Oregon or Montana

[moose drool]

I've been looking at either an Oregon 450 or a Montana 600 for hiking and hunting. I've been reading about quite a few problems with the Montana. Have those pretty much been ironed out? Any cause for concern as far as dependability? I really need a full functioning unit in the back country.

 

Thanks!

[+ArtieD]

I have an Oregon 450 and absolutely love it. I think you'd really enjoy it, too.

[yogazoo]

Try using the search function on the GPS and Technology forum main page. There have been about a dozen threads with basically the same question asked in the past few weeks. No worries, just trying to make it easier fo you to get your answers.

[+Styk]

for hunting and hiking, I'd opt for the Oregon simply because it's smaller and lighter. I upgraded from the Oregon to the Montana a few month's ago. For ATVing and geocaching, it rocks. during hunting season, i reverted to my 60Cx for size and weight savings.

[+Walts Hunting]

Sold the Oregon. Got the Montana and couldn't be happier.

[+coachstahly]

MOST of what you read were/are issues that owners had with the brand new Montana and its subsequent updates. I would venture to guess the same thing applied to the Oregon when it came out. You don't really hear too much about the good things for both units. I really don't think you could go wrong with either one, but I can really only see two major differences that set them apart. The first is the price. The second is the difference in types of things the unit can do for you (Montana has a few more bells and whistles making it a truly one-stop shopping item!) and the ability to customize the unit to your heart's content.

[+Walts Hunting]

The screen visibility on the MonTana is vastly superior too the Oregon.that was the biggest complaint for it.

[WrongwayUK]

I have had a Montana about a month now and am very happy with it. Any problems I have reported have been quickly dealt with. All very minor issues or suggestions for improvements. I have a 60CSx as well, but that doesn't seem to get used as much now. I am very tempted on a Garmin 62s for a smaller easier to carry GPSr when I don't want to carry the Montana, but I think I would probably be disappointed as the Montana has such a good readable display, the extra size making all the difference. Plus all the extra features that have been added to the Montana would probably mean the 62s would take too much of a back seat.

Edited December 15, 2011 by WrongwayUK

[+Lieblweb]

Never had a Montana. The Oregon is great....only complaints, is it locks up/shuts off from time to time. In the field, you sometimes have to pull the battery out to get it to startup again. This might be a firmware issue but I'm not sure. Every once in a while, my husband has to wipe it clean of everything and reload it. We have about 5500 caches in it on a normal day.

Edited December 15, 2011 by Lieblweb

[+eusty]

We have about 5500 caches in it on a normal day.

'about' is less than 5000 as it's the maximum for the 450

 

 

The thing which put me off getting a Montana and going for the Oregon was the size/weight issue.

 

The Oregon is no bigger than my Colorado which it replaced, the Montana which has a nice screen was just too big....

 

[team tisri]

I've been looking at either an Oregon 450 or a Montana 600 for hiking and hunting. I've been reading about quite a few problems with the Montana. Have those pretty much been ironed out? Any cause for concern as far as dependability? I really need a full functioning unit in the back country.

 

Thanks!

 

Some Montanas have battery issues where it seems the battery is slightly too small. A piece of card wedged against the battery solves this (it's not an issue unless the unit vibrates, e.g. if you're cycling along rutted gravel).

 

Personally I found the Oregon screen unreadable in direct light. Even the fluorescent light of a shop left me struggling to read it. I mount my GPS on my handlebars so at a stroke that renders the unit useless for my purposes. The Montana seems to work just fine - I've never had a problem with it.

[moose drool]

Thanks to everyone who gave constructive feedback and opinions. I went to the local store today and did a hands on with the Montana. It has a good feel to it and a very nice, responsive screen. I guess my main concerns have to deal with the FW issues I keep reading about. Guess I may have to just pay to play and see how it shakes out.

[+Lieblweb]

We have about 5500 caches in it on a normal day.

'about' is less than 5000 as it's the maximum for the 450

 

 

Awww...craptastic!! There's the problem..... Dur! (laugh)

 

Will have to approach our PQ's a little differently then eh? We've never used an SD card - but is it possible to get a large enough SD card to put more than 5,000 goecaches on it? Or does using the SD card primarily as your data source cause different 'issues' in loading/retrieving/what-not?

[+dfx]

Will have to approach our PQ's a little differently then eh? We've never used an SD card - but is it possible to get a large enough SD card to put more than 5,000 goecaches on it? Or does using the SD card primarily as your data source cause different 'issues' in loading/retrieving/what-not?

 

The 5000 caches is an internal limit and having additional storage doesn't change it. You can load your GPXs from internal storage, from SD card or both, but you'll always only get 5000 caches max.

[WrongwayUK]

Thanks to everyone who gave constructive feedback and opinions. I went to the local store today and did a hands on with the Montana. It has a good feel to it and a very nice, responsive screen. I guess my main concerns have to deal with the FW issues I keep reading about. Guess I may have to just pay to play and see how it shakes out.

 

Don't worry about FW issues. They are all minor things now and In general Garmin seems to be on the ball as far as correcting issues as they are reported. I can only speak from my personal experience though.

[+Lieblweb]

Will have to approach our PQ's a little differently then eh? We've never used an SD card - but is it possible to get a large enough SD card to put more than 5,000 goecaches on it? Or does using the SD card primarily as your data source cause different 'issues' in loading/retrieving/what-not?

 

The 5000 caches is an internal limit and having additional storage doesn't change it. You can load your GPXs from internal storage, from SD card or both, but you'll always only get 5000 caches max.

 

Thanks!!

I'm not sure my husband knows about the 5,000 - but if he doesn't, he'll understand why its been locking up.

[+splashy]

@moose drool

 

There ain't any Montana HW/FW issues and if there are like the last update it's not really important, if it was there would be a new update in a couple of days, the Montana is very well monitored by Garmin and as it looks now this is the first Garmin with so much FW in such a short time working like a dream.

[+Atlas Cached]

@moose drool

 

There ain't any Montana HW/FW issues and if there are like the last update it's not really important, if it was there would be a new update in a couple of days, the Montana is very well monitored by Garmin and as it looks now this is the first Garmin with so much FW in such a short time working like a dream.

 

If you think the Montana doesn't have any firmware issues, either you aren't using one, or you do not have access to a Montana.