have dropped it several times 10ft on concreat and it took it like a champ. I can't even imagine what would of happened to the Oregan.

Using cabs battery, the battery times in both are about the same. Being able to charge the battery while it is still in the unit (PN-40) is nice.

Now the Oregon is much easier to use. Has the wow factor. You can hand it to a newby and they can pick up on it very quickly.

The Oregon poorly lit screen is not a factor for me. It really is not that bad. It would not keep me from buying one.

This to me is where the biggest difference is between the two. It is a LOT easier to put caches on the Oregon. A lot. The PN-40 will only hole 1000 caches and must have a plugin or program to add caches. That is a big deal when you live in an area that has a lot of caches. The Oregon will hold 2000 and you can put an unlimited of caches as POI,s. This is done by just dropping the file on the gps, not software needed. I can load a total of 6500 caches on it in less than 45 seconds. In other words you can load it up with 2000 caches and then load you whole database on top of that and they are all on them. Now you can;t log them if they are a poi, but you still get all descriptions and logs. The PN-40 can't come close to that. Now some will say that with the TOPO software that comes with the PN-40 you can do some map layering and such to make it work. It is complicated and time consuming. Like I said, I can load the Oregon in less than 45 sec.

For me, if they ever get the Oregon as accurate as the PN-40 I am jumping ship. It will be a no brainier then. It is very frustrating when I am caching and we get out of the PN-40 foot print of caches and my wife is having to feed me coordinates so I can play also.

If everything you says is accurate, and I will assume it is, I am buying the PN-40. Mostly because of the accuracy in heavy cover--where I usually find myself--and the ability to take a hit, which I find happens when hiking through said heavy cover. While I dig caching, I am not even in the same hemisphere with having to need more than 1000 caches in my GPS. I actually use caching more to find cool spots than actually log caches, though I usually find them and at least say hi or leave something silly if I remember to take something.

Anyway, add the TOPO and satellite imaging and I am sold. I use my GPS for tracking where I hike as much if not more so than for caches. What you say about PN-40 embodies everything I have ever wanted in a GPS. I am stoked to try it!! As to the road map thing, yea I guess that is a bummer, but close is usually good enough. I still own maps, believe it or not.

Edited June 13, 2009 by Vashuers

June 13, 2009

I have had an Oregon with the maps and a -40. I sold the Oregon and kept the -40. I think it is more accurate and I use the routing for caches and to find other things. It does a good jod for this but not as good as my Nuvi also I do not know if I am doing something wrong but I cannot get it to recalculate if I miss a turn. The Oregon was nice for auto routing but I think the accuracy took a hit. Just rember this is my opinion and just telling it like I see it. Right now the -40 is $245 at Amazon with Topo 8.

8.9k · June 13, 2009

I have had an Oregon with the maps and a -40. I sold the Oregon and kept the -40. I think it is more accurate and I use the routing for caches and to find other things. It does a good jod for this but not as good as my Nuvi also I do not know if I am doing something wrong but I cannot get it to recalculate if I miss a turn. The Oregon was nice for auto routing but I think the accuracy took a hit. Just rember this is my opinion and just telling it like I see it. Right now the -40 is $245 at Amazon with Topo 8.

In the menu is a way to fix that, let me see if I can remember where....OK, hit menu, then routes, then menu again, then edit route settings, thenback on track driving, change to automatic.

June 13, 2009

Thanks

9.3k · June 13, 2009

PN-40, Colorado 300, or Oregon 300....60CSx

As someone who has cached with all of these, I reckon the answer depends on what you want to do with it.

I'm thinking that if the layout of the 60 bothered you, you'd probably dislike the PN-40. The button positioning is similar on both. I know I find the layout of the Colorado tiresome. Having to use the scroll wheel to spell out street names, custom POIs and/or business names aggravates me. My wife, on the other hand, isn't bothered by it at all. She zooms thru the alphanumeric like Rosie O'Donnell gnawing her way thru a tub of Ben & Jerry's. We do both agree that the Oregon is a lot more intuitive, though it is slightly less accurate that the Colorado. Since this discrepancy is typically just a couple feet, it doesn't bother me too much. I guess I got spoiled by the accuracy of my 60. While it's hard to definitively quantify, I would rate the accuracy of the Oregon as being comparable with the Vista HCx. My brother has the PN-40, and in a side by side comparison with my 60CSx, I was quite impressed. The only complaints I had with the Delorme were the ones they addressed in their update. Chris uses a vehicle mount for his PN, which charges the unit in between caches, so battery life never became an issue.

