Decision help needed based on personal experiences

[+CometStrike]

Hi,

 

over the past days/weeks I´ve read through quite a lot of descriptions, reviews and forum threads to determine which GPS to buy. I´ve narrowed it down to three choices, with the current favorite Dakota 20, followed by the Oregon 450 (I like the touchscreen more than buttons) and lagging behind the eTrex 30. All of them are within my price range and offer the features most important to me (routing possible, custom maps can be added via µSD, paperless caching, ).

 

I´ve handled the Dakota 20 of a friend from time to time and have a rather good impression of it. I only looked at an eTrex 30 for half an hour and didn´t test it outside and still have to get my hands on an Oregon 450 (which I will in the next days). But still, having seend a GPS and maybe used it a couple of times doesn´t really tell you on how well it really works. Judging from most forums one shouldn´t buy any GPS, because they all seem to fail in so many things (as those unhappy with their device dominate those threads).

 

Thats why I want to ask those who possess one of those GPS to tell me:

- how well does the compass and position update work for you when you are standing still or move very slowly (near a cache)? I mostly cache in urban areas and in forests. Far off mountains or the sea will be veeeery rare.

- how do you judge the usability of these devices when biking (as in touring, not MTB) i.e. visibility of the screen, battery life?

- are there any issues I should be aware of when buying one of these devices that are not commonly advertised/complained about?

- if you have the Dakota or the Oregon: do you personally think the price difference (200€ vs 280€) is worth the bigger screen (lower battery life) and features like Wherigo on the Oregon?

 

I appreciate your help in this matter!

CometStrike

[tr_s]

I am an eTrex 30 owner and can't do anything else than to recommend against it.

 

After a lot of tinkering with the device, it is just about acceptable.

With tinkering I mean finding mapsets that don't make the device crash, updating the software, finding workarounds for a long list of bugs, etc.

Compass is better in the latest firmware update, a keyring toy compass still beats it in reliability though. Initially it used to work ten minutes after a calibration, then started oscillating randomly 180 degrees. Now it at least (mostly) gives the right bearing within 45 degrees.

 

Position update at low speeds is smooth in the latest firmware, but if and only if I skip using the glonass satellites. It should also be noted that some users in here claim never ever having had the "sticky problem" in any firmware revision; maybe there is a dud set of hardware floating around the market.

 

Battery life is good, far better than the old eTrexes, count on 20-25 hours with moderate use using a set of good NiMH's.

Edited April 27, 2012 by tr_s

[+Isonzo Karst]

if you have the Dakota or the Oregon: do you personally think the price difference (200€ vs 280€) is worth the bigger screen (lower battery life) and features like Wherigo on the Oregon?

 

I have the DeLorme and my husband has the Oregon. I'd trade in the Delorme for the Oregon in a heartbeat.

 

Disclaimer, I bought the Delorme early on, when the unit was fairly new to the market, and my particular unit is a lemon. It's been back to Delorme for repairs 3 times, eats batteries like potato chips, and is still prone to spontaneous lock up and power down - things they've "fixed" but never for very long (all repairs have been free, other then shipping, but none have lasted). I do think this colors my attitude to the units.

 

The Oregon is far easier to learn to use, much more intuitive. I can pick it up and do just about anything with it, even though I've never had a Garmin gps. I still struggle to recall "how to" on the Delorme. Stuff buried in menus, under sub-menus in places that aren't apparent.

 

We have Ram Mounts for our gps, with mounting balls on the MTB, the road bikes, and our kayaks. Both units are fine in these applications. It's hard to say about visibility, I think that may depend upon the particulars of your eyesight. Glare is an issue for any unit outdoors. Neither unit "good" re battery life, my particular Delorme is awful.

Edited April 27, 2012 by Isonzo Karst

[+Redwoods Mtn Biker]

My impression is that the Oregon is a bit more rugged than the Dakota. IIRC, the Dakota screen is flush, whereas the Oregon's is recessed. This could explain why I've heard more complaints of busted Dakotas.

[+ecanderson]

...the Dakota screen is flush

The Dakota 20 screen is just as deeply recessed as is the Oregon (I own both).

 

Thats why I want to ask those who possess one of those GPS to tell me:

- how well does the compass and position update work for you when you are standing still or move very slowly (near a cache)? I mostly cache in urban areas and in forests. Far off mountains or the sea will be veeeery rare.

- how do you judge the usability of these devices when biking (as in touring, not MTB) i.e. visibility of the screen, battery life?

- are there any issues I should be aware of when buying one of these devices that are not commonly advertised/complained about?

- if you have the Dakota or the Oregon: do you personally think the price difference (200€ vs 280€) is worth the bigger screen (lower battery life) and features like Wherigo on the Oregon?

Both behave well near a cache. Both use a 3-axis compass.

I've used both on my bike for bike caching runs. The Dakota screen is a bit grainier than the Oregon, but both work well enough. Neither are that great in half-light. In full sun, tilted the right way, they can really dazzle. In darkness, the backlight is plenty. In that half-light situation where you don't have quite enough ambient or backlight, you'll probably want your reading glasses if you wear them.

I do like the bigger and somewhat less grainy screen on the Oregon.

Another Oregon feature is the ability to store 2-1/2 times the number of caches (5000 vs. the 2000 of the Dakota). Whether that matters to you will depend upon local cache density, I suppose.

 

One oddity - I find that the screen on the Dakota 20 is a good bit snappier when it comes to scroll/updating. Not sure why. Perhaps comparable processor with less video to process?

