Oregon, Dakota or MemoryMap?

[+Guanajuato]

Until a couple of weeks ago, I've been using a PocketPC, bluetooth GPS and GeoScout for all my caching needs. The pocketPC has expired - battery holds charge for only a couple of hours, even when switched off. A new battery has made no difference - there's something fundamentally wrong with it. As its about 4 years old, maybe its just dead! I've tried caching with Geoshrine and Trekbuddy on my Phone, but the update rate just doesn't cut it. Useful for the cache details and as a backup, just in case.

 

I'm wondering what to get as a replacement.

 

The Oregon seems the 'standard', but the Dakota is cheaper for what seems essentially the same spec (Dakota 20 Vs Oregon 200). Other than the screen size, is there any REAL difference in functions & usability? I've seen Oregon 300s for less than the 200s - again, what are the practical differences?

 

The other interesting bit of kit is the new Memory Map Adventurer 2800. The advantage is getting OS Maps (I'm in the UK) roughly the same price as the Oregons that don't have it (but can be added later). But it doesn't seem to have the paperless caching functions. It seems like its almost a locked-down PocketPC, so I wonder if I could install GeoScout on it??? I HAVE found a place that sells the Oregon 300 with OS Maps for only £40 more than the cheapest without maps, which is VERY tempting. But its still nearly £100 more than the cheapest Dakota.

 

From reading recent posts, I think I could scan OS Maps and use them as custom maps on the Dakota 20. I'm not clear whether the Oregon 200/300 would support the custom maps.

 

I'm leaning towards the Dakota 20 as its the cheapest option and has all the features I need (I think!).

 

Any advice/help would be much appreciated.

[+fegan]

Dakota doesn't do Wherigo, Oregon does.

[+bwmick]

both units support custom maps, I was pleasantly surprised how easy they were to create and use.

[+Redwoods Mtn Biker]

The Dakota has lower resolution, but better screen visibility.

[+guilliamus5]

I bought MemoryMAp Adventurer in December. Tricky to use but once mastered nice bit of kit. Big problem is fragility. First proper day out and screen cracked as I was scrolling map. MemoryMap insist I broke it so no repair or replacement. I do not recommend Adventurer 2800. Very expensive mistake. Will stick with iPhone app in future which is much easier to use and more robust.

 

 

 

Until a couple of weeks ago, I've been using a PocketPC, bluetooth GPS and GeoScout for all my caching needs. The pocketPC has expired - battery holds charge for only a couple of hours, even when switched off. A new battery has made no difference - there's something fundamentally wrong with it. As its about 4 years old, maybe its just dead! I've tried caching with Geoshrine and Trekbuddy on my Phone, but the update rate just doesn't cut it. Useful for the cache details and as a backup, just in case.

 

I'm wondering what to get as a replacement.

 

The Oregon seems the 'standard', but the Dakota is cheaper for what seems essentially the same spec (Dakota 20 Vs Oregon 200). Other than the screen size, is there any REAL difference in functions & usability? I've seen Oregon 300s for less than the 200s - again, what are the practical differences?

 

The other interesting bit of kit is the new Memory Map Adventurer 2800. The advantage is getting OS Maps (I'm in the UK) roughly the same price as the Oregons that don't have it (but can be added later). But it doesn't seem to have the paperless caching functions. It seems like its almost a locked-down PocketPC, so I wonder if I could install GeoScout on it??? I HAVE found a place that sells the Oregon 300 with OS Maps for only £40 more than the cheapest without maps, which is VERY tempting. But its still nearly £100 more than the cheapest Dakota.

 

From reading recent posts, I think I could scan OS Maps and use them as custom maps on the Dakota 20. I'm not clear whether the Oregon 200/300 would support the custom maps.

 

I'm leaning towards the Dakota 20 as its the cheapest option and has all the features I need (I think!).

 

Any advice/help would be much appreciated.

[+Marky]

First proper day out and screen cracked as I was scrolling map. MemoryMap insist I broke it so no repair or replacement. I do not recommend Adventurer 2800. Very expensive mistake.

OMG! That has to be the worst customer service report I've heard about a GPS unit intended for outdoor use. They can't hope to survive with support like that. Did they tell you this after physically inspecting the unit, or did they just tell you this over the phone/email?

 

--Marky

[+jopasm]

I just ordered a Dakota 20 as an upgrade from a 60cx. I wanted a smaller unit with paperless caching and a touch screen. An oregon was just too pricey - it does have a larger screen and higher resolution screen, but I played with a Dakota in a local store the other day and I didn't have a problem with it.

 

The Dakota will have a brighter screen than any X00 (200, 300, 400) Oregon model, although the X50 Oregon units may be comparable (450 & 550).

 

The free maps available for the garmin units and the ability to load my own custom maps really convinced me to go with the Garmin.

[+StarBrand]

Where are you finding the Dakota 20 for less than an Oregon 200??

 

....The Oregon seems the 'standard', but the Dakota is cheaper for what seems essentially the same spec (Dakota 20 Vs Oregon 200). Other....

[+jopasm]

Where are you finding the Dakota 20 for less than an Oregon 200??

 

I'd like to know too. I wonder if they meant the Oregon 300, the Dakota 20 seems like a smaller Oregon 300 with a lower resolution, but brighter, screen.