+eusty Posted November 6, 2011 Share Posted November 6, 2011 My Colorado is playing up a bit lately and I'd always said I'd replace it with a 62S. But looking at the etrex 30 it seems be be as good as the 62. Apart from the form factor and the 62 has a helical antenna there isnt much between them. Over to you...why is the 62 worth the extra £130? Quote Link to comment
+eusty Posted November 6, 2011 Author Share Posted November 6, 2011 After a bit more investigation it seems that Garmin don't make a GPSr with a good a screen resolution as the Colorado without a touch screen I like a decent resolution for OS maps...but not that keen on a touch screen...grrrr..looks like it might be a Oregon 450 or Montana 600. Or another Colorado off ebay....... Quote Link to comment
+Triple Crown Posted November 7, 2011 Share Posted November 7, 2011 For me, the eTrex screens are just too small, and the menus are cumbersome to navigate. I also find it difficult to read all the paperless caching info on such a small screen. I had a 60Csx, but I like the Oregon touchscreen interface much better. I would recommend going to REI or some other retailer that has display units you can power on and try. I currently have the Oregon 300 but I think my next unit will be the Montana 600. Quote Link to comment
+luvvinbird Posted November 7, 2011 Share Posted November 7, 2011 I've been trying to get my wife interested in geocaching and decided to surprise her with a GPSr for her birthday. I was absolutely sold on the new eTrex 30 as I thought this is a newly launched receiver for a new geocacher....perfect! But then I started to read about pixel problems on the screen and about transferring caches to it's memory, either singly or by PQ. Nothing really major but it made me think that Garmin may have hurriedly put out a product that was less than ideal. Maybe just a "gut feel" on my part but I decided to go with a unit that I really enjoy using. I bought her an Oregon 450. Identical to the one I use, I even programmed it the same as my mine in terms of profiles, etc. I've thoroughly enjoyed using my Oregon and have found it to be more "fun" than my 62s. I love it's smaller, more compact size and it's touchscreen is fast and so simple to navigate. The latest updates have, for me, made geocaching even more fun. Now, if I can only convince her..... Quote Link to comment
+TeamGoonies Posted November 7, 2011 Share Posted November 7, 2011 I currently have an GPSMAP62ST, and wonder if the eTrex30 have the same option to easy change navigation type, from turn-by-turn to off road? I use this all the time when geocaching by car, and I don't want to lose that function. /Micke Quote Link to comment
+DazeDnFamily Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 The biggest, and prolly most applicable difference is that the 62 has the quad helix antenna, which is tried and true from the 60 series to grab and hold a signal. The eTrex line have the patch antenna, which will likely be sufficient, unless you commonly find yourself in severe terrain or under heavy tree cover. Other than that, it comes down to form factor, and ease of use. The only real way to figure out which you like best is to get hands on, if possible, and try them out. If you have an active group in your area, there will likely be someone close that has each of the more commonly used model types (any of the new eTrex or 62 series have the same form/function) and will be happy to let you demo it. Or, if you have a good outdoor store, perhaps you can try them out there. Hope this helps! Later! Quote Link to comment
Wintertime Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 The biggest, and prolly most applicable difference is that the 62 has the quad helix antenna, which is tried and true from the 60 series to grab and hold a signal. The eTrex line have the patch antenna, which will likely be sufficient, unless you commonly find yourself in severe terrain or under heavy tree cover. Has anyone here had the opportunity to compare the number of satellites that can be received with a 60 series GPSr vs. the number that can be receiving by turning on both GPS and GLONASS on an eTrex? Quote Link to comment
+GrateBear Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 For me, the eTrex screens are just too small, and the menus are cumbersome to navigate. I also find it difficult to read all the paperless caching info on such a small screen. I had a 60Csx, but I like the Oregon touchscreen interface much better. I would recommend going to REI or some other retailer that has display units you can power on and try. I currently have the Oregon 300 but I think my next unit will be the Montana 600. I just can't see paying over $500 for a GPSr. I paid $200 for my Dakota 20 and it does a fine job. I don't think I would be that much happier for $300 more. Quote Link to comment
snakyjake Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 (edited) eTrex has GLONASS. More satellites. But what good are more satellites going to be if you don't get their signals? GPSMap has quad helix antenna. Better in tree cover. Multi-directional, good if carried in pack/pocket. Can either of them recharge the batteries via USB? My Delorme can be recharged via USB, which is real nice when I travel or know I'll have my computer with me (also have the option of AA batteries). Edited November 9, 2011 by snakyjake Quote Link to comment
