Looking to upgrade

[+Davidandrebekah]

I picked up a Garmin Etrex Legend a while back to start geocaching with. It's done its job but I've gotten tired of it losing reception from just driving under a tree (slight exaggeration but its really frustrating). It also usually only has an accuracy rating of 40 ft. Only sometimes will it reach 20ft accuracy. I think it's a really older model. Maybe 2001 or around there. I'm looking to spend some more on a used unit (100-200 bucks). Some more mapping abilities would be awesome and accuracy and reception is the main priority. Which ones would you look at?

[+sword fern]

A good Dakota will suffice. You can get cheaper ones on ebay.

[+CacheFreakTim]

I picked up a Garmin Etrex Legend a while back to start geocaching with. It's done its job but I've gotten tired of it losing reception from just driving under a tree (slight exaggeration but its really frustrating). It also usually only has an accuracy rating of 40 ft. Only sometimes will it reach 20ft accuracy. I think it's a really older model. Maybe 2001 or around there. I'm looking to spend some more on a used unit (100-200 bucks). Some more mapping abilities would be awesome and accuracy and reception is the main priority. Which ones would you look at?

 

Any of the current Garmin eTrex units with an H in the name (ex. Vista HcX, Venture HC, etc...) will have high sensitivity receivers and will be more accurate under tree cover. As for mapping you will want to get a unit with expandable memory so you can add a bunch of maps. Many of the eTrex units can be found used for under $200. If you look around you might be able to find a used Garmin Dakota for under $200 as well as they are selling new for $230. Also keep in mind Garmin is about to launch a new line of eTrex units that will be Geocaching friendly in the next couple months. If you can hold off they might be worth waiting for. If not keep an eye out in the Garage Sale section of the forum for someone selling one.

[+Davidandrebekah]

I like the dakota a lot and i also like the price of it. Would that be as accurate as the 60csx because I know a guy with 12,000 finds and he uses the 60csx so it must be a pretty good gps. I know that the 60csx is not paperless but that's okay because that's not a top priority of mine.

[+CacheFreakTim]

I like the dakota a lot and i also like the price of it. Would that be as accurate as the 60csx because I know a guy with 12,000 finds and he uses the 60csx so it must be a pretty good gps. I know that the 60csx is not paperless but that's okay because that's not a top priority of mine.

 

I have went caching with people who have both the 60csx and the Dakota and found both to be very on par with each other. I wouldn't say from my experience that the 60 is anymore accurate than the Dakota's.

 

Also someone else just posted in another post that The GPS Store has the Dakota 20 on sale for $210 with free shipping. That is by far the best deal I have seen on them.

[+SilentWolf]

I love my Garmin Oregon.

[+SilentWolf]

Also David keep in mind that even with the "most accurate" gps' out there right now, you have to take into consideration the accuracy of the gps the person was using when they hid the cache. Now granted most of the time with the newer gps' accuracy is very good (Most will get within 10' accuracy). But, if you consider that your gps may get within 10 feet accuracy, and the person who hid the cache may have also had 10' accuracy, you now have a minimum 20' search area.

I've found most of the time the coordinates are very accurate and will get you within 10', but I've also had a few experiences where I've had to expand my search to 20 or 30 feet or more. (One particular one I remember was 80' from where my gps said it should be) I've had to train myself to use my gps to get me to "ground zero", then put it in my pocket and just start looking. I've had much more success this way than relying 100% on the coordinates.