Oregon vs Dakota?

[dewwars]

I am just getting into Geocaching with my boys. A guy at work recommended the Garmin eTrex Venture HC, then started looking more into and a lot of people recommended the Garmin GPS 60CSx. Then I got into this forum and read the Oregon vs PN-40 and Dakota vs PN-40. Talked to a lot of people on the Delorme Forum and they said it has a big known error (don't remember what it was but a lot of people kept talking about it) so I not quite sure about that one. Really like the Oregon 300 and Dakota 20. Basically because of the Touchscreen option. Went to the Garmin site to compare them and one has compass/barometric and the other doesn't (read a lot of the forum that the compass has to be calibrated a lot) and the other just has better resolution.

 

Any help would be appreciated on figuring out which would be better for me. Also researched some of the comments in Amazon.com from other users. Trying to get an idea from ones that use them more often.

 

Thanks!

[+SRTmike08]

I am just getting into Geocaching with my boys. A guy at work recommended the Garmin eTrex Venture HC, then started looking more into and a lot of people recommended the Garmin GPS 60CSx. Then I got into this forum and read the Oregon vs PN-40 and Dakota vs PN-40. Talked to a lot of people on the Delorme Forum and they said it has a big known error (don't remember what it was but a lot of people kept talking about it) so I not quite sure about that one. Really like the Oregon 300 and Dakota 20. Basically because of the Touchscreen option. Went to the Garmin site to compare them and one has compass/barometric and the other doesn't (read a lot of the forum that the compass has to be calibrated a lot) and the other just has better resolution.

 

Any help would be appreciated on figuring out which would be better for me. Also researched some of the comments in Amazon.com from other users. Trying to get an idea from ones that use them more often.

 

Thanks!

 

Hello I just got the Dakota 20 for Christmas and I like it a lot for Geocaching. I think the main issue the Delorme forum might have been talking about is the Waas. The Oregon and Dakota both use the same gps chipset and both have issues with taking a long time to get a waas signal then losing it easily. To be honest tho it really has not affected my Geocaching experience as the difference with waas on in my area is usally only about 2-3 feet.

 

The 300 and 20 both have a magnetic compass but the 20 has a 3 axis compass like the one found on the Oregon 550 series. The 3 axis is nice cause you do not have to hold the gps flat to get a accurate reading.

 

Hopefully this helps you a little bit. Have fun you cant go wrong with either one.

Edited December 31, 2009 by SRTmike08

[+Redwoods Mtn Biker]

Both are great units If you go with the Dakota 20, you'll need to recalibrate the compass after each battery change (or switch off the electronic compass). I really like the Dakotas because the screen is a bit brighter, but I'm a biker using it on a fixed mount where that makes a huge difference.

[Pajaholic]

I really like the Dakotas because the screen is a bit brighter, but I'm a biker using it on a fixed mount where that makes a huge difference.

Many thanks for that. FWIW, I'm toying with the idea of a Vista HCx, Oregon 300, or Dakota 20 to use both for geocaching and for cycling. If the Dakota screen is noticeably brighter, I'd prefer that even though the Oregon has better resolution. So I guess it's now between the Vista HCx and the Dakota 20.

 

Thanks again,

 

Geoff

[+Redwoods Mtn Biker]

The Dakota will still have some visibility issues on handlebars; it won't be as bright as a cell phone. But that's the one I'd go for. You can now add custom maps like topos and aerial photos to the Dakota and Oregon series. That's reason enough alone to go for that over the older Vista HCx.

[yogazoo]

I have two questions for Dakota owners that I can't seem to find the answer to anywhere else.

 

1) Satellite lock compared to the Oregon series. GPSfix posted the original review of the Dakota's and mentioned a difference in the sat reception. Essentially stated as not as sensitive as the Oregon. Has this been resolved?

 

2) Does the Dakota series recognize a heart rate monitor like the Oregons do?

 

Thanks in advance!

[yogazoo]

OK, After some searching through the Garmin blogs and forums I found that the Dakota does indeed recognize the heart rate monitors.

 

Refering to my other question, here is the quote on "Performance" from GPSfix. My question again is has this been debunked? Improved via firmware? Is it still experiencing more "noise" than the Oregon?

