Jump to content

Garmin Montana


Recommended Posts

Other than padding for protection, I think size and performance of batteries is a large part of this. I would be upset if Garmin stops supporting AA batteries because they are inexpensive and convenient.

Actually AA Alkaline are not inexpensive. I used the Lithium Ion for awhile and while they cost twice as much that lasted about 4 times longer so are actually cheaper. In addition the recycle impact less than Alkaline so if they disallow Alkaline for use in the device they are going Green and that is goo.

 

I just checked the manual and you can use Alkaline, Lithium or NIMH. Although with the 16 hours you are supposed to get and recharging each night I will probably only carry two batteries with me when I go out.

Sorry, I should have clarified that AA NiMH are cheaper. And the AA form factor is convenient because if I ran out of charged NiMH, I can easily pop into pretty much any store and get alkalines.

 

I wonder how much Garmin plans to sell a replacement battery for. The LiIon battery for a Nuvi 500 is about $30. A generic replacement probably costs less, but I've had very limited success with generic replacements with my digital cameras.

Probably similar to the magellan explorist series, I don't remember for sure what the Li-on batt from magellan was but I think it was around $70.00 Motorola had one that sold for anywhere from $10.00 to about $20.00.

The Motorola batts lasted about as long as the Magellan did

Link to comment

Here are FCC photo's of the interior. The antenna looks similar to the antenna found on the eTrex line (patch). I was hoping that, given the size, they would have a Quad Helix.

 

Do you have a link to the FCC site page?

 

Photo's can be found in this thread here: FCC Pics of interior

 

I've seen those, thats the post I quoted. I was hoping there was more of a write up so we could figure out which GPS chip they used.

Link to comment

Well, I returned my 62s (didn't like the buttons and the screen resolution was dissapointing) and sold my PN-40 so I have cash in hand for a 650. I'll definitely be picking one up the day of release. Lets hope it's just like an Oregon with a bigger and brighter screen.

 

Looking at the pics of this on the FCC site, it looks like the Li-Ion battery is going to be charged inside the unit. I looked but couldn't see an external charging cradle for it.

Hopefully it will charge from either the computer USB cable or the 12 volt car adapter. That way it would be able to be used day to day and not have to be opened up to change batteries.

Link to comment

I am guessing it charges from either. On the Garmin site they list items in the box:

 

Montana 650

Lithium-ion battery pack

USB cable

AC charger

Quick start manuals

Owner's manual on disk

 

They also have an accessory (vehicle power cable, not the mount) that is USB.

 

The manual doesn't say either way.

 

I will miss the caribiner and if the disk is one of those small ones I will have to download the manual since my laptop has slot drive and can't handle them.

Edited by Walts Hunting
Link to comment

Can anyone with a 78 report on the acquisition and lock in challenging conditions?

 

The 78s was rock solid when I tested it. Some of my testing was done in fairly tight coves with dense overhead canopy. It was actually significantly better than the 62s in terms of tracklog accuracy.

 

Thanks Rich, I just viewed your review and tracklog results. The results compared to the 62 seem counter intuitive given the reputation of the quad helix antenna. Perhaps the STM certesio chips work better when paired with a patch/ceramic for whatever reason than paired with a quad helix. Either way, it's encouraging news for the reception of the Montana.

Link to comment

Yeah, I was definitely surprised early on when the 62s wasn't as good. It's improved a lot since then, but the 78s was great from the start.

 

What he said X2....

 

I got a 78S very shortly after Rich did and have been pleasantly surprise from the get go. I have a 76CSx , a 550, and a 78S and map a lot of trails I never thought that the Quad Helix could be beat, but actual "on the ground" results have proven that opinion incorrect. It's probably more sensitive, but also more susceptible to multipath error as well as erroneous points logged while stopped.

 

I recently lost (HD crash and simultaneous Ext HD failure) a track file that had 13 copies of the exact same single track trail done with multiple GPSs, on multiple days, X ant or not, sometimes carrying as many as 3 GPSs at once. That file clearly showed the unit differences and suggested what needed to be done differently to improve track quality.

 

Of the three units mentioned above, all carried simultaneously, the "as logged" tracklog of the 78 will require the least editing to accurately represent the actual path.....that pretty well says it all.