I'm a Wherigo nut, which is the only reason I have not bought a Delorme.

June 14, 2009

If everything you says is accurate, and I will assume it is, I am buying the PN-40. Mostly because of the accuracy in heavy cover--where I usually find myself--and the ability to take a hit, which I find happens when hiking through said heavy cover. While I dig caching, I am not even in the same hemisphere with having to need more than 1000 caches in my GPS. I actually use caching more to find cool spots than actually log caches, though I usually find them and at least say hi or leave something silly if I remember to take something.

Any advantage the PN-40 has over the Oregon in this area will soon be going away.

Both the PN-40 and Oregon had horrific performance under tree cover from the get-go, and both had serious WAAS issues.

This is because they use the *exact* same GPS receiver hardware.

The PN-40 is currently slightly ahead of the game because they were the first to release a firmware update that fixed WAAS issues. The Oregon is pretty close (the 2.9x series betas have apparently made great strides in accuracy and receiver performance, I can't do a before/after as I loaded 2.98 almost immediately.) About the only thing missing from the Oregon's firmware at the moment compared to the PN are the WAAS fixes, and those should be coming soon.

As to the ability to take a hit - The PN-40 has a tendency to fail even if you don't hit it. Read the DeLorme forums regarding the unusually high percentage of power supply issues, whether due to design flaw or bad manufacturing quality control. People will defend the PN-40 by saying, "it's a small percentage of sales", but the fact that it has a sticky thread on the tech support forums indicates that the numbers are statistically significant, whereas the Oregon does not seem to have any such statistical patterns in failures pointing to one particular item that fails for many users. As to the availability of an in-unit rechargeable battery for the 40 - I think DeLorme bit off more than they could chew with that. I have a feeling their power supply circuit would be a lot more reliable if they weren't trying to do so much with it. (Supporting alkaline, NiMH, and RCR-V3 with in-unit recharging in a single unit.)

In my case, my PN-40 either failed spontaneously, or a light tap against my apartment door (2-3 inches of travel on the end of the lanyard as I unlocked my door) was enough to kill it.

Edited June 14, 2009 by Entropy512

June 14, 2009

PN-40, Colorado 300, or Oregon 300....60CSx

I guess I got spoiled by the accuracy of my 60. While it's hard to definitively quantify, I would rate the accuracy of the Oregon as being comparable with the Vista HCx.

I'd put my Vista HCx against any other gps for accuracy. With the money you save you can get a great Palm for paperless.

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=168470

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=176734

http://forums.gpsreview.net/viewtopic.php?t=6326

8.9k · June 14, 2009

If everything you says is accurate, and I will assume it is, I am buying the PN-40. Mostly because of the accuracy in heavy cover--where I usually find myself--and the ability to take a hit, which I find happens when hiking through said heavy cover. While I dig caching, I am not even in the same hemisphere with having to need more than 1000 caches in my GPS. I actually use caching more to find cool spots than actually log caches, though I usually find them and at least say hi or leave something silly if I remember to take something.

Any advantage the PN-40 has over the Oregon in this area will soon be going away.

Both the PN-40 and Oregon had horrific performance under tree cover from the get-go, and both had serious WAAS issues.

This is because they use the *exact* same GPS receiver hardware.

The PN-40 is currently slightly ahead of the game because they were the first to release a firmware update that fixed WAAS issues. The Oregon is pretty close (the 2.9x series betas have apparently made great strides in accuracy and receiver performance, I can't do a before/after as I loaded 2.98 almost immediately.) About the only thing missing from the Oregon's firmware at the moment compared to the PN are the WAAS fixes, and those should be coming soon.