 

" GPS Performance

Even though I believe the GPS chipset is shared with the Oregon the antenna design may not be because of the Dakota’s smaller form factor. I’ve run through a few head-to-head tests and the Dakota does have more track noise and variation than the Oregon. Before I draw any conclusions though I’ll have to do more testing to determine if the Dakota might be a little less sensitive than the Oregon. The Dakota has the same excellent fast lock performance as the Oregon does, once you’ve locked the first time and established the HotFix database the unit typically acquires satellite lock before it displays the map page."

[+facade66]

Hi guys,

 

I have both the Vista HCx and an Oregon 300, I thought I would leap into the 21st century and replace the Ol' faithful with a new model: big mistake

 

I generally geocache by mountain bike, and find the HCx is far better for me.

 

I can usually see the display, it is way way better than the Oregon in sunlight.

It is actually easier to operate, the buttons work better for me, swapping between map, trip meter and compass is easy, as is actually finding a cache.

 

The oregon touch screen does make scrolling the map easier than the little joystick though if you are planning a route on the fly

 

I have figured out the HCx and find the Oregon just too fiddly to use. The paperless caching is good except, the trouble going from navigation to cache hint and back makes it infuriating. The way the oregon stores tracks and waypoints is a bit tricky too: you would think it is more logical, but I find it more tricky. I bought GSAK, and it has some scripts to load up the oregon, but I couldn't get it working properly.

 

The batteries last longer in the HCx too.

 

In summary, having learned the HCx, I tried out the Oregon, and relegated it to the Geocaching Drawer, and went back to the HCx

 

The only problem with the HCx is Garmin used double sided tape to hold the rubber buttons and surround on. This comes off in no time. I cleaned all the glue off mine and superglued it back

 

*******Warning Boring Bit ahead***********

 

How I work is like this:

 

I find the caches, either singly or via a pocket query, and get them into the HCx.

I also get them into Google earth.

I then use Google Earth to plan my route as a path, and export the path as a KMZ. I then upload to the HCx using GPSUtility and it appears as a saved track.

 

Off i go caching, following the planned route, marking the caches as found. I take a couple of photos using my Cannon Ixus too.

 

When I get home, I delete the planned track, and any unfound caches.

I plug the Ixus into the Pc and press the blue button, this downloads the photos into a folder named by date.

I now download the recorded track and found geocaches using EasyGPS as a GPX, and save in the folder I just made. I then use GPX2GE (because I paid for it once) or GPSBabel to change to a KMZ and marvel at the days performance in Google Earth.

I can also geotag the photos with Geosetter, and upload to Panoramio for inclusion in Google Earth.

Edited December 31, 2009 by facade66

[+SRTmike08]

OK, After some searching through the Garmin blogs and forums I found that the Dakota does indeed recognize the heart rate monitors.

 

Refering to my other question, here is the quote on "Performance" from GPSfix. My question again is has this been debunked? Improved via firmware? Is it still experiencing more "noise" than the Oregon?

 

" GPS Performance

Even though I believe the GPS chipset is shared with the Oregon the antenna design may not be because of the Dakota’s smaller form factor. I’ve run through a few head-to-head tests and the Dakota does have more track noise and variation than the Oregon. Before I draw any conclusions though I’ll have to do more testing to determine if the Dakota might be a little less sensitive than the Oregon. The Dakota has the same excellent fast lock performance as the Oregon does, once you’ve locked the first time and established the HotFix database the unit typically acquires satellite lock before it displays the map page."

 

I cant say for 100% sure weather or not its better but here is what I can tell you.

 

Typically on the GPS screen it reports that my accuracy is 8ft with waas and around 10-11 feet without. I have recorded several geocaching trips as well as walks I normally take. The tracks have matched up with Google Earth very well. I have not been a victim yet of the drift problems I have read about.

 

Again I am no professional just telling you my experiences with the unit.

 

Edit: O and by the way I am currently running the 2.41 beta software for the gps im not sure if that fixed any of the tracking problems or not but iv been using without problems and really enjoy the added features.