Link to comment

That is real good news thanks for the effort. Although my Oregon has gotten much better over time.

The Montana is looking better all the time.

@WH, Definitely the Oregon has greatly improved over time. The lost file that I mentioned above very visibly showed the progression from no WAAS thru v 2.6 and subsequent updates to present. I sent several comparison track files (76CSx,550 at the time) to Garmin and they (support) called with questions, so they must have been actually looking at the results.

Link to comment

Yeah, I was definitely surprised early on when the 62s wasn't as good. It's improved a lot since then, but the 78s was great from the start.

 

What he said X2....

 

I got a 78S very shortly after Rich did and have been pleasantly surprise from the get go. I have a 76CSx , a 550, and a 78S and map a lot of trails I never thought that the Quad Helix could be beat, but actual "on the ground" results have proven that opinion incorrect. It's probably more sensitive, but also more susceptible to multipath error as well as erroneous points logged while stopped.

 

I recently lost (HD crash and simultaneous Ext HD failure) a track file that had 13 copies of the exact same single track trail done with multiple GPSs, on multiple days, X ant or not, sometimes carrying as many as 3 GPSs at once. That file clearly showed the unit differences and suggested what needed to be done differently to improve track quality.

 

Of the three units mentioned above, all carried simultaneously, the "as logged" tracklog of the 78 will require the least editing to accurately represent the actual path.....that pretty well says it all.

How were you carrying that many units simultaneously? Are you sure you didn't merely have the 78 in the most favorable carrying position?

 

Quad-helix antennas might have such a good rep because they are often in their optimal orientation when hanging from a belt clip. Patch antennas aren't. I know my Oregon performs MUCH better if I'm holding it flat than if I have it hanging from a 'biner. Similarly, my iBlue 747A+ performs very well when velcroed to the top of my backpack - not so well in any other situation.

 

As to the weight compared to an iPhone - double the weight is about what I'd expect for the shock/vibe/water intrusion ruggedization this device has. (Actually, only doubling the weight is pretty good...) Garmin markets their units as waterproof, nearly all cell phones will have their warranty voided by a humid day. (Those immersion detection stickers are WAY too sensitive. I've seen them go red on numerous devices that were never actually immersed.)

 

Rugged or lightweight - pick one.

Link to comment

Yes, I'm very sure that it wasn't just a "one in a row" for the 78.

 

After MUCH experimentation on multiple trips and based on results comparison here's how the three are carried.

76CSx -carried vertical, inside the pack , close to the top center.

78S- carried in a GPS Outfitters case on outside on top of pack. It is laying partially flat face up.

550- carried in GPS Outfitter case (inserted face out) attached high up on a shoulder strap of the back pack which also lays it partially flat. Hiking in canyons, I carry it on the shoulder "away" from the closest canyon wall. In that position, my head blocks some of the "reflected" signals bouncing off the closest canyon wall, which reduces the bad signals without affecting the good ones. If the trail changes sides in the canyon, then the 550 GPS position is also changed to the the other shoulder.

 

Really skinny slot canyons ?? Nothing works...........

Link to comment

I already use the 550T and was waiting for something great to come along. The 650's series appears to be a disappointment. The Lithium batteries are great IF you charge them everynight and IF they hold to 16 hours. Garmin said the 3 AA are either (1)an additional 22 hours or (2) last 6 hours making it a total of 22 hours. I don't know which is correct? I get about 6-8 hours out my 2-AA rechareables. Doesn't seem logical that Lithium would not last longer than normal AA batteries.

 

I was hoping for a built in 1:24,000 topo map as the 1:100,000 is pretty much worthless and provides very little useful information. I was hoping they would at least have a slot for 2 micro SD cards so both Navigator and detailed topo could be added. The newest Magellan came out with a built in 1:24,000 topo.

 

The bulk would be a big factor while hiking or carrying in my pocket.

 

The MSR price is high. I think I will buy a 450 and put detail topo on it and use it while hiking.

Link to comment

While I agree somewhat with your overall sentiments regarding the Montana series, I feel as though you may have been somewhat disengenuous on two of your specific criticisms.