As to the ability to take a hit - The PN-40 has a tendency to fail even if you don't hit it. Read the DeLorme forums regarding the unusually high percentage of power supply issues, whether due to design flaw or bad manufacturing quality control. People will defend the PN-40 by saying, "it's a small percentage of sales", but the fact that it has a sticky thread on the tech support forums indicates that the numbers are statistically significant, whereas the Oregon does not seem to have any such statistical patterns in failures pointing to one particular item that fails for many users. As to the availability of an in-unit rechargeable battery for the 40 - I think DeLorme bit off more than they could chew with that. I have a feeling their power supply circuit would be a lot more reliable if they weren't trying to do so much with it. (Supporting alkaline, NiMH, and RCR-V3 with in-unit recharging in a single unit.)

In my case, my PN-40 either failed spontaneously, or a light tap against my apartment door (2-3 inches of travel on the end of the lanyard as I unlocked my door) was enough to kill it.

A light tap huh...I was once given back a golf club a customer was let to try out...broken shaft. When asked what happened, he said he barely hit the ground too...odd! :laughing:

The fact that DeLorme stickied the thread tells me they're not trying to hide the issues, more like they're working hard to resolve it! I am very much impressed with the way DeLorme treats their customers, like they want them to come back and buy from them again! I also like how these things sell themselves. I showed a person mine, they bought one, then their relations, then on and on...and not a gripe from the lot! I showed another friend, they bought one and again, no problems. I have read about the problems, but THANKFULLY, have not seen any save when the connections got wet between the adaptor and the unit...which was fixed with a quick wipe-down!

To those interested in buying a PN series, rest assured your purchase is backed by a 30 day return policy (even if bought from a distributor...as long as they are an authorized distributor). So, if your unit fails after an hour as Entropy's did, you have peace of mind knowing you're covered. Maybe had Entropy given DeLorme a chance, he'd have had a better experience?

As for the Garmins catching the PNs, they're behind in more than just WAAS and accuracy, Cache Register is a big reason for this!

Edited June 14, 2009 by Rockin Roddy

June 14, 2009

Using Send to GPS from geocaching.com to send the GPX to my brandnew Garmin Oregegon 400t...

The information text and puzzles for the next coordinates are almost unreadable because of the many HTML tags like:

and so on and on...

To be able to read the cache info on the gps (paperless geocaching) was my main motivation to buy this GPS. :laughing:

Payed even €30 to become a member and to be able to download the GPX into the GPS.

I spotted another person complaining about this on the Communicator-plugin Developers forum (dec 2008), but they claimed to have no time to fix this problem.

http://developer.garmin.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=761

2.1k · June 14, 2009

I spotted another person complaining about this on the Communicator-plugin Developers forum (dec 2008), but they claimed to have no time to fix this problem.

http://developer.garmin.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=761

Maybe DeLorme's geocaching support will shake Garmin out of their complacency and actually push them to fix things like this.

June 14, 2009

After much research/debate I bought a 60CSx and am glad I did!

add EasyGPS software to manage caches and download pocket queries (free) and you're all set.

Long battery life, bright display, long/proven track record, no issues......

Steve

2.1k · June 14, 2009

Topic Title:

Out of the box...Garmin or DeLorme?

I'd put my Vista HCx against any other gps for accuracy. With the money you save you can get a great Palm for paperless.

An answer which is responsive to: "Out of the boxes...Garmin and Palm or DeLorme?"

8.9k · June 14, 2009

After much research/debate I bought a 60CSx and am glad I did!

add EasyGPS software to manage caches and download pocket queries (free) and you're all set.

Long battery life, bright display, long/proven track record, no issues......

Steve

You don't know what you're missing with the CR....but as long as you're happy! :laughing:

Didn't even notice I was using CA instead of CR....must be the weight of the world pushing on the few spare brain cells left?? Glad I have such an easy unit to use, I'd surely be lost otherwise!

Edited June 14, 2009 by Rockin Roddy

8.9k · June 14, 2009

PN-40, Colorado 300, or Oregon 300....60CSx

I guess I got spoiled by the accuracy of my 60. While it's hard to definitively quantify, I would rate the accuracy of the Oregon as being comparable with the Vista HCx.

