Jump to content

60csx discontinued


John E Cache
Followers 0

Recommended Posts

My son was looking into geocaching and I was pointing him towards the 60CSx, which I love.........and then I found out they were discontinued!! Major bummer. Guess its on to the 62 series.

That's a great choice. I have one as well and I really enjoy it. You might also consider Garmin's newly available eTrex line (eTrex 10, 20, 30). Paperless and with all the bells and whistles but less costly than the 62s.

Link to comment

This is really a shame because the 60csx was and STILL IS the best GPS handheld around - maybe not on paperless geocaching or "modern" features, but in terms of accuracy and reliability.

 

And I'm not talking a personal opinion here. Recently read a review of the new eTrex 20 that included side by side tracking comparisons of an older 60csx (SiRF model, not MediaTek), the 62s, and the eTrex 20. I was a bit surprised to see 60csx was the most accurate of the bunch. The reviewer wrote it off to more mature firmware, but I think for now nobody has come up with a better combination than a SiRF III processor tied to a quad helix antenna.

Edited by Portland Cyclist
Link to comment

EC, the chipset is just one part of what I'm talking about. On paper sevral MTK and Cartesio chipsets look like they could also beat the older SiRF III too --but until you have the entire package in your hand (chipset, antenna, firmware, etc)

 

Relevant to geocaching users, is anyone making/selling an outdoorsy handheld, regardless of chipset) that actually DOES best the late, lamented 60csx in terms of accuracy? I know the faithful will jump in and say their own GPS is the best thing they've ever had, but I'd really be interested in seeing side-by-side comparisons rather than a venting of user's gut feelings.

 

PS: Speaking of things I'd be interested in seeing, did you ever corral that magic GPS that was perfectly accurate except for always being 30 feet off in one direction?

Link to comment

Negative. Owner moved once between retiring the unit and looking for it. His guess is that it's in his storage locker. I told him that if he EVER runs across it, I want first dibs. The locals even created a cache in its/his ?honor?: GC1HEHA

 

Back to our previously scheduled conversation ... something like the 60csx with the IV (vs the III) should outperform the 60csx.

Link to comment

EC, the chipset is just one part of what I'm talking about. On paper sevral MTK and Cartesio chipsets look like they could also beat the older SiRF III too --but until you have the entire package in your hand (chipset, antenna, firmware, etc)

 

Relevant to geocaching users, is anyone making/selling an outdoorsy handheld, regardless of chipset) that actually DOES best the late, lamented 60csx in terms of accuracy? I know the faithful will jump in and say their own GPS is the best thing they've ever had, but I'd really be interested in seeing side-by-side comparisons rather than a venting of user's gut feelings.

 

PS: Speaking of things I'd be interested in seeing, did you ever corral that magic GPS that was perfectly accurate except for always being 30 feet off in one direction?

I have a 60Cx with a SIRF111 chip and a 60CSx with a MediaTek chip. When geocaching with a friend, I'll use the 60CSx and my buddy uses the 60Cx. We'll go after the same cache but tend to go off in different directions and always ending up together at GZ. So, for basic geocaching, is there an appreciable difference in chipsets. I'm extremely pleased with both 60's (I also have a 62s and an Oregon 450) but I need to replace the 60Cx as I sheared off three buttons and damaged the case...still works great! My concern is that I may not get a refurb unit with a SIRF111 chipset. Should I be concerned?

Link to comment

[so, for basic geocaching, is there an appreciable difference in chipsets.

The most accurate GPS I own (bad word to use, but it has an exceptional lack of drift and excellent repeatability) is my old eTrex Summit HC (MediaTek chip). Don't know why. Wish the old bugger was paperless! Edited by ecanderson
Link to comment
...I need to replace the 60Cx ... My concern is that I may not get a refurb unit with a SIRF111 chipset. Should I be concerned?

Well... yes and no. I really do believe the 60csx/SiRF III version has not been surpassed by any currently shipping handheld in any reasonable price range. And you could probably try to hunt one up used from eBay rather than risk getting an M instead of S model from a vendor.

 

BUT - in practical terms? Nah -- the difference in accuracy & repeatability betwene an M or S based 60csx, or any newer MediaTek or Cartesio based device is probably not enough to affect most users, even geocachers. Geocachers in particular tend to forget this. It'd be nice if everyone posted spot-on coords -- but that just doesn't happen as often as you'd like.

Edited by Portland Cyclist
Link to comment
...I need to replace the 60Cx ... My concern is that I may not get a refurb unit with a SIRF111 chipset. Should I be concerned?

Well... yes and no. I really do believe the 60csx/SiRF III versdion has not been surpassed by any currently shipping handheld in any reasonable price range. And you could probably try to hunt one up used from eBay rather than risk getting an M instead of S model from a vendor.

 

BUT - in practical terms? Nah -- the difference in accuracy & repeatability betwene an M or S based 60csx, or any newer MediaTek or Cartesio based device is probably not enough to affect most users, even geocachers. Geocachers in particular tend to forget this. It'd be nice if everyone posted spot-on coords -- but that just doesn't happen as often as you'd like.

That's true. Many CO's are using smartphones to post coordinates and it's not too often that GZ is exactly at the posted coords. That being said, and as an aside, I've noticed some logs from geocachers saying the cache was off by 15 feet (or even less in some cases). I thought 30 feet was considered pretty much right on?

Link to comment

..I've noticed some logs from geocachers saying the cache was off by 15 feet (or even less in some cases). I thought 30 feet was considered pretty much right on?

Unless I know I'm having a bad GPS day (it happens - bad PDOP sometimes), I start to enter the 'alternate coordinates' into my gc.com find log at 30'+. A well averaged placement is rarely that far out except under peculiar terrain situations.
Link to comment

My guess is that the longer a person has been caching, the larger the error can be and they'll still be ok with it. I've only been doing this just over a year, but almost all of the ones I've found have been within 20-25 feet or closer. The newer the cacher, the more likely they might be to complain if their GPSr doesn't lead them right to it! I'm usually ok with a hide around 25 ft. off. I'll email the CO to let them know I was off at 25 ft. or further, but it doesn't bother me too much.

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...