Gold Standard GPS

[zcoyote12]

So I am lookig for a new GPS to be mainly used for hiking and my primary navigation device. I really want the capability to have overhead maps like on my smart phone. A considerable amount of the areas I travel to out west have no cell phone coverage. I have always had a Garmin and would prefer to stay with the brands since I am familar with the unit navigation. Should I be looking at the 62 or Montana.

Edited July 6, 2012 by zcoyote12

[+JBnW]

I really thought I wanted a Montana when they came out, until I actually got to hold one in my hands. I thought my 76 CSx was too big to fit in any pockets, the Montana is huge (OK, really large and ain't going in any pockets). So I got a 62s. I think you're decision will come down to this: do you want battery life for long hikes, or screen size for navigation, beeps or words for navigation, or buttons vs. touchscreen? Otherwise, both will do what you've described.

[+baloo&bd]

I had went with a Montana and, after getting it, realized it was not very Geocaching friendly. More of a Nuvi trying to also double as a trail device. Currently, the 62s holds the title of "gold standard", at least among the Garmin units.

[+Atlas Cached]

IMHO, the Montana only seems so large because it is the largest handheld GPSr Garmin currently offers. They look ginormous in the store next to the eTrex or Dakota. Not incredibly larger than an Oregon, but larger. The 62 is also larger than the Oregon. With the external antenna, I don't think the size difference between the Montana and 62 is enough to consider. Actually, you can compare the two here, and see they are equally sized in depth, while the Montana is 1/2" wider but also 1/2" shorter than the 62.

 

The 62 has a very small screen compared to the Montana, not just in physical size, but also in pixels.

 

Based on your statement "I am lookig for a new GPS to be mainly used for hiking and my primary navigation device" alone, the Montana is the only real option.

 

More info about the Montana here.

[+Atlas Cached]

I had went with a Montana and, after getting it, realized it was not very Geocaching friendly. More of a Nuvi trying to also double as a trail device. Currently, the 62s holds the title of "gold standard", at least among the Garmin units.

 

Explain this?

 

Could not be farther from the truth.

 

The Montana is first and foremost an outdoor hiking, boating, riding, and trail device, with some additional nuvi like features for urban navigation.

 

I find the Montana works very well for Geocaching, and would love to hear why you do not.

[zcoyote12]

IMHO, the Montana only seems so large because it is the largest handheld GPSr Garmin currently offers. They look ginormous in the store next to the eTrex or Dakota. Not incredibly larger than an Oregon, but larger. The 62 is also larger than the Oregon. With the external antenna, I don't think the size difference between the Montana and 62 is enough to consider. Actually, you can compare the two here, and see they are equally sized in depth, while the Montana is 1/2" wider but also 1/2" shorter than the 62.

 

The 62 has a very small screen compared to the Montana, not just in physical size, but also in pixels.

 

Based on your statement "I am lookig for a new GPS to be mainly used for hiking and my primary navigation device" alone, the Montana is the only real option.

 

More info about the Montana here.

Not sure why the Montana would be my oly option. I used the 60csx and Etrex Legend and they wroked fine but I want something to show overhead pictures to improve my association to where I am at on the map. From whjat I read the 62 can do this. I am not as concerned with size. I dropped down from the 60 to etrax thinking size mattered. It really didn't in this case (maybe others) and I now finding I want more that what the legend can give me.

[+Cacheoholic]

I had went with a Montana and, after getting it, realized it was not very Geocaching friendly. More of a Nuvi trying to also double as a trail device. Currently, the 62s holds the title of "gold standard", at least among the Garmin units.

 

Explain this?

 

Could not be farther from the truth.

 

The Montana is first and foremost an outdoor hiking, boating, riding, and trail device, with some additional nuvi like features for urban navigation.

 

I find the Montana works very well for Geocaching, and would love to hear why you do not.

 

Just ignore baloo&bd. He makes this claim over and over and over again but will never go into detail why he continues to make this outrageous claim.

[+user13371]

ZCoyote, I think you opened yourself up for trouble saying you wanted a "gold standard"

 

Everyone has their own idea of what's "THE BEST" and that's what you're gonna hear -- even if my best in't what's best for you.

 

If you're really just trying to decide betwene a 62 series and a Montana (both can load aerial imagery) you have to ask yourself which features matter to you. Biggest diffentiators are:

 

- Screen size

- Buttons or touchscreen

- Battery life and options

- Physical size and weight

- On the road navigation

 

Not one of those traits make either unit the gold standard; they're just factors to balance for suitability to tasks.

[+Cacheoholic]

- 5000 vs 12,000 paperless geocache limit.

[+Team CowboyPapa]

So I am lookig for a new GPS to be mainly used for hiking and my primary navigation device. I really want the capability to have overhead maps like on my smart phone. A considerable amount of the areas I travel to out west have no cell phone coverage. I have always had a Garmin and would prefer to stay with the brands since I am familar with the unit navigation. Should I be looking at the 62 or Montana.