I'd put my Vista HCx against any other gps for accuracy. With the money you save you can get a great Palm for paperless.

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=168470

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=176734

http://forums.gpsreview.net/viewtopic.php?t=6326

I wish we were close enough to compare the two! BTW, paperless isn't just seeing the info anymore, that bar has been elevated quite a bit hgher! Was raised to logging via field notes, but CR has pushed it even higher yet! :laughing: :wub:

9.3k · June 14, 2009

I'd put my Vista HCx against any other gps for accuracy.

I think you'd lose. I don't want to knock the Vista HCx, which is a great little unit, (kinda like the Kia is a great little car), but a patch antenna is not suited for dense tree cover. Having used a Vista HCx along side a 60CSx and a PN-40, in various environments over the course of an extended weekend, we all found the Vista lacking. Of the three units, it was the only one to ever lose satellite reception, which happened several times. We also did fixed object return tests, where we selected random objects from a distance, (mostly tree stumps), and marked their position with all three units, then returned to the same spot later to see how close our original waypoint was to our current calculated lat/lon. The Vista lost every one of those competitions. Mind you, it didn't lose by any huge margin. For the budget conscious cacher, it's a great choice. It's just not the best choice for someone more worried about accuracy than price.

18.9k · June 14, 2009

Using Send to GPS from geocaching.com to send the GPX to my brandnew Garmin Oregegon 400t...

The information text and puzzles for the next coordinates are almost unreadable because of the many HTML tags like:

<img src = "http://img.geocaching.com/cache/0876568876375436433242.jpg">

<pr><hr>< >



and so on and on...

To be able to read the cache info on the gps (paperless geocaching) was my main motivation to buy this GPS.

Payed even €30 to become a member and to be able to download the GPX into the GPS.

I spotted another person complaining about this on the Communicator-plugin Developers forum (dec 2008), but they claimed to have no time to fix this problem.

http://developer.garmin.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=761

Not a big deal at all - it is actually faster to grab the individual cache page GPX and drop it into the [drive]:\garmin\gpx folder as it is to use the clunky communicator. Done that way - no issues with common HTML.

Also learn to use Pocket Queries - http://www.markwell.us/pq.htm

June 14, 2009

A light tap huh...I was once given back a golf club a customer was let to try out...broken shaft. When asked what happened, he said he barely hit the ground too...odd!

The fact that DeLorme stickied the thread tells me they're not trying to hide the issues, more like they're working hard to resolve it! I am very much impressed with the way DeLorme treats their customers, like they want them to come back and buy from them again! I also like how these things sell themselves. I showed a person mine, they bought one, then their relations, then on and on...and not a gripe from the lot! I showed another friend, they bought one and again, no problems. I have read about the problems, but THANKFULLY, have not seen any save when the connections got wet between the adaptor and the unit...which was fixed with a quick wipe-down!

To those interested in buying a PN series, rest assured your purchase is backed by a 30 day return policy (even if bought from a distributor...as long as they are an authorized distributor). So, if your unit fails after an hour as Entropy's did, you have peace of mind knowing you're covered. Maybe had Entropy given DeLorme a chance, he'd have had a better experience?

As for the Garmins catching the PNs, they're behind in more than just WAAS and accuracy, Cache Register is a big reason for this!

I describe it as, specifically:

Lanyard was hanging from my wrist

PN-40 swung approximately two inches back

Swung two-inches forward towards the door

My phone has taken far more (and far more significant) hits and still works perfectly, despite having far more potential failure points (like a slide-out tilting keyboard).

Which leads me to another plus for the Garmin:

The PN-40 comes with an incredibly long lanyard that lets the unit swing around a huge amount if you're not holding it.

The Garmin Oregon and Colorado series come with a carabiner clip that the Garmin's mounting rail snaps into. (The Oregon/Colorado mounting rail is a great thing in general here) You can clip it onto your belt or through a belt loop and it won't swing/bounce at all.

As to the thread being sticky:

At least they're not trying to hide it, but this has been a known problem for at least six months with no conclusive fix so far.

