My First GPS

[+TEAM US2]

My wife and I have gotten hooked on geocaching and are looking to purchase our first GPS. Not knowing anything, I started researching and have found GPS models in several different price groups ... $75-100, $125-175, $200-300, and over $300. From reading, I believe I want to find a unit that has expandable memory since I think I'll need to purchase maps and maybe software separately??? Paperless with quick response and accuracy with a decent battery life is obvious. I'm not sure what else to look for, or how much to believe the manufacturers claims. I want to purchase enough that I will be happy with it for quite a while, but then again, I don't want to buy more than I will need or use either. My question for everyone is what do I get at the different price levels and what recommendations you might have for my first GPS keeping in mind that it will be used for seeking (and in the future maybe placing) caches. No boating or turn-by-turn for the car features are needed. What accessories are "must-haves" and what will I forget/not know about that I will regret after making this first purchase? Thanks! Happy Hunting! TEAM US2

[savant9]

My recommendations...

Buy a newer model Garmin as appropriate for your budget.

 

Dakota 20

Etrex 30

Oregon 450 or 550 w/ camera

Gpsmap 62s or 62sc w/ camera

 

Montana 600 or 650 w/ camera

 

The order of that list sort of increasing in price....sort of. With Black Friday approaching the chances of you getting a great gps for cheap is very good. I would wait till tomorrow at 12.00 EST to see what Gpscity has on sale. Last year they had the Oregon 450 for $229 Here is a comparison of those first 4 models listed. http://www.gpscity.c...x30&oreg450

 

Basically decide if you want a touchscreen or just buttons.

Touchscreen: Dakota, Oregon, Montana.

Buttons: Etrex, Gpsmap.

 

For maximum useability, I would avoid the Dakota 10 (no sd card slot or baro/compass, wireless sharing/chirp ability), Etrex 10 (no sd, baro/compass, wireless sharing/chirp ability), Etrex 20 (no baro/compass, wireless sharing/chirp)

If you want to do Wherigo caches, the only current model that still supports them is the Oregon line.

 

I would do alot of research fast if you want a good deal this week.

[Wintertime]

For maximum useability, I would avoid the Dakota 10 (no sd card slot or baro/compass, wireless sharing/chirp ability), Etrex 10 (no sd, baro/compass, wireless sharing/chirp ability), Etrex 20 (no baro/compass, wireless sharing/chirp)

The electronic compass and Chirp capability in the eTrex 30 may well be features that TeamUS2 don't need. As you say, they won't have maximum usability without those features, but they may be able to get the features they do need for a lower cost.

 

Patty

[+BAMBOOZLE]

From time to time the Oregon 450 can be had between $200-$250.....for the money I think its the way to go.

I hear the 62S is nice but it doesn't come down as much as the 450.

The 450 is touchscreen, the 62S has buttons.

[+kentwoodkrew]

Hi. My big deal is the screen size for my older eyes. Let me know if you are interested in a used oregon 450 with driving and topo maps

[+TEAM US2]

I truly appreciate all the feedback quick advice from my fellow cachers! Yes, I am rushing my research in hopes of a black Friday sale. With all your assistance I am now targeting the Oregon 450. So, two last questions: 1. Are there any "must have" accessories I'll want to add on? 2. The whole map thing has me a bit confused ... am I looking for a CD or a pre-loaded microSD card or what? Am I better off w/ a 24k map of Florida only o the 100K U.S. map? Thank you all again! I know these newbie questions must get tedious, but I can't tell you how much you sharing you knowledge and experience is appreciated! Happy Thanksgiving all! TEAM US2

[Wintertime]

If you're thinking about buying maps from Garmin, be sure to read the "Requirements" details for the three media options (download, micro-SD, and DVD). Some formats can only be used on one device, while others can be used on more than one but aren't eligible for low-cost updates (I think you have to buy the whole map again).

 

Patty

[+ecanderson]

The new Etrex is far more accurate than other models as it also uses the GLONASS series of satellites.

I've yet to see that demonstrated in an empirical test. Perhaps at the margin, but with a decent constellation providing decent PDOP, which is the case most of the time, I don't see GLONASS improving on the accuracy.

