Jump to content

SDcard Question


Followers 0

Recommended Posts

I am looking to go paperless. I am seriously considering the Garmin gpsmap60

What I want to know is...can I copy and past the logs and clues form the geocache site to the sd card and then be able to view them on my gps?

 

Thanks

 

Nope - you need something more modern for that like a Colorado, Oregon or Dakota.

 

I am looking at the comparisons between the Colorado, and the 60, and the GPSMap 60 has better reviews.

If it doesnt work that way what is the card used for?

Also I dont think that I personally want a touch screen

Edited by Nuts-n-boelts
Link to comment

I am looking to go paperless. I am seriously considering the Garmin gpsmap60

What I want to know is...can I copy and past the logs and clues form the geocache site to the sd card and then be able to view them on my gps?

 

Thanks

 

Nope - you need something more modern for that like a Colorado, Oregon or Dakota.

 

I am looking at the comparisons between the Colorado, and the 60, and the GPSMap 60 has better reviews.

If it doesnt work that way what is the card used for?

 

Maps, POI's, tracks

Link to comment

I am looking at the comparisons between the Colorado, and the 60, and the GPSMap 60 has better reviews.

If it doesnt work that way what is the card used for?

Also I dont think that I personally want a touch screen

 

The well reviewed 60s are the 60CX and the 60CSX. The "S" adds a compass and altimeter. Both have removable microSDHC slots for up to 4GB mSDHCs. They also have high sensitivity receivers. Earlier ones don't.

 

I'd also consider an OR300. I've done side by side tests of a 60CSX and an OR300. Tracklog performance was comparable. The OR's downside is it's harder to see without a backlight, and it doesn't have genuine serial ports or an antenna connection. The touchscreen makes up for a lot though.

 

For geocacheing, the OR's probably better.

Edited by seldom_sn
Link to comment

I am looking at the comparisons between the Colorado, and the 60, and the GPSMap 60 has better reviews.

 

Yes, some people believe that the GPS performance of the 60csx was better. This WAS based on that unit using a Sirf receiver. Current model 60CSX units do not use the Sirf receiver any more, so any advantage it "Might" have had is gone assuming you buy a new unit.

 

For Geocaching, the Colorado is light years better than a 60Csx.

Link to comment
Yes, some people believe that the GPS performance of the 60csx was better. This WAS based on that unit using a Sirf receiver. Current model 60CSX units do not use the Sirf receiver any more, so any advantage it "Might" have had is gone assuming you buy a new unit.

It is also widely claimed that the quad helix antenna on the GPSMap series is superior to the patch antenna on the Oregon. I don't know how the antenna on the Colorado compares - can't seem to find information on it.

 

For geocaching paperless is the only way to go for me :(

Edited by Chrysalides
Link to comment
Yes, some people believe that the GPS performance of the 60csx was better. This WAS based on that unit using a Sirf receiver. Current model 60CSX units do not use the Sirf receiver any more, so any advantage it "Might" have had is gone assuming you buy a new unit.

It is also widely claimed that the quad helix antenna on the GPSMap series is superior to the patch antenna on the Oregon. I don't know how the antenna on the Colorado compares - can't seem to find information on it.

 

For geocaching paperless is the only way to go for me :(

 

The Oregon's amazing - I can turn it on miles from where it was last used and within 30 seconds it's got a fix and knows exactly where it is.

Link to comment

It is also widely claimed that the quad helix antenna on the GPSMap series is superior to the patch antenna on the Oregon. I don't know how the antenna on the Colorado compares - can't seem to find information on it.

 

For geocaching paperless is the only way to go for me :(

 

The Oregon has a ceramic antenna, not a patch. The Colorado has a quad helix.

 

Anyone that claims they KNOW there is a difference due to the antenna design is fabricating a complete guess. All three units use receiver made by different companies and the programing of those receivers is responsible for 99.9% of the quality of the signal. People need to be VERY careful reading posts and opinions as the performance of all these units changed dramatically with changes in firmware. The performance of all three units is night and day better with current firmware as compared to the firmware that they had when released. Reports by more or less unbiased source indicates that the performance of all three units with current firmware is basically the same with regard to the GPS receiver other than the Oregon still has WAAS problems (AFAIK).

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Followers 0
×
×
  • Create New...