As to the 30 day policy:

Who cares? Amazon provides a better policy that applies to both Garmin and DeLorme products. Unlike DeLorme's policy, Amazon will pay for the unit to be shipped back (in fact, gives you a premade UPS label to print out), and will reset the 30 days while you're waiting for your replacement. Also, a good return policy is no substitute whatsoever for a reliable unit. If the unit fails before an important event, what good is a return/exchange policy?

As to Cache Register:

Cache Register is just a (additional cost) workaround for the DeLorme's deficiencies. Garmin allows you to perform Cache Register's two primary functions (loading of multiple geocaches into a unit and uploading of field notes) simply using drag-and-drop in your favorite file management program.

As to Garmin Communicator issues:

Garmin Communicator was designed for older Garmin units. Newer Garmin units (Oregons/Colorados) do not require any special plugin for cache loading. Just copy the GPX file over to the unit's memory.

4.3k · June 14, 2009

...Cache Register is just a (additional cost) workaround for the DeLorme's deficiencies...

Um, not exactly.

While I agree with you that DeLorme is very, very poor in cross platform support and they really, really should have a simpler drag and drop method of transferring data to/from the device, Cache Register does break some new ground.

CR fetches and syncs your PQ's directly from GC.com -- no waiting for the email with each PQ, downloading and unzipping the attachment, copying it to the GPS. Instead, when you run CR it shows you the list of PQs you have on GC.com. You pick one from the list and click the "sync" button - and CR loads the PQ direcly to your GPS. Also, if you've made some field notes since your last sync, it uploads those to GC at the same time.

This integration is the one seriously cool feature that I think give DeLorme an edge for cachers. For now.

That may be temporary. GC.com made some back end changes for this to work, and I rather expect Garmin will be able to use a similar method real soon now.

Edited June 14, 2009 by lee_rimar

June 15, 2009

Content deleted - GC database was hiccuping earlier and posts went through despite browser reporting error.

Edited June 15, 2009 by Entropy512

June 15, 2009

...Cache Register is just a (additional cost) workaround for the DeLorme's deficiencies...
Um, not exactly.

While I agree with you that DeLorme is very, very poor in cross platform support and they really, really should have a simpler drag and drop method of transferring data to/from the device, Cache Register does break some new ground.

CR fetches and syncs your PQ's directly from GC.com -- no waiting for the email with each PQ, downloading and unzipping the attachment, copying it to the GPS. Instead, when you run CR it shows you the list of PQs you have on GC.com. You pick one from the list and click the "sync" button - and CR loads the PQ direcly to your GPS. Also, if you've made some field notes since your last sync, it uploads those to GC at the same time.

This integration is the one seriously cool feature that I think give DeLorme an edge for cachers. For now.

That may be temporary. GC.com made some back end changes for this to work, and I rather expect Garmin will be able to use a similar method real soon now.

Hmm, a minor advantage, and if gc.com opened up their API so ANY developer could access that feature of the site, then I'm sure Garmin (or a third party) would quickly match and exceed CR.

I do know of a piece of software that offers similar capabilities to what you describe (e.g. accesses multiple caches without going through the standard PQ system), and interestingly enough most times I see a reference to it, I also see a post on the thread referencing it saying that GS has been deleting references to said software for TOS violations, probably because said software doesn't use the "secret" Cache Register backdoor (which should not be secret...)

In general, the PN-40 needs far more software support to perform various functions than the Garmin does. Yes, if you spend $10 you can get a few features not currently done by the Garmin, but 90% of the functionality of that piece of software is offered out of the box by the Oregon without any need for special software (free or for-pay) of any kind.

This combined with the lower reliability, lack of a mounting rail (the carabiner clip included with the Oregon is FAR more useful than the PN-40's megalanyard, and there's no way you could add a 'biner to the PN-40 to mimic the way the Oregon's 'biner works - You could use a split ring and some string tied to the PN-40's lanyard holes, but this would allow the unit to swing far more than the Oregon's 'biner gadget.), and lower resolution/smaller screen make the Oregon worth the extra cost over the PN-40, since free 24k topos can be downloaded from www.gpsfiledepot.com for the Oregon.

