Yet another "What is the best GPS" thread

[+===sgb]

I'm contemplating a new GPS, but my requirements are probably a bit different from most folks. Maybe you-all can advise? (the big wants are at the end)

 

I currently have a 2005 Garmin Etrex. I am very happy with its functions, but not its spec.

 

I like its display of many waypoints, its breadcrumb trail, its scalable and rotatable "view".

 

I don't like the fact that the "I'm here" cursor and the waypoint cursors are all incredibly chunky and obscure each other - would much prefer fine crosshairs. (Its nice having the waypoints named.)

 

I would prefer a larger display area with the "I'm here" cursor more central - you go round a corner and a target waypoint dispappears off screen unless you change scale.

 

I would prefer an easier way of entering waypoints manually - I don't need computer download - but all the "next, select, up up up up select" to change one digit is painful.

 

I like that it is weatherproof and has a backlight for dark conditions.

 

Long battery life is preferred. Batteries must be replaceable in the field.

 

An accurate compass that works even when no satellite would be nice.

 

I rarely use altitude, but that's nice too.

 

THEN THE BIG ONES...

 

I hate that it has lousy accuracy in trees and urbans with medium (let alone tall) buildings. I NEED MORE ACCURACY. Too often I've got "47m accuracy" and I think that even that is optimistic. I walk up a path and back down the same path and the "two trails" are often 20m or more apart.

 

I do NOT need or want maps, cameras, trip planners, cafe recommendations or any of the other "helpful" gadgets. I just want to know where I am and where the cache is as easily as possible.

 

===

 

I read good reviews of thing like the Oregon 550, but I suspect that those are mainly raves about the maps etc. Not what I want.

 

Can you help?

[Motorcycle_Mama]

Moving to the GPS and Technology forum.

[+ecanderson]

Can you help?

 

If you don't need a camera, the 550 is overkill. If anything, you should be considering the 450. It will address the following:

 

• I NEED MORE ACCURACY. Does better than what you owned, and as well as any of the others they're offering now.
• I do NOT need or want maps, cameras, trip planners, cafe recommendations or any of the other "helpful" gadgets. The 450 86's the camera. Stay away from the T models (e.g., 450T and 550T) as you're paying for the extra topos with those, and you can get them for free if you ever want them.
• I like its display of many waypoints, its breadcrumb trail, its scalable and rotatable "view". View doesn't rotate. All else covered.
• I would prefer a larger display area with the "I'm here" cursor more central - you go round a corner and a target waypoint dispappears off screen unless you change scale. Big improvement over what you had.
• I would prefer an easier way of entering waypoints manually Very fast with touch screen. "Mark Waypoint" and start punching numbers off the 10 digit pad.
• I like that it is weatherproof and has a backlight for dark conditions. Weatherproof and has backlight. Works better in dark than half light, though.
• Long battery life is preferred. Batteries must be replaceable in the field. Guess we'd have to define "long". The cells I use give me most of a good 8 hour day. Easy to replace a pair of AA if needed.
• An accurate compass that works even when no satellite would be nice. Even 3 axis - you don't have to hold it dead flat for it to read properly.
• I rarely use altitude, but that's nice too. As they say in the spaghetti sauce commercial, "It's in there".

Edited January 15, 2011 by ecanderson

[+===sgb]

If you don't need a camera, the 550 is overkill. If anything, you should be considering the 450. It will address the following:

 

• I like its display of many waypoints, its breadcrumb trail, its scalable and rotatable "view". View doesn't rotate. All else covered.

 

Maybe the improved accuracy will eliminate the need for a rotating display. I have the display set to "point ahead". Then for problem caches - eg the edge of woods - I can walk into the open field and walk "directly towards the cache from "over there", then do it again from "over here" and see where my paths intersect. If I can just go to spot "X" then I expect I can do without.

 

Thanks. Comments?

[+dfx]

Maybe the improved accuracy will eliminate the need for a rotating display. I have the display set to "point ahead". Then for problem caches - eg the edge of woods - I can walk into the open field and walk "directly towards the cache from "over there", then do it again from "over here" and see where my paths intersect. If I can just go to spot "X" then I expect I can do without.

 

Thanks. Comments?

 

well, the map view does rotate. i don't know how it works on the etrex, but on the oregon you have the choice between "north up" and "track up", with the latter being whatever direction you're heading or facing. you just can't rotate the map in an arbitrary direction.

 

i would also recommend the 450. however, you should realize that when it comes to reception, even an etrex H will have better reception than your etrex, so you can just opt for a cheaper/simpler option if the 450 is too expensive for you.

[+===sgb]

i would also recommend the 450. however, you should realize that when it comes to reception, even an etrex H will have better reception than your etrex, so you can just opt for a cheaper/simpler option if the 450 is too expensive for you.

 

OK Thanks. So the view rotates the same way that my etrex does.

Is there a difference in sensitivity/accuracy between a 450 and an H? I desire the more accurate one, cheapness is secondary.