snakyjake Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 GLONASS is operating right now and has about 20 birds in the sky Some of my information may be outdated (I read something regarding full operation by 2012). Just read Wikipedia and it said 23 are operational, and "24 satellites to provide services worldwide". But 20 or 23 should be good enough to provide advantages where signals are tough to get. I doubt more satellites are going to help under tree cover. Probably will help if in a canyon/valley or don't have access to the full sky. Need something that can receive weak signals. Also was reading with the latest GPS chips antenna types aren't significant. Quote Link to comment
snakyjake Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 Here's what I was reading from Garmin's website: "GLONASS is a system developed by the Russian Federation that will be fully operational in 2012." Maybe it's partially available to civilians/consumers? Maybe Garmin doesn't have full licensing yet? Or maybe Garmin's website is incorrect? Quote Link to comment
+Red90 Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 The biggest, and prolly most applicable difference is that the 62 has the quad helix antenna, which is tried and true from the 60 series to grab and hold a signal. IMO, this is an old wive's tail. I compare a lot of track logs in my trail making project and I see no accuracy differences between any of the modern Garmin units due to different antenna designs. As stated in other posts, the Glonass support may make a real difference as it will be interesting to do some side by side testing. Quote Link to comment
+dfx Posted November 9, 2011 Share Posted November 9, 2011 Guess it depends what they mean by fully operational. My Etrex is seeing GLONASS birds and Rich Owings in his report on the new Etrex range in GPS Tracklog showed the sort of screenshots I get, and appeared to get greater accuracy with GLONASS enabled. "Fully operational" means that it's in the state that it's designed to be in. It's designed to have 24 active satellites, and currently there's only 23. So, by design and convention it's not "fully operational" yet, because one satellite is missing. But that doesn't mean it can't be used to get a position fix! Quote Link to comment
gps_dr Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 eTrex has GLONASS. More satellites. But what good are more satellites going to be if you don't get their signals? GPSMap has quad helix antenna. Better in tree cover. Multi-directional, good if carried in pack/pocket. Can either of them recharge the batteries via USB? My Delorme can be recharged via USB, which is real nice when I travel or know I'll have my computer with me (also have the option of AA batteries). Only special batteries can be recharged in DeLorme GPS (3V Lithium ion), not AA. They don't want you to blame them when U connect to external power with regular batteries installed and unit blows up. The Montana units will only charge with the included expensive Lithium ion battery pack installed. Haven't seen any small handheld to use the same setup as DeLorme. Even then, that battery pack does not pack same power as 2 separate rechargeable AA batteries. Quote Link to comment
+LucaPCP Posted November 25, 2011 Share Posted November 25, 2011 The biggest, and prolly most applicable difference is that the 62 has the quad helix antenna, which is tried and true from the 60 series to grab and hold a signal. The eTrex line have the patch antenna, which will likely be sufficient, unless you commonly find yourself in severe terrain or under heavy tree cover. Has anyone here had the opportunity to compare the number of satellites that can be received with a 60 series GPSr vs. the number that can be receiving by turning on both GPS and GLONASS on an eTrex? Not an answer, but when I mountain bike under tree cover, my Vista HCx is occasionally off by as much as 100m, while my 62s is spot on. So I tend to think that antenna type matters. Quote Link to comment
+eusty Posted November 30, 2011 Author Share Posted November 30, 2011 In the end I went for the 450 as it has basically the same screen as my Colorado which I like. Etrex = Let down by the screen 62S = Same as the etrex, pity as I like the form of this Montana = Too big/heavy and too expensive! It was delivered today by I haven't opened it yet....wonder what I'll be doing tonight!! Quote Link to comment
gallet Posted December 5, 2011 Share Posted December 5, 2011 (edited) Notice a few negative comments about the patch vs quad helix antenna. When I tested a Vista HCx against a MAP 60 CSx, I found no difference at all between the two antennas, even with the HCx hanging upside down so the patch antenna was not facing the sky. I also note that my Colorado has a quad helix antenna and I'm not real impressed with its performance. I think the quad helix antenna superiority died when Garmin introduced high sensitivity chips a few years ago. Edited December 5, 2011 by gallet Quote Link to comment
+eusty Posted December 5, 2011 Author Share Posted December 5, 2011 I used both the Colorado and Oregon side by side at the weekend and didn't really notice much difference. And inside the house the Oregon seems to get a better signal! Quote Link to comment
DBV2 Posted December 5, 2011 Share Posted December 5, 2011 When I compared the 62s to the 450, I thought the screen on the 450 was noticeably dimmer? Maybe, the place I tested it had it setup that way? I actually like the way the 62s feels in my hand - feels more rugged than the 450. I did think the 450 seemed easier to use and did like both units. In the end I went for the 450 as it has basically the same screen as my Colorado which I like. Etrex = Let down by the screen 62S = Same as the etrex, pity as I like the form of this Montana = Too big/heavy and too expensive! It was delivered today by I haven't opened it yet....wonder what I'll be doing tonight!! Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
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.