Also, a contributing factor to the original poster - What other devices do you own? Do you own a Blackberry, Motorola, or HTC phone, or anything else that charges from mini-USB? You will be able to use these same chargers with the Oregon. (Although BB/Moto chargers require a small software workaround. HTC chargers are treated by the Oregon identically to a Garmin power supply.)

Add Reply failed so apologies if this becomes double posted.

The OP also was interested in turn by turn routing - lee, I did not have a chance to exercise it, but is the PN-40's on-unit routing significantly improved compared to the PN-20, Street Atlas Handheld 2006, or Street Atlas Handheld 2009? I'm looking for words like "epic" and "night and day" and "totally redone" as the on-device road routing on the latter three products (I have used both of the SAHHs, my father has a PN-20), and on those products, road routing was so minimal, slow, and in general useless that it was barely enough to warrant the feature checkbox and that was about it. DeLorme could claim they had it, even though it was unusable for 95%+ of device owners. I have seen little evidence that the 40 is any significant improvement in this regard. While the Oregon will be a massive disappointment for a Nuvi user as far as road routing, the difference between it and the DeLorme with City Navigator maps is like night and day.

4.3k · June 15, 2009

Entropy, while I agree with you on many points about the DeLorme PN-40's shortcomings, you misunderstood my comments about CR. It's not a secret back door. It doesn't bypass the PQ system. It's fully supported by and was developed in coordination with GC. And I do expect Garmin to make use of the new API eventually -- but they haven't yet.

And my comments about CR have nothing to do with chargers, lanyards, mounting rails, or anything else -- but your reply went all over the place. You don't really need to repeat EVERYTHING you dislike about the PN-40 in EVERY post. That's a sure way to bore or offend even those who agree with you.

Try this sometime -- just grind ONE axe in each post

June 15, 2009

Where's the link to the documentation describing how an application can pull PQ results directly?

Unless there's a publicly documented API, it's a "secret backdoor".

9.5k · June 15, 2009

Where's the link to the documentation describing how an application can pull PQ results directly?

Unless there's a publicly documented API, it's a "secret backdoor".

Semantics

You're confusing publicly available dcoumented API with commercially available documented API.

Edited June 15, 2009 by TotemLake

8.9k · June 15, 2009

Where's the link to the documentation describing how an application can pull PQ results directly?

Unless there's a publicly documented API, it's a "secret backdoor".

I guess all I can say is...WOW!

4.3k · June 15, 2009

Unless there's a publicly documented API, it's a "secret backdoor".

Being publicly known about, it's not a secret. Being documented for someone to use (even if you have to register or pay to use it) it's not a backdoor.

Wanna use it? Apply to Groundspeak, they own it.

June 16, 2009

Why do these threads always turn into Ford versus Chevy or Pepsi versus Coke?

I would avoid the Colorado and concentrate on the Oregon or PN-40. The Colorado would not seem to be long for this world as a current product.

Out of the box, the PN-40 will do turn by turn road navigation and the Oregon will not. The PN-40 road navigation is not nearly as good as something like a Nuvi but I've personally found it serviceable the few times I've used it.

Both units will do paperless Geocaching out of the box. Geocaching with the PN-40 is much nicer if you spend the $10 for Cache Register but it's not required. Entering information is much easier on the Oregon's touchscreen.

Out of the box, the PN-40 has far superior maps compared to an Oregon 300 series basemap. You can download free maps for the Oregon but the quality varies depending on your location. If you were to purchase the Oregon 400t you'd have topo maps that are better then DeLORME offers plus 3D terrain and shading.

Both the Oregon and the PN-40 have somewhat poor battery life. This can be improved by going with better (ie: more expensive) batteries on either unit.

If useful to you, the PN-40 supports the DeLorme Map Library Subscription for around $30 a year. This allows you to download unlimited satellite and aerial imagery plus USGS topo maps and NOAA charts. I've personally found this to be very useful for exploring but not that important for Geocaching.

The PN-40 also comes with Topo 8. Love it or hate it, this powerful software allows you to also have full maps on your computer with 3D views and routing. I've found this to be very useful, especially in the field where there is no Internet connection. All of the maps and imagery you download using the Map Library Subscription can be viewed in Topo on your large computer or laptop screen.

