Explorist gc or dakota 20 or other

[+wilko160]

Looking at the lower price ranges. I know the dakota had the electric compass which surely is important for caching?

However the gc can carry more caches and is cheaper.

 

Does the dakota show you the last 20 user logs too? The gc does buy can't see if the garmin does or not.

 

Using iphone now which has satelite topo and compas but kills battery and scared of dropping it! So want a GPS.

[+wilko160]

Thanks. Also see the benefit of being able to download satellite maps but on the other hand I quite like the idea of finding the terrain out as I cross it.

Does anyone have experiance with the dakota or both? Another question I have. Are there any other benefits to the gc? It's a dedicated unit for geocaching but is there anything that makes it different apart from a logo on the box?

Edited February 5, 2013 by wilko160

[+gpsblake]

I own the Dakota 10 and the GC. The 20 adds some features that the 10 doesn't have. The Dakota is superior in every possible way except it can hold only 2,000 geocaches (consider I have found only 1240 in ten years of geocaching) and the Dakota 20 doesn't come with a detailed map although plenty of good free ones are out there. The Dakota is quicker, faster, touch-screen, batteries last longer, SD card, auto-routes, boots faster, and far far less button pushes then the GC. Also if you are entering field notes or coordinates for a multi-cache, the Dakota just blows the GC out of the water due to the touch screen.

 

I've been using the GC a lot over the past week testing stuff out for Magellan but Dakota 10 is my main unit. So my recommendation is the