Well, if you wish to communicate outside of cell phone coverage, you may have to consider other than Garmin:

http://www.inreachdelorme.com/product-info/inreach-pn-60w.php

http://www.delorme.com/

Note that the DeLorme PN-60w can also host photo imagery, both Satellite 10 and Color Aerial.

[+ecanderson]

I think he wants access to the mapping (overhead maps") that he's accustomed to seeing on his cell phone vs. the actual hard link back to a server.

 

To the OP - the 62 is nice, the Montana is huge, and the Oregon 450 fits somewhere in between, and is worth your investigation. It is also capable of using Garmin's satellite map system (Birdseye) which for $30 a year allows you to download as much satellite imagery as you can fit on a 32GB uSD card .. and believe me, you won't likely ever come anywhere near that. You can also get topo maps from several different sources.

 

Best of all, I'll challenge anyone with a 62 to a text entry duel when it comes to entering field notes and getting back on the road again. It's hard to beat the touch screen for that.

[+Atlas Cached]

IMHO, the Montana only seems so large because it is the largest handheld GPSr Garmin currently offers. They look ginormous in the store next to the eTrex or Dakota. Not incredibly larger than an Oregon, but larger. The 62 is also larger than the Oregon. With the external antenna, I don't think the size difference between the Montana and 62 is enough to consider. Actually, you can compare the two here, and see they are equally sized in depth, while the Montana is 1/2" wider but also 1/2" shorter than the 62.

 

The 62 has a very small screen compared to the Montana, not just in physical size, but also in pixels.

 

Based on your statement "I am lookig for a new GPS to be mainly used for hiking and my primary navigation device" alone, the Montana is the only real option.

 

More info about the Montana here.

Not sure why the Montana would be my oly option.

 

I took the following quote to mean you wanted nuvi like Navigation Capabilities:

 

So I am lookig for a new GPS to be mainly used for hiking and my primary navigation device.

[+baloo&bd]

I had went with a Montana and, after getting it, realized it was not very Geocaching friendly. More of a Nuvi trying to also double as a trail device. Currently, the 62s holds the title of "gold standard", at least among the Garmin units.

 

Explain this?

 

Could not be farther from the truth.

 

The Montana is first and foremost an outdoor hiking, boating, riding, and trail device, with some additional nuvi like features for urban navigation.

 

I find the Montana works very well for Geocaching, and would love to hear why you do not.

 

Just ignore baloo&bd. He makes this claim over and over and over again but will never go into detail why he continues to make this outrageous claim.

 

Actually, it has been explained by myself and others "over and over and over again", since it will be ignored no sense in re-hashing with disrespectful comments from like this from luddites will just derail the thread. If the OP needs any more details, feel free to contact us directly however it seems you are already on the right track.

[+user13371]

Well, if you wish to communicate outside of cell phone coverage

Well, he didn't actually ask for a that, but ... yeah, good point. Spend a lot of time out of cellphone range -- an inReach may be worth a look. As I said in an earlier note, that's just be one more factor to weigh.

 

I almost mentioned the DeLorme PN series myself (just for being able to load aerial imagery, not thinking of the inReach). But the OP really seems more interested in Garmin units and features, so I let the thought slip away.

Edited July 6, 2012 by user13371

[+Team CowboyPapa]

Well, if you wish to communicate outside of cell phone coverage

Well, he didn't actually ask for a that, but ... yeah, good point. Spend a lot of time out of cellphone range -- an inReach may be worth a look. As I said in an earlier note, that's just be one more factor to weigh.

 

I almost mentioned the DeLorme PN series myself (just for being able to load aerial imagery, not thinking of the inReach). But the OP really seems more interested in Garmin units and features, so I let the thought slip away.

Likewise, well almost anyway. I passed on it for a few hours, but when nobody else mentioned it, I thought that I would. Yes, realizing the penchant for sticking with Garmin, but then thinking that OP just may not be aware of the inReach capability to communicate from the back country. I also had to assume that the OP's usage of overhead maps related to the photo imagery shot overhead from airplanes and satellites.

Edited July 6, 2012 by Team CowboyPapa

[zcoyote12]

[Guess I needed to be a little more clear when I said navigation. I meant navigation off road while on the trail. That being said I do want my handheld unit to be able to give turn by turn directions on the road if needed. I do a lot of travel out west on bivy backpacking in areas that I have not been in. The little screens don't give much on a look in Topos even at 1:24 size. In areas with no cell coverage I wanted to be able to use sat photo's to help orient myself better.

[+user13371]

Okay - for a change I'll throw in with the Cowboy

 

If the small screen bothers you, and you really want "do it all" capability, and you already have a smartphone that does MOST of what you need ...