 

1) Battery life (Garmin website) "Battery life: up to 16 hours (lithium-ion); up to 22 hours (AA batteries)" I'm not sure how to interperet that other than the obvious.

 

2) Preloaded 24K Topo's. While the newer Magellans may come with preloaded 24K representations, and the 100K on the Garmin "T" models may be a bit lacking in many departments, the ability to load (and make) freely available 24K representations among other useful maps is a big bonus in my opinion.

 

Bulky: agreed

Overpriced: agreed

Link to comment
If we get preloaded 24Ks for the US, it will first appear on a new Oregon series.

Two barriers:

  • Size, because Garmin uses 20' contours, their maps are twice as large as most other 24K maps
  • Segments, Garmin uses 15' map segments, so for the 4-corner states alone there are ~1800 map segments, the 4000 limit fast approaches

 

Clearly Garmin can solve both, but I don't see it happening soon. Also, there will be an Idaho or Arizona series next, not a new Oregon. ;)

Link to comment

I already use the 550T and was waiting for something great to come along. The 650's series appears to be a disappointment. The Lithium batteries are great IF you charge them everynight and IF they hold to 16 hours. Garmin said the 3 AA are either (1)an additional 22 hours or (2) last 6 hours making it a total of 22 hours. I don't know which is correct? I get about 6-8 hours out my 2-AA rechareables. Doesn't seem logical that Lithium would not last longer than normal AA batteries.

 

I was hoping for a built in 1:24,000 topo map as the 1:100,000 is pretty much worthless and provides very little useful information. I was hoping they would at least have a slot for 2 micro SD cards so both Navigator and detailed topo could be added. The newest Magellan came out with a built in 1:24,000 topo.

 

The bulk would be a big factor while hiking or carrying in my pocket.

 

The MSR price is high. I think I will buy a 450 and put detail topo on it and use it while hiking.

 

I would agree with this and I wouldn't want to go back to a Patch Ant.....whats with that, why not Quad Helix.

We've been enjoying the 450....looking forward to testing the new software download.

Link to comment

 

I was hoping for a built in 1:24,000 topo map as the 1:100,000 is pretty much worthless and provides very little useful information. I was hoping they would at least have a slot for 2 micro SD cards so both Navigator and detailed topo could be added. The newest Magellan came out with a built in 1:24,000 topo.

 

Why? MicroSDHCs are readily available at sizes of 8GB and 16GB (I think even 32 exists but these are expensive). More than enough for Navigator (1-2 GB) and detailed topo.

 

Or are you unaware that Garmin updated Oregons/Colorados long ago to allow arbitrarily named .img files? (Dakotas supported it from the get-go, same for Montana.)

Link to comment

I think that if Garmin updated the 100K Topo Map roads (got rid of the horribly innaccurate Tiger 2000 data) the "T" models would be much more enticing even for people who own the 24K series for thier area. Why? Because when using BirdsEye aerial imagery, the 24K topo information is nice but the dense topo lines can many times clutter the screen in steep terrain. Often and at some zoom levels you can't even see the aerial imagery. In Montana (the state) it's a constant problem.

 

It would be nice to have a few isolines, just enough to give you a feel of terrain over the imagery, with up to date roads. If Garmin does this I might consider forking the extra dough for the "T".

Edited by yogazoo
Link to comment
I was hoping for a built in 1:24,000 topo map as the 1:100,000 is pretty much worthless and provides very little useful information. I was hoping they would at least have a slot for 2 micro SD cards so both Navigator and detailed topo could be added. The newest Magellan came out with a built in 1:24,000 topo.

Why? MicroSDHCs are readily available at sizes of 8GB and 16GB (I think even 32 exists but these are expensive). More than enough for Navigator (1-2 GB) and detailed topo.

32GB are available at Class 2 speeds for about $55.

 

Personally I'm glad Garmin doesn't force me to buy maps but offers a choice. I can get 24k separately if I want to. I'm not sure what's the motivation for wanting Garmin to include the maps. I'm guessing:

 

1. Price - that it'll be offered for less than what it costs to get them separately

2. Having the whole US on 24k - right now you need to get regions separately

 

Personally I don't need to have the entire US 24k but I guess there are people who would find it useful.