Edited May 15, 2012 by ecanderson

[+luvvinbird]

Hi,

 

over the past days/weeks I´ve read through quite a lot of descriptions, reviews and forum threads to determine which GPS to buy. I´ve narrowed it down to three choices, with the current favorite Dakota 20, followed by the Oregon 450 (I like the touchscreen more than buttons) and lagging behind the eTrex 30. All of them are within my price range and offer the features most important to me (routing possible, custom maps can be added via µSD, paperless caching, ).

 

I´ve handled the Dakota 20 of a friend from time to time and have a rather good impression of it. I only looked at an eTrex 30 for half an hour and didn´t test it outside and still have to get my hands on an Oregon 450 (which I will in the next days). But still, having seend a GPS and maybe used it a couple of times doesn´t really tell you on how well it really works. Judging from most forums one shouldn´t buy any GPS, because they all seem to fail in so many things (as those unhappy with their device dominate those threads).

 

Thats why I want to ask those who possess one of those GPS to tell me:

- how well does the compass and position update work for you when you are standing still or move very slowly (near a cache)? I mostly cache in urban areas and in forests. Far off mountains or the sea will be veeeery rare.

- how do you judge the usability of these devices when biking (as in touring, not MTB) i.e. visibility of the screen, battery life?

- are there any issues I should be aware of when buying one of these devices that are not commonly advertised/complained about?

- if you have the Dakota or the Oregon: do you personally think the price difference (200€ vs 280€) is worth the bigger screen (lower battery life) and features like Wherigo on the Oregon?

 

I appreciate your help in this matter!

CometStrike

I do agree that understanding and changing settings on the newer Garmin paperless GPSr's takes a bit of time and patience, but the two units that I use I just wouldn't be without. My fave is the 62s which I've seen as cheap as $349 (CDN) but my Oregon 450 is my second favourite and it's been getting a lot of use by me lately. It's priced around the $269 (CDN) or less mark and I highly recommend it. Also, keep in mind that generally, only forum users who have difficulty or are unhappy with their devices will post a comment. Those that are happy usually don't make it a point to mention it in the forum. I'm convinced that the great majority of owners/users of the two products I mentioned are happy with them.

[+54kgx2]

I have the Oregon 450, first GPS I've ever owned and I love it. It has fast become my favourite piece of tech. I haven't had problems with the battery life use rechargables ( 2650mA) and find they last all day. The screen has been good too - have it set on lowest screen brightness and have had no problems - however I do live in Scotland so no bright sunshine yet this year. I bought the OS maps on SD card and have been happy with these too.

[+BAMBOOZLE]

Hi,

 

over the past days/weeks I´ve read through quite a lot of descriptions, reviews and forum threads to determine which GPS to buy. I´ve narrowed it down to three choices, with the current favorite Dakota 20, followed by the Oregon 450 (I like the touchscreen more than buttons) and lagging behind the eTrex 30. All of them are within my price range and offer the features most important to me (routing possible, custom maps can be added via µSD, paperless caching, ).

 

I´ve handled the Dakota 20 of a friend from time to time and have a rather good impression of it. I only looked at an eTrex 30 for half an hour and didn´t test it outside and still have to get my hands on an Oregon 450 (which I will in the next days). But still, having seend a GPS and maybe used it a couple of times doesn´t really tell you on how well it really works. Judging from most forums one shouldn´t buy any GPS, because they all seem to fail in so many things (as those unhappy with their device dominate those threads).

 

Thats why I want to ask those who possess one of those GPS to tell me:

- how well does the compass and position update work for you when you are standing still or move very slowly (near a cache)? I mostly cache in urban areas and in forests. Far off mountains or the sea will be veeeery rare.

- how do you judge the usability of these devices when biking (as in touring, not MTB) i.e. visibility of the screen, battery life?

- are there any issues I should be aware of when buying one of these devices that are not commonly advertised/complained about?

- if you have the Dakota or the Oregon: do you personally think the price difference (200€ vs 280€) is worth the bigger screen (lower battery life) and features like Wherigo on the Oregon?

 

I appreciate your help in this matter!

CometStrike

I do agree that understanding and changing settings on the newer Garmin paperless GPSr's takes a bit of time and patience, but the two units that I use I just wouldn't be without. My fave is the 62s which I've seen as cheap as $349 (CDN) but my Oregon 450 is my second favourite and it's been getting a lot of use by me lately. It's priced around the $269 (CDN) or less mark and I highly recommend it. Also, keep in mind that generally, only forum users who have difficulty or are unhappy with their devices will post a comment. Those that are happy usually don't make it a point to mention it in the forum. I'm convinced that the great majority of owners/users of the two products I mentioned are happy with them.

 

+ 1

[+DukeOfURL01]

I never have, but a couple friends have had Oregons and think highly of them.

[+hikerT]

I have an Oregon 450 and love it. It's my 5th GPS so I know a bit about the topic. I have had no issues with accuracy/compass issues at any speed. I think the Dakota is just too small, screen-wise and capacity-wise. I upgraded from the 400 last year and this model has better visibility than the other. (I couldn't see the screen well on the 400 to the point that I took off the screen protector... resulting in scratching the screen to the point I couldn't see at all.)

 

Battery life is decent, on a sunny day you don't need any backlight on and that saves battery life too. I find rechargeable batteries last a bit longer than disposables.

 

As well, since the new Montana has come out (that is excellent too BTW) the price has come down nicely on the 450.

[+phlatlander]

I have Oregon 550 (purchased in Jan12) which replaced my problematic Etrex Legend. Touchscreen works well (better than my Nuvi 135), lots of features and you can customize the display. I would recommend the 450/550. I would also STRONGLY recommend a screen protector.