 

Put the phone in an Otter box, carry an external battery box (and lots of AA batteries), download DeLorme's Earthmate app to your phone, and buy an inReach.

 

This will give you everything you asked for in your original post, with the bonus of being able to send & receive text messages even when you're out of cellphone range -- not just for idle chatter, but also to call for help if you need it.

Edited July 7, 2012 by user13371

[+Team CowboyPapa]

OK, my turn to throw in with user13371. The inReach to which he has provided a link will pair up and communicate with either an iOS or an Android smartphone. In addition to the Earthmate app (iOS) version to which user13371 has also provided a link, DeLorme has an Android version for Android phones. Late last year I aquired the Samsung Galaxy II Skyrocket (Android) phone with a 4.3" screen. Yes, the same topo maps as I have always carried on my PN-60 may now be hosted by smartphones, including those with substantially larger screens.

 

I will also note that when out of cellular coverage, the inReach unit's GPS will transmit your location by Bluetooth to the smartphone for display on the Earthmate app's mapping function.

Edited July 7, 2012 by Team CowboyPapa

[+user13371]

...when out of cellular coverage, the inReach unit's GPS will transmit your location by Bluetooth to the smartphone for display on the Earthmate app's mapping function.

Just to clarify, many (most? all?)) smartphones can still get a GPS fix when out of cellular coverage. The advantage of using the inReach for this is that it's a better quality GPS than most phones have -- and the batteries last a long* time, saving your phone's battery. That's assuming you turn OFF your phone's internal GPS and just leave on the Bluetooth connection to let the inReach do the talking.

 

On Android devices (like Cowboy's), the inReach can only feed GPS data to DeLorme's Earthmate app.

 

On iOS (iPhone/iPod Touch/iPad), the inReach can feed GPS data to ANY app - so you can use your own favorite mapping/navigating/geocaching programs as well as DeLorme's Earthmate app.

 

---

* YMMV. DeLorme advertises up to 120 hours on a pair of AA Energizer Ultimate Lithium batteries. But that's NOT paired to any cell phone -- their benchmark is recording one fix/trackpoint every ten minutes. Over on DeLorme's user forum, one user who had it paired to his iPhone, and constantly constantly with the Gaia mapping app, found it "only" lasted 24 hours.

Edited July 7, 2012 by user13371

[yogazoo]

I've owned the 62 and Montana and after a brief stint using them both, sold my 62.

 

The Montana has 20 or so data fields that the 62 doesn't have such as "Track Distance", "Vertical Distance to Destination", "GPS Elevation" to name a few. I'm not sure how the 62 is the "gold standard" while lacking the ability to view all these extra (and in most cases very helpful) data fields. However I have very little experience as far as geocaching with the Montana. The screen resolution/viewability comparison between the two is no contest, Montana wins by a fair margin.

 

I fit the Montana in my jacket pocket all the time. While large, I think some of the critique of the units size given by those who haven't owned the Montana is perhaps unwarranted. I was guilty myself of being overly critical of the size before I actually owned one.

 

The Montana appears to be the gold standard as far as functionality goes. If you prefer buttons over touch-screen then take a look at the 62, otherwise, if you want the best Garmin handheld GPS unit the Montana wins hands down in my opinion (I've owned both).

[zcoyote12]

Thanks for all the info. very informative. The inReach is very interesting and I plan on doing a little research on them.

[+user13371]

ZC: I recently got an inReach (and the Earthmate App) and reviews are up on REI's website (hardware only) and iTunes (Earthmate app). If you get one, PM me before you activate it or subscribe to a service plan if you want some tips on using it just as a GPS in trial mode.

 

Bear in mind that while I agreed with the Cowboy's recommendation, it really depends on your needs. To me, the "gold standard" for geocaching is my iPhone 4 -- with my eTrex 20 for those times when I need to get a bit closer. And the iPhone already does the key thing you were after, various kinds of maps and the aerial imagery cached in apps like Gaia. If you're an Android user, you'd have to ask the Cowboy his favorite apps.

 

But -- having nothing to do with the GPS part -- if you need the inReach's messaging feature when out of cellphone range, there's nothing else for it.

[+Team CowboyPapa]

I have two Gold Standards:

1. Geocaching: The DeLorme PN-60 does all I want for geocaching. I prefer to cache with the DeLorme MapPack aerial photo imagery of which I carry about 3,000 sq mi (about 12GB) on a 16GB SDHC card. As the OP has mentioned, I prefer to determine my location in reference to observable surroundings.

2. Back country 4WD sightseeing and exploring: The object is to be outside of cellular service and whereby an inReach unit with either my PN-60w or my Samsung Android phone, has no peer regarding communication from such environs.

 

I might add for those preferring large screens, the inReach can work with Earthmate apps installed on iPads and Samsung Android 10.1" screen tablets.