Link to comment
I'm not sure what's the motivation for wanting Garmin to include the maps. I'm guessing:

 

1. Price - that it'll be offered for less than what it costs to get them separately

2. Having the whole US on 24k - right now you need to get regions separately

 

3. Ease of use. Lots of people are technologically impaired and couldn't load a map onto their GPS to save their lives, or simply can't be bothered to do so and would rather spend some more $$$ instead.

Link to comment

3. Ease of use. Lots of people are technologically impaired and couldn't load a map onto their GPS to save their lives, or simply can't be bothered to do so and would rather spend some more $$$ instead.

Thant's an excellent point. I would venture to guess this is the most important of all the reasons why people purchase the "T" models. The folks on this forum are often fairly well versed in technology and how to perform seemingly simple tasks. For the majority however this isn't the case. Some people don't want to fool around with software and all the nuances involved. Simple, topo's already loaded, no messing around with computers necessary.

Link to comment

Why? MicroSDHCs are readily available at sizes of 8GB and 16GB (I think even 32 exists but these are expensive). More than enough for Navigator (1-2 GB) and detailed topo.

 

Or are you unaware that Garmin updated Oregons/Colorados long ago to allow arbitrarily named .img files? (Dakotas supported it from the get-go, same for Montana.)

 

Yep. My Colorado has a 16 GB card (bought for $12..). I have All of CN China, China basemap, Worldwide basemap, MG Canada, Topo Canada and Ibycus Topo all on there at once plus a bunch of Birdseye.

Link to comment

 

Or are you unaware that Garmin updated Oregons/Colorados long ago to allow arbitrarily named .img files? (Dakotas supported it from the get-go, same for Montana.)

 

I don't understand what you mean about arbitrarily named img file. How does that work?

If I read his post correctly, he meant that the maps don't all have to be named "gmapsupp.img" - you can have multiple img files and selectively enable them.

Link to comment

I don't understand what you mean about arbitrarily named img file. How does that work?

If I read his post correctly, he meant that the maps don't all have to be named "gmapsupp.img" - you can have multiple img files and selectively enable them.

Sort of. You can't selectively enable actual files, the gps (at least my Oregon) loads everything that's in the right folder and has an img extension. Once the files are loaded you can toggle maps on and off from within the map setup menu as usual.

 

Here's an example of how arbitrary file names are useful - I have topo maps and a custom map that don't change very often and autorouting maps that change every week. I uploaded just the topo maps then renamed the gmapsupp.img file to topo.img, then I uploaded just my custom map and renamed the new gmapsupp.img to mine.img, now I can update the autorouting maps as often without disturbing either of the other 2 maps.

Link to comment

I already use the 550T and was waiting for something great to come along. The 650's series appears to be a disappointment. The Lithium batteries are great IF you charge them everynight and IF they hold to 16 hours. Garmin said the 3 AA are either (1)an additional 22 hours or (2) last 6 hours making it a total of 22 hours. I don't know which is correct? I get about 6-8 hours out my 2-AA rechareables. Doesn't seem logical that Lithium would not last longer than normal AA batteries.

 

I was hoping for a built in 1:24,000 topo map as the 1:100,000 is pretty much worthless and provides very little useful information. I was hoping they would at least have a slot for 2 micro SD cards so both Navigator and detailed topo could be added. The newest Magellan came out with a built in 1:24,000 topo.

 

The bulk would be a big factor while hiking or carrying in my pocket.

 

The MSR price is high. I think I will buy a 450 and put detail topo on it and use it while hiking.

 

I would agree with this and I wouldn't want to go back to a Patch Ant.....whats with that, why not Quad Helix.

We've been enjoying the 450....looking forward to testing the new software download.

 

You do realize the 450 is a patch and not quad helix. Only the 60, 62 and Colorado use the quad helix.

 

They are going to have to come way down on the MSR before I would even consider it.