[+Chief301]

Also don't rush to buy Garmin maps, there are lots of free ones out there that in many respects are better

 

...such as being free

[+TEAM US2]

I like freebies!!! How/where can I get free maps? Is there separate software I need to purchase first?

[+Chief301]

I like freebies!!! How/where can I get free maps? Is there separate software I need to purchase first?

 

www.gpsfiledepot.com probably has what you're looking for. I use MapSource to load them to my GPS (I don't remember if MapSource came with my GPS or was a program I downloaded from somewhere...I don't recall having to pay for it.)

 

The only programs/features I have had to pay for so far are GC.com premium membership ($30.00/year), GSAK (Geocaching Swiss Army Knife, a waypoint management program - technically is free but after a trial period you get an increasingly long nag screen prompting you to buy the license...$25.00 one time purchase, I think) and of course the Groundspeak Geocaching app for iPhone ($10.00). I got free maps from gpsfiledepot.com for my Garmin Legend HCX.

[+ecanderson]

so personally empirical tests don't matter to me, real life experience does

Apart from the fact that a single example might be an exception, 'real life experience' IS an empirical test.

 

That said - RamblinBear doesn't speak of any 'real life' experience with GLONASS on a Garmin product, either. His experience is with professional grade products. Like me, he HOPES there will be a commensurate improvement in consumer grade gear with this change.

 

And as the article you cited states, "Theoretically, GLONASS will improve accuracy." Note the word theoretically. The number of samples with the 62, 450, and 20 (both modes) isn't enough to know for certain. I'd have loved to have seen him repeat that test instead of running it just once. The resulting numbers were pretty jumpy, and if you take out the one anomalous 450 entry, it outperformed the 20 in non-GLONASS mode, which I am sure would get howls from the some of the 20/30 owning crowd. What we do NOT know is what the PDOP situation was for either the U.S. or Russian satellites at the time of his testing.

 

Truth is, GLONASS could help to fill in gaps where the U.S. constellation is a bit out of whack in a given area at a particular time for a given user. How much? I need something more concrete before I'd be willing to make a claim such as "The new Etrex is far more accurate than other models as it also uses the GLONASS series of satellites." We really don't know yet, and can only hope.

Edited November 25, 2011 by ecanderson

[+ecanderson]

Well, in practice my Etrex 20 is more accurate than my Legend H...

Those two units don't even use the same GPS chip. The Legend H used the MTK chip. Even sans GLONASS, I would therefore expect some performance differences between those two units.

[+user13371]

Perhaps at the margin, but with a decent constellation providing decent PDOP, which is the case most of the time, I don't see GLONASS improving on the accuracy.

Chris, that's what I thought at first too. After using the eTrex 10 for a few weeks while, I've concluded otherwise.

 

I don't think it's the GLONASS by itself makes much of a difference; the system isn't fully populated yet. But I do think using the combination of both GPS and GLONASS pretty much ensures you always have a large set of satellites in view with a favorable, well-placed geometry. I'm seeing a lot more fixes with accuracy figures in the single digits than I used to on my eTrex Legend HCx or my DeLorme PN-40. Both in geocaching and visits to previously marked, known locations.

 

On the down-side, I have noticed the ocassional slowness to update while moving (what some folks have called "stickiness"). Sometimes you can "unstick" it by asking it to average a waypoint Expect this will eventually improve with firmware updates.

 

Also, the screen is a bit on the small side. Not problem for me but may bother some.

 

Relevant to the OP's question, this is certainly on of the most accurate handhelds I've ever had, and with paperless caching at MSRP of $119 I think it's the best low-end entry for geocacaching.

Edited November 25, 2011 by Portland Cyclist

[+TEAM US2]

I wanted to close this thread by thanking everyone for their help. In the end, I decided to go with the Oregon 450. I'm still learning how to use all of its features, but I am quite pleased with the choice. Thank you all who helped me make the decision - and for letting me know about downloading free maps! I would've spent a fortune without that tidbit of information! Again, thanks to all!!! You are the best! Happy hunting!!!