[+BAMBOOZLE]

I had went with a Montana and, after getting it, realized it was not very Geocaching friendly. More of a Nuvi trying to also double as a trail device. Currently, the 62s holds the title of "gold standard", at least among the Garmin units.

 

The 62S also gets my vote as the current " Gold Standard ".

[yogazoo]

I had went with a Montana and, after getting it, realized it was not very Geocaching friendly. More of a Nuvi trying to also double as a trail device. Currently, the 62s holds the title of "gold standard", at least among the Garmin units.

 

The 62S also gets my vote as the current " Gold Standard ".

 

As someone who just occasionally geocaches, what exactly are the differences between the 62 and Montana when it comes to geocaching? What makes the 62 so much friendlier? Thanks.

[+PeoriaBill]

Hello,

Looking at your geocaching stats, your primary use of a GPS is for hiking as you stated. You also mentioned being "off the grid" outside of telephone coverage as a requirement and needing aerial maps and pictures. Balancing your requirements with what is available, seems that your logical, not expressed, choice is the PN60w w/ an Inreach or Spot device. Delorme make a military version w/ Iraq/Afgan maps if you need that. If you are flexible on your stated requirements, then Garmin makes some excellent GPS units as mentioned in the comments above. Delorme and Garmin both have on road navigation ability. I discourage phones because they are not rugged or waterproof. There are some phones that do an amazing job, but might not be the best choice for extended hikes to remote areas. Good luck whatever you decide.

[+RFtinkerer]

I really love the Montana; I have the City Navigator, 24k topo, and Birdseye imagery for it. And the automotive mount. I use it for everything...for geocaching, I select a cache from the geocaching mode, car navigate to it through voice-guided prompts, take it off the the mount and hike the rest of the way, then log the cache after I find it in there. Navigate back to my car, off to the next. I also use it for city navigation, boating, and ranging for long range shooting. It plain rules. I don't mind the bulk, it still fits in my jeans pocket, though it is large.

[+taeke]

I fit the Montana in my jacket pocket all the time. While large, I think some of the critique of the units size given by those who haven't owned the Montana is perhaps unwarranted. I was guilty myself of being overly critical of the size before I actually owned one.

 

(Note: I can only compare the Montana with an Etrex 20, none of the other mentioned devices)

 

I agree with yogazoo on the size issue. I carry my Montana in my jacket pocket, but it will also fit in the pocket of my trousers if I don't wear a jacket. Obviously I don't wear skinny jeans

 

I like the larger size (and bright) screen as it means less scrolling to look around on the map, which I prefer when cycling.

 

For me it is the personal gold standard, after waiting for a few years for something like this to show up. The Oregon etc just didn't cut it for me.

 

I use it for geocaching and navigating to the geocache (by car or bicycle). For navigating, I find the device perfect, but the paperless caching it is still immature in my opinion. Despite that, I geocache paperless, but it requires getting used to the mangled XML imports.

By the way, a few days ago I e-mailed the Montana-team with an idea to improve paperless caching, so I hope they will pick that one up, as it is a great timesaver

 

To conclude, I think with the use in mind of the OP, I would recommend the Garmin Montana.

[+BAMBOOZLE]

I had went with a Montana and, after getting it, realized it was not very Geocaching friendly. More of a Nuvi trying to also double as a trail device. Currently, the 62s holds the title of "gold standard", at least among the Garmin units.

 

The 62S also gets my vote as the current " Gold Standard ".

 

As someone who just occasionally geocaches, what exactly are the differences between the 62 and Montana when it comes to geocaching? What makes the 62 so much friendlier? Thanks.

 

For years I used a Magellan Platinum and My wife a 60 CSx.......both wonderful units loaded with features.

We got an Oregon 450 to go paperless and later I got a 62S. I don't care for the touch screen and I find the 62S as accurate as anything I've ever used and far better reception. The 62S has the same button layout as the 60 and Platinum which I prefer over the button/joystick arrangement of the Etrex line. I'm kind of a GPS junkie and own over a dozen and read this forum constantly and, like I said, the 62S gets my vote.

[+eosxt]

I'm surprised no one mentioned the eXplorist 710 or 610. I just got the 710, couldn't ask for anything more. I know people around here don't like Magellans, but I'd at least give it a look.

--> http://www.magellangps.com/lp/eXploristfamily/screens.html#6

[+user13371]

Rethinking in light of a new product announcement... If the small screen bothers you, and you really want "do it all" capability, and you already have a smartphone that does MOST of what you need ... Put the phone in an Otter box, carry an external battery box (and lots of AA batteries, and buy THIS.

 

A tiny and accurate bluetooth unit that links with iOS and Android devices, supports GPS and GLONASS, offers 10x per second sampling rate... sign me up!

Edited July 12, 2012 by user13371