Link to comment

I already use the 550T and was waiting for something great to come along. The 650's series appears to be a disappointment. The Lithium batteries are great IF you charge them everynight and IF they hold to 16 hours. Garmin said the 3 AA are either (1)an additional 22 hours or (2) last 6 hours making it a total of 22 hours. I don't know which is correct? I get about 6-8 hours out my 2-AA rechareables. Doesn't seem logical that Lithium would not last longer than normal AA batteries.

 

I was hoping for a built in 1:24,000 topo map as the 1:100,000 is pretty much worthless and provides very little useful information. I was hoping they would at least have a slot for 2 micro SD cards so both Navigator and detailed topo could be added. The newest Magellan came out with a built in 1:24,000 topo.

 

The bulk would be a big factor while hiking or carrying in my pocket.

 

The MSR price is high. I think I will buy a 450 and put detail topo on it and use it while hiking.

 

I would agree with this and I wouldn't want to go back to a Patch Ant.....whats with that, why not Quad Helix.

We've been enjoying the 450....looking forward to testing the new software download.

 

You do realize the 450 is a patch and not quad helix. Only the 60, 62 and Colorado use the quad helix.

 

They are going to have to come way down on the MSR before I would even consider it.

 

The 450 is actually a ceremac ant and is rated somewhere between the Patch and Quad.......if the 450 had the Quad I think it would be almost perfect.

Garmin just won't put all the good stuff in one package ( if it weren't for the bugs and case issues the 62S would seem to come close)

Link to comment

The 450 is actually a ceremac ant and is rated somewhere between the Patch and Quad.......if the 450 had the Quad I think it would be almost perfect.

Garmin just won't put all the good stuff in one package ( if it weren't for the bugs and case issues the 62S would seem to come close)

 

The problem with a Quad helix is there is no room in the x50 design to fit it.

 

photo.jpg

 

Link to comment

Got that part now thoight I might have go in and change names.

 

Is the name restricted to letters?

 

I assume each file has to comply with the 4000 tile limit

Might allow numbers, I haven't tried. I would suggest sticking with 8.3 filenames to be sure.

 

Obviously you need a recent Oregon/Colorado firmware for this. It was added sometime early 2010 I think? Maybe even late 2009?

Edited by Entropy512
Link to comment

Got that part now thoight I might have go in and change names.

 

Is the name restricted to letters?

 

I assume each file has to comply with the 4000 tile limit

Might allow numbers, I haven't tried. I would suggest sticking with 8.3 filenames to be sure.

 

Obviously you need a recent Oregon/Colorado firmware for this. It was added sometime early 2010 I think? Maybe even late 2009?

 

You can use numbers. I named my topo map "US Topo 24K East.img" and City Nav "CNNANT 2011-3.img" and I have no problem with my Oregon 550.

Link to comment
The 450 is actually a ceremac ant and is rated somewhere between the Patch and Quad...

Hmm? Educate me please on differnece between "patch" and "ceramic" antenna in this context?

 

Personally I would stop worrying about it. There is no evidence to show that the different antennas perform any differently in these units.

Link to comment
The 450 is actually a ceremac ant and is rated somewhere between the Patch and Quad...

Hmm? Educate me please on differnece between "patch" and "ceramic" antenna in this context?

Hardware - Garmin Oregon WikiNov 3, 2010 ... According to Garmin the Oregon has neither a traditional patch or quad-helix antenna, the refer to is as a "ceramic antenna". ...

garminoregon.wikispaces.com/Hardware

 

Garmin GPSMAP 78 GPS Chipset - GPSFixJun 2, 2010 ... To that end the Oregon uses what is called a ceramic antenna whereas the GPSMAP 78 appears to use a Cirocomm patch antenna. ...

www.gpsfix.net/gpsmap78-internal-2/

 

Oregon WAAS Reception - Garmin Oregon Wiki20 posts - 11 authors - Last post: Jan 23, 2010

Some where I've seen it written that the PN-40 has a "Patch" type antenna. The Oregon has a "ceramic" antenna per Garmin. ...

garminoregon.wikispaces.com/message/view/home/19152821

 

The Garmin Outdoor GPS Information Resource - GPSFixTo that end the Oregon uses what is called a ceramic antenna whereas the GPSMAP 78 appears to use a Cirocomm patch antenna. I have not had the time yet to ...

www.gpsfix.net/page/8/

 

I had found a site ( Wiki ? )that had pictures and ratings of all three...the patch was lowest rated and quad the highest. I'll see if I can find it.

