got my oregon 300 today

[+smstext]

 

now im trying to set it up and would be grateful for help, tips n hints as like an idiotproof guide or what you have learnt from experience to work best.

 

have downloaded the toastie maps that people keep mentioning, althrough many footpaths in my area are not included, it is so far a great map and mustn't grumble for the price of zilch.

 

many thanks in advance to anyone who can help.

[Contra1971]

man i want a Oregon 300...

[+g-o-cashers]

http://garminoregon.wikispaces.com/Geocaching should help you get started with geocaching.

[+smstext]

ive been reading through that and at the moment im wondering if i was better off staying with my etrex h which was idiotproof. this one seems to have to many settings and options and a 40ft accuracy with waas enabled

[+Walts Hunting]

You might want to take your etrex along for accuracy when under cover. Most people disable WAAS since you will never see them anyhow and the constant searching does seem to make it less accurate. It would be interesting to head out with both of them pointing to a cache in an area with some (or lots) of tree cover and see which one somes closer.

 

As to all the settings and complexity you can do just fine with it using the default settings and make changes as you learn it.

[strumble]

You get some help here:-

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php...p;hl=discoverer

[+Cacheoholic]

It would be interesting to head out with both of them pointing to a cache in an area with some (or lots) of tree cover and see which one somes closer.

 

I would be more beneficial to compare them to an accurate waypoint like an adjusted benchmark rather than a cache. An adjusted benchmark is accurate to a fraction of an inch were a cache is more like 10’ at best. The reported accuracy of a GPS is only a calculated guess and is calculated differently by different models of GPSes. One can only use it to affirm that you are getting a better signal if the accuracy is a smaller distance. You definitely can not compare reported accuracy of 2 different models of GPSes and think that one is more accurate than the other simply by the reported accuracy.

[+smstext]

i plan to take both out soon anyhow as i know the etrex h inside out so any problems with the oregon i have a backup device.

[+bjb670]

You might want to take your etrex along for accuracy when under cover. Most people disable WAAS since you will never see them anyhow and the constant searching does seem to make it less accurate. It would be interesting to head out with both of them pointing to a cache in an area with some (or lots) of tree cover and see which one somes closer.

 

As to all the settings and complexity you can do just fine with it using the default settings and make changes as you learn it.

 

 

I get a lock on WAAS just about every time i use my gps...

[+Walts Hunting]

bjb670 you don't say which GPS you have. I was referring to the Oregon which has the well documented "never see a waas bird" problem and the recommendated solution is turn it off. Many posters talk about the increased accuracy when that is done.

 

As to comparing accuracy I have gone out several times with a friend who has the Colorado and he is consistently closer to the cache location than my Oregon. That doesn't even get into the "arrow doesn't turn" problem.

[strumble]

In the UK we get:-

 

[+smstext]

so is the general view to turn WAAS off (egnos i think is the uk version) and just have it on normal? my etrek h prefers WAAS on but this oregon doesnt seem to like it.

 

after a quick walk around the back garden its only 2 out on the West co ords and occasionly 1 out on the northern co ords to what the etrek says, but guessing its a newer device to the etrek its probably more accurate with newer chips inside it.

[+Walts Hunting]

Actually it is the reverse. It is a long story but there was a lawsuit against the chip manufacturer and Garmin had to change from SIRFIII to MEK and has had nothing but accuracy (and other) issues since. Definately a step down. Plus they went away from the Helix antenna to the patch which seems to have added to the problem. If you want the most accurate Garmin find an old 60CS with the SIRF. Doesn't get any better.

[+Cacheoholic]

I also get WAAS on the eastern USA with my Oregon.

 

[+Tequila]

Make sure you have the latest officially released firmware (3.20 I think) installed.

 

With it, the OR has no accuracy problems and gets a good signal everywhere.

[+g-o-cashers]

You will get WAAS if you stand outside with a clear view to your WAAS satellite. But I'll guarantee if you go under any type of cover you'll lose it. It is this cycling between having WAAS correction and not that has caused problems for me. I leave it off.

[+Walts Hunting]

I would kill for the accuracy displayed in the two pictures. It would be neat if they were to take those units into a forest and after about 15 minutes take a picture. They guy in Sacramento can come up to where I cache and I'll take him for a Oregon killing hike. There are many up here. I go out with a guy that has a Colorado (MEK chip and helix antenna). He is constantly closer to the cache than me.

 

I'm thinking about buying a Colorado from REI after checking their return policy and use them side by side. I would hate to give up the touchscreen. It is so neat and easy to use but very frustrating.

[+Maingray]

Actually it is the reverse. It is a long story but there was a lawsuit against the chip manufacturer and Garmin had to change from SIRFIII to MEK and has had nothing but accuracy (and other) issues since. Definately a step down. Plus they went away from the Helix antenna to the patch which seems to have added to the problem. If you want the most accurate Garmin find an old 60CS with the SIRF. Doesn't get any better.

 

Any data on that? I think you'd find the newer chips on the Oregon/Colorado/PNxx units are performing very well, and the newer features such as ephemeris prediction is very good. The antenna issue, I agree, is more likely a culprit..maybe for the OR v Colorado. My Oregon performs very well now, accuracy is very very good. WAAS cycling is still an issue under cover and that's the only issue I see. The other features of the paperless units are also well worth the price of admission.