Edited December 31, 2009 by SRTmike08

[+cliptwings]

I have both an Oregon 200 and a Dakota 10. These are similar to the Oregon 300 and Dakota 20, except the 200 does not have compass or altimeter, and the 10 does not have compass, altimeter or SD card slot. Comparing the Oregon to the Dakota: Oregon has more capability, having the ability to store pictures and go after Wherigo caches. It also has a bigger, higher resolution screen, and it has the SD memory card slot. The advantages I see in the Dakota are a brighter screen and longer battery life. If you get the Dakota 20, the only advantage I see the Oregon having is the larger screen, picture storage, and Wherigo caches. If I had to get rid of one tomorrow, I think I would keep the Dakota. I really like the brighter screen and long (15 hour) battery life. I would suggest going to a store (REI, Sports Authority) where you can look at them all at the same time.

[+aldoglen]

I bought the Dakota 10 a couple of months ago, I didn't want to go too expensive in the event the family didn't like geocaching. From my experience the 10 works pretty good, although there have been times when I wander around in the vicinity of the Cache unable to get the GPS to put me over the cache location , other times it takes me right to where I need to go. So from a price perspective, the Dakota has worked good for me, but I do intend to upgrade after using my Dakota for a year or so.

[+ecanderson]

I bought the Dakota 10 a couple of months ago, I didn't want to go too expensive in the event the family didn't like geocaching. From my experience the 10 works pretty good, although there have been times when I wander around in the vicinity of the Cache unable to get the GPS to put me over the cache location , other times it takes me right to where I need to go. So from a price perspective, the Dakota has worked good for me, but I do intend to upgrade after using my Dakota for a year or so.

I know owners of eTrex and 60 series units that have never turned on their mag compass, and you didn't get on with the Dakota 10. The situation you describe above is exactly why I use mine a great deal. If need be, I can back away 30' in two or three directions and get a good idea by triangulating by eyeball. Works well when I back out from under tree cover, away from a bridge, cliff face, etc. -- anywhere that the local terrain and structures are messing with satellite coverage.

 

That's one of the big reasons that I opted for the Dakota 20 vs. the 10. The 3-axis compass works as advertised, so it doesn't require holding the unit so level as was the case with my Summit HC. The only downside is that ALL of Garmin's units with a mag compass suffer from direction drift as the battery voltage drops. At about 50% capacity, I find it necessary to recal, and again when I toss in the fresh ones. If I have enough spare NiMH with me, I keep replacing them when they get to 75%, and then I don't seem to have to mess with calibration.

[Pajaholic]

The Dakota will still have some visibility issues on handlebars; it won't be as bright as a cell phone. But that's the one I'd go for. You can now add custom maps like topos and aerial photos to the Dakota and Oregon series. That's reason enough alone to go for that over the older Vista HCx.

Many thanks for that. I'm not so sure that custom maps are an issue for the Vista HCx where I live since TalkyToaster's maps basted on OSM are routable, topo, and available for both devices. Also, someone recently posted a utility that lets you access Ordnance Survey mapping for free via the Bing interface - although you only get a relatively small area at a time.

 

That said, I suspect you can help with some more info WRT the Dakota. I have butterfly bars and finding somewhere for the mount might be an issue. From Garmin's product description on their website, it isn't clear whether you can swivel the mount (e.g. to fit the GPSr on the stem) or whether it's fixed (so you have to use a horizontal section of handlebar). Can you help with more detail of the mount?

 

TIA,

 

Geoff

Edited January 2, 2010 by Pajaholic

[+Redwoods Mtn Biker]

It's a simple zip tie mount that can go on the bars or stem (if it's long enough). It's the same mount as the one used for the Oregon. It can be adjusted in one plane...

 

https://buy.garmin.com/shop/shop.do?pID=11411

 

I'm not sure if that's exactly the info you were after, but hopefully it helps.

[Pajaholic]

I'm not sure if that's exactly the info you were after, but hopefully it helps.

That's what I was afraid of. It looks like you can swivel it in the same plane as the bar on which it's mounted. Unfortunately, my stem's at a bit of an angle and the GPSr would be unreadable in that plane, so I'd need to either buy a third-party mount or use a Topeak X-Tender, Minoura SwingGrip, or similar.

 

Thanks again,

 

Geoff

[+Redwoods Mtn Biker]

Here's a custom adjustable mount someone created...

 

http://2-epic.com/?p=981