The PN-40 really has no map support outside of the U.S. and Canada. If you travel around the world this could be a big problem.

Looking at Amazon, the Oregon 300 is $349 with just the basemap and the PN-40 is $249 with street/topo maps for the entire US and topo maps for Canada.

I personally went with the PN-40 and I have no regrets (other than the fact I paid more for mine than you can buy them for now!).

June 16, 2009

Both the Oregon and the PN-40 have somewhat poor battery life. This can be improved by going with better (ie: more expensive) batteries on either unit.

Alkalines in general are a bad idea for any device.

The one real advantage they had over NiMH batteries (low self discharge) has been negated by the new breed of Ultra Low Self Discharge (ULSD) NiMH batteries, also sold as "hybrid" or "Pre-Charged". A few packs of ULSD NiMH batteries and a good NiMH charger (such as MaHa MH-C9000 or LaCrosse BC-900) is one of the best investments anyone can make.

I have yet to even have my Oregon show one bar down on the battery, but I'm in the habit of throwing things onto my MaHa on a regular basis (being a smart charger with proper charge termination, it can safely "top off" batteries) and the Oregon uses the same car power supply as my phone and as both my old Bluetooth GPS puck and my new BT GPS datalogger, so the end result is I've got power supplies all over the place for it.

It sounds like the PN-40 may have had significant improvements in road mapping. Its handheld predecessors (PN-20, various revisions of Street Atlas Handheld) were not by any definition serviceable. Even a short (20-30 mile) road route took 2-3 minutes to generate on-device with SAHH, and the PN-20 wasn't much faster.

Edited June 16, 2009 by Entropy512

8.9k · June 17, 2009

Both the Oregon and the PN-40 have somewhat poor battery life. This can be improved by going with better (ie: more expensive) batteries on either unit.

Alkalines in general are a bad idea for any device.

The one real advantage they had over NiMH batteries (low self discharge) has been negated by the new breed of Ultra Low Self Discharge (ULSD) NiMH batteries, also sold as "hybrid" or "Pre-Charged". A few packs of ULSD NiMH batteries and a good NiMH charger (such as MaHa MH-C9000 or LaCrosse BC-900) is one of the best investments anyone can make.

I have yet to even have my Oregon show one bar down on the battery, but I'm in the habit of throwing things onto my MaHa on a regular basis (being a smart charger with proper charge termination, it can safely "top off" batteries) and the Oregon uses the same car power supply as my phone and as both my old Bluetooth GPS puck and my new BT GPS datalogger, so the end result is I've got power supplies all over the place for it.

It sounds like the PN-40 may have had significant improvements in road mapping. Its handheld predecessors (PN-20, various revisions of Street Atlas Handheld) were not by any definition serviceable. Even a short (20-30 mile) road route took 2-3 minutes to generate on-device with SAHH, and the PN-20 wasn't much faster.

Yes, the PNs are really turning into some serious tools! I know they had and have their problems, but the majoriy of users are quite satisfied indeed! As for routing, I am really happy with mine!

June 17, 2009

Probably not as good as the Oregon's - the PN-40 would have to advance lightyears compared to the 20 and SAHH to come close, and to be honest, for POI searching and such in a vehicle, a touchscreen is a must. The only thing about its road routing features I miss compared to TomTom Navigator or Garmin Mobile XT (I've tried both, I prefer TT's UI slightly more, but Google Local Search in GMXT ROCKS!) is that TTN and GMXT do voice prompts - The Oregon's road routing has everything else I'm used to.

Edited June 17, 2009 by Entropy512

June 17, 2009

I'd go with the Oregon hands down! In my book, there's not even a close 2nd! The the ariel maps are cool but you have to suscribe to a service and download only parts at a time.

I'd efinately go with Oregon!

June 17, 2009

Betaman, can you offer anything more to support your comments? The Oregon 300 that the OP is talking about only comes with a basemap and costs $100 more than the PN-40 (which comes with routable street/topo maps for the entire U.S.). It has the same receiver chipset and offers similar performance. Both do paperless geocaching. The Oregon does not support satellite/aerial maps or USGS quads at any cost while you can download an unlimited amount on the PN-40 and Topo for only $30 a year.

I see a unit that wins hands down and it's not the Oregon however your criteria seems to be different.

Edited June 17, 2009 by OpenTrackRacer

June 17, 2009

Betaman, can you offer anything more to support your comments? The Oregon 300 that the OP is talking about only comes with a basemap and costs $100 more than the PN-40 (which comes with routable street/topo maps for the entire U.S.). It has the same receiver chipset and offers similar performance. Both do paperless geocaching. The Oregon does not support satellite/aerial maps or USGS quads at any cost while you can download an unlimited amount on the PN-40 and Topo for only $30 a year.

But it's the same price (or cheaper) as/than the PN-40:

Advantages out of the box? Probably screen resolution and interface (220x176 vs. 240x400). Not to spread FUD, but I avoided the PN-40 from posts regarding quality control, though I agree that aerial imagery is a neat feature. I haven't used either of them yet, both are more than capable for geocaching. I guess it comes down to whether you want aerial or better driving.

June 17, 2009

It depends on how critical to your needs aerial imagery is.

In my opinion the ability to load aerial imagery does not make up for the fact that the PN-40:

Has a smaller and lower resolution screen

Despite the dual processor, smaller screen, and no relief shading (less work to do), has slower updating of the screen as you move.

Does not provide you the option of adding international maps if you ever travel internationally

Does not have third-party sources of free topographic data - Despite the fact that the source data is free in the United States from the Census Bureau and the USGS, DeLorme's topo maps are less detailed than ones freely available from www.gpsfiledepot.com - When I walked in my town park, the PN-40 showed the creek that runs through the park as an effectively straight line that eventually angled towards the river. Both of the New York topo maps available from the above site show its true structure (meandering frequently). Given that there's a cache in one of the peninsulas created by the meanders (which puts it on the other side of the line indicated by the 40), it helps a lot to have accurate hydro structure.

Has quite a few known (and even acknowledged by the manufacturer) quality control problems. These may eventually get fixed, but right now the PN-40 is a quality control gamble. (translation: you get what you pay for)

Cannot be powered in a vehicle using relatively common power supplies (Motorola, Blackberry, HTC, among others). In general, a lot of reports in the sticky thread documenting power supply issues indicate that the "one piece" cable that comes with the unit tends to cause lots of problems (lockups and such) if an attempt is made at using it to provide external power. You need to purchase a special cable to provide external power.

Has no "bracket mount/rail mount" point - Only options are friction mount and lanyard mount. The PN-40 comes with an incredibly long lanyard that allows the device to swing about quite a bit. The Oregon's included carabiner mount is just plain slick - It does not permit very much side-to-side twisting motion, and in general the device doesn't bounce/swing much when clipped to a belt loop. (The Oregon has a lanyard mount too.)

According to at least one review on Amazon, the NOAA marine charts provided by DeLorme are at a significantly lower resolution than the source data. Tonight I'll try to see if Topo 6 (since I had to return Topo 8 with my failed PN-40) is compatible with the Map Library (which I activated before my unit failed and I returned it) so I can see how DeLorme's aerial imagery for my area compares to the freely available source data for the area (USGS aerial, or in my case, New York GIS aerial which is what Google Maps and Google Earth users get for free at full resolution.)

June 17, 2009

But it's the same price (or cheaper) as/than the PN-40:

Advantages out of the box? Probably screen resolution and interface (220x176 vs. 240x400). Not to spread FUD, but I avoided the PN-40 from posts regarding quality control, though I agree that aerial imagery is a neat feature. I haven't used either of them yet, both are more than capable for geocaching. I guess it comes down to whether you want aerial or better driving.

No, It's really not the same price or cheaper when you consider the "out of box" capability. To get detailed routable streets for the Oregon you would also need to purchase City Navigator which last I checked was about $100.

You are correct that the Oregon is better for driving but for the extra $100 that City Navigator costs, you can get a cheap Nuvi which is even better.

Best advice is to find a retailer carring both and check them out for yourself. I like my PN-40 but if someone offered me an Oregon I wouldn't turn them down.

Out of the box...Garmin or DeLorme?

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

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