No. of Geocaches in GPSMAP 62S?

[+funigalo]

We're thinking of upgrading our Garmin VistaC to either the GPSMAP 62S (or Oregon 450) based purely on the number of geocaches that can be stored in the unit, as well as switching to paperless geocaching. The VistaC is limited to 500 caches/waypoints (combined) which is just not enough when extended cycle touring and no access to a PC is available.

 

I've read on some forums that the GPSMAP 62S (and possible the Oregon 450) can have 5000 geocaches (with all descriptions, logs, etc) as well as 2000 waypoints stored! This would be ideal, and then the maps could be stored on the MicroSD Card. Could somebody with the unit(s) please confirm if this is the case. Thanks.

[+comphelp]

Garmin say 2000 in their documentation. Many people have reported here that they get 5000 in last few Garmin models.

 

I've got ~2400 in my 62S.

 

Having come from a 60CSx previously and just got a 62S, paperless caching is awesome!

 

EDIT: I see you're a neighbour too The 2400 caches is all within 1000km of Perth.

Edited August 15, 2010 by comphelp

[+Red90]

2000 waypoints PLUS 5000 geocaches.

[+funigalo]

Thanks Guys! Seems like the 62S is the way to go.

[+randco]

I am curious as to why you need to load so many geocaches/waypoints?

[+funigalo]

Hi randco.

 

The reason to load so many caches is just to have them available! We've been caught out before where we start a month long cycle tour with a route in mind, and have all the caches along the route loaded (up to a max of 500). In NZ that was allowing about 4km each side of the proposed route which isn't much. We set out knowing that we would only do a small fraction of these!

 

Two weeks into the tour we decided to change the route based on people we met and other advice received. No more geocaching as we don't access the internet when we are away (and even then we would have to manually enter the coords which is just tedious). It would have been nice to have more caches loaded just so we had the option. I must say that 5000 seems a bit over the top, but hey, that's just a limit.

 

With this paperless geocaching, it's even better as you don't have to print out the info when there's only a small chance of you actually trying to find them. It's all about options I guess.

[+randco]

Hi randco.

 

The reason to load so many caches is just to have them available! We've been caught out before where we start a month long cycle tour with a route in mind, and have all the caches along the route loaded (up to a max of 500). In NZ that was allowing about 4km each side of the proposed route which isn't much. We set out knowing that we would only do a small fraction of these!

 

Two weeks into the tour we decided to change the route based on people we met and other advice received. No more geocaching as we don't access the internet when we are away (and even then we would have to manually enter the coords which is just tedious). It would have been nice to have more caches loaded just so we had the option. I must say that 5000 seems a bit over the top, but hey, that's just a limit.

 

With this paperless geocaching, it's even better as you don't have to print out the info when there's only a small chance of you actually trying to find them. It's all about options I guess.

 

Okay, I understand. Thanks for taking the time to educate me. I do a 500 cache PQ every Friday. I open the file using GSAK then I export the .gpx file to my PDA and send the waypoints from GSAK to my 60CSx. I have a laptop with all of the information on it but I don't take it caching.

 

The Mrs. and I are planning to purchase a motorhome in the very near future. Hopefully with the wifi capability of the laptop we can update or GPS/PDA information when we settle in a campground for the evening. At least that's the plan.

 

Thanks again,

 

randco

[+ecanderson]

I am curious as to why you need to load so many geocaches/waypoints?

For most of us, it doesn't happen often, but it happens. I define "opportunistic caching" as my being in a place that happens to have a cache. Took a recent trip to Europe and a portion of the itinerary in some countries was not well defined (shore excursions) and were in high density cache areas. The more I could load, the better the chance I had at finding one near whatever my current position.

 

Classic example from another trip was Frankfurt. A load of 500 there won't even get you from the center of town to the airport. That's an issue in many major metro areas where you don't know for certain where you'll be all the time, and with a few spare minutes on your hands, it's always nice to see what might be nearby. Heck, it's even more dense here in the Denver area. Anyone visiting our metro area would need a load of well over 2000 unless they knew exactly where they planned to be.