 

People get a little hung up with the accuracy of these units. It's not like caches are hidden by people with super accurate military GPSr. Get to within 10-20 feet of the cache, GPS should be put away anyway.

 

And I think you meant 60C(S)X. The non-X units were even older and certainly not high sensitivity.

Edited November 2, 2009 by Maingray

[+Walts Hunting]

The best ones are with the SIRF by a bunch. Under cover mine jumps to 30+ feet or more and the arrow doesn't turn when I do. I don't know about data but check out the wiki site (a url under g-o-cachers name) and you will see that it is a general consensus. When I go with my friend who has a Colorado he is (with rare exception) closer o target than me. Plus we turned at right angles off of a road into cover. His arrow swung. Mine didn't for over 500 feet and then it was because we came to the middle of a clearing. There doesn't seem to anyone disputing that the Oregon is the least accurate GPS ever produced by Garmin. The softward fixes cannot fix the hardware deficiencies.

[+Entropy512]

In my experience with both MTK2 and SiRF III based Bluetooth pucks, the MTK2 chipset has provided superior performance to the SiRF III.

 

That said, MTK vs SiRF doesn't apply in this case. Oregons use the STMicro Cartesio chipset, which is "OK", the main problem is that WAAS performance of the Cartesio is abysmal. All receivers on the market (DeLorme PN-40 and the Oregons) that I know of with the Cartesio have abysmal WAAS performance.

 

If anyone is judging the SiRF->MTK transition of Garmin chipsets based on Oregon performance, they are sorely misinformed, since as I said above, the Oregons use neither chipset.

[+smstext]

well i took it into forest today to find a cache and accuracy went over 40ft, couldnt find the cache so i got out my etrek h which had to be turned on and hadnt been on in days found the WAAS signal and locked down to 12ft if i didnt have it with me then i wouldnt have found the cache. Actually im quite disappointed now with the oregon and only bought it because of the recommendations on here that i got in a previous thread. I was going to get a 200 with memory card but a few people advised me to get a 300 and when a colorado was mentioned i was told the only diference was one was touch the other was a jog wheel... Well there you go i feel let down, i have emailed garmin to let them know of my disappointment and will keep you all informed.

[+Maingray]

well i took it into forest today to find a cache and accuracy went over 40ft, couldnt find the cache so i got out my etrek h which had to be turned on and hadnt been on in days found the WAAS signal and locked down to 12ft if i didnt have it with me then i wouldnt have found the cache. Actually im quite disappointed now with the oregon and only bought it because of the recommendations on here that i got in a previous thread. I was going to get a 200 with memory card but a few people advised me to get a 300 and when a colorado was mentioned i was told the only diference was one was touch the other was a jog wheel... Well there you go i feel let down, i have emailed garmin to let them know of my disappointment and will keep you all informed.

 

Odd. Updated to latest firmware?

[+Walts Hunting]

I have the latest firmware and mine does the same thing. The colorado next to me doesn't.

[+smstext]

yes mine is on the latest firmware 3.20 and gps has firmware 3.70

 

Got an email back from Garmin which says:

 

Thank you for contacting Garmin Europe.

 

As you correctly pointed out I would expect the Oregon 300 to pick up as

strong a signal than the eTrex as it has a higher sensitivity receiver

and as you also mentioned, the ability to operate with EGNOS should give

a greater accuracy when operating with a clear view of sky (when under

tree cover you may not acquire EGNOS satellites). The inaccuracy may be

caused by corrupt data and so I would recommend carrying out a master

reset on the device.

 

To carry out the master reset please power up the unit while holding the

top left hand side of the touchscreen. The unit will power up and ask do

you really want to erase all user data? Select yes and the unit will

reset.

 

The unit may take approx 20 mins to acquire the first time however

should acquire quickly follow this. Please note that waypoints, routes

and tracks will be erased during this process. These can be backed up by

using mapsource if applicable.

 

I would also recommend ensuring that you have the latest version of

software loaded to the GPS. The software can be updated by using a

program called webupdater that automatically looks for the latest

software for your unit and updates. Please follow the link below to

download webupdater: -

 

http://www8.garmin.com/products/webupdater/

 

If the problem remains please advise or if there is anything else I can

help with please let me know.

Alternatively you can search for a solution here: http://www.garmin.com/support

 

Kind regards,

 

 

I have done this (even through the device came with the most up to date firmware on it) and am now giving it 30 minutes in the conservatory where my etrek h gets down to 10-12ft and see what happens, when i left it was jumping between 20-40ft

[+Seab3]

In the UK we get:-

 

 

I know this is a n00b question, but how do you get the bottom two screens to show up on the 300?

I searched the setup and custom fields to no avail.

 

Thanks

[vagabond]

just touch the signal strength at the bottom of the startup screen

Edited November 4, 2009 by vagabond

[+Seab3]

just touch the signal strength at the bottom of the startup screen

 

Thanks, I was just back to post an "I should RTFM" reply but you beat me to it.