Link to comment

I had found a site ( Wiki ? )that had pictures and ratings of all three...the patch was lowest rated and quad the highest. I'll see if I can find it.

 

http://gpstracklog.com/2010/06/garmin-gpsmap-78s-review.html

 

78s w/Patch VS 60csx w/Quad Helix. In this test the patch (78s) wins over the tried and trusted 60csx. There are many other factors besides antenna type to consider when attempting to speculate on a unit's sensitivity/accuracy (both subjective terms). In the early days Rich Owings from GPStracklog (link above) noted that the 78s was "significantly better" than even the 62s.

 

While a Quad Helix antenna type may be more sensitive and omnidirectional than a patch in raw tests, the other factors such as chip type and firmware version seem to drown out any statistical performance differences. Antenna type is nothing to base a descision on in my opinion

Link to comment

I was surprised all of the responses I generated with my comments. No, I did not know that you could have larger than a 4GB microSD card. We kind of got off topic about the Montana. I do a lot of caching (almost everyday) and I didn't feel comfortable with the built in batteries lasting all day. I never get close to the 16 hours of battery life per Garmin Specs for any of their GPS. I didn't want to be somewhere where I couldn't use the Montana since those batteries need to be charged in the unit. Of course there is not much of a problem carrying 3-6 additional AA's. But I rotate rechargeables to keep them charged so I could find myself with discharged batteries or would have to use throw-aways.

 

I need CN for all 50 states but I do not need topo for all 50 states. I can load up the western states that I need and that should be okay 99.9% of the time. My comment was more directed to the lack of technology progress by Garmin. Electronics seem get more advanced with smaller units every couple of years with even a price decrease. The Montana didn't seem to make any major advancement but they increased their price with not much IMO to show for it. I would think they would try to match the competion instead of just keep using the 1:100,000 topo.

 

In rethinking about the Montana IMO it is more of a "NuviOregon" and not intended to upgrade the Oregon 550 series. Maybe a future model will have more advanced features.

 

The bottom line: I went to Cabela's today and bought an Oregon 450T for $299.99. I was going to buy just the 450 but they wanted $345 for that model. I plan using my new 450T for off roading/hiking and as a GPS for my wife when we are caching together. Thanks to Red90 and ceeG comments I have a free microSD slot for more detailed maps and maybe satellite imagery.

Edited by merlot
Link to comment
The 450 is actually a ceremac ant and is rated somewhere between the Patch and Quad...
...Educate me please on differnece between "patch" and "ceramic" antenna...
Personally I would stop worrying about it. There is no evidence to show that the different antennas perform any differently in these units.

I'm not worried about performance, just curious about Bamboozle implying "patch" and "ceramic" are different antenna types. I thought a ceramic antenna WAS a kind of patch antenna and wondered what he (or Garmin) was special or different about it.

Edited by Portland Cyclist
Link to comment

I don't understand what you mean about arbitrarily named img file. How does that work?

If I read his post correctly, he meant that the maps don't all have to be named "gmapsupp.img" - you can have multiple img files and selectively enable them.

Sort of. You can't selectively enable actual files, the gps (at least my Oregon) loads everything that's in the right folder and has an img extension. Once the files are loaded you can toggle maps on and off from within the map setup menu as usual.

 

Here's an example of how arbitrary file names are useful - I have topo maps and a custom map that don't change very often and autorouting maps that change every week. I uploaded just the topo maps then renamed the gmapsupp.img file to topo.img, then I uploaded just my custom map and renamed the new gmapsupp.img to mine.img, now I can update the autorouting maps as often without disturbing either of the other 2 maps.

 

Thanks for the info. I loaded some last night. First CN for NA which went fine. Then West 24K and changed the name to TOPO WA OR CA NV. I thought that name would show up on the Map Select page, instead it shows TOPO West (or something close). Since I am loading other TOPO'S (Southwest and NorthCentral) I was wondering if there was any way for the Map Select page to show the new name and not the disc name?

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...
×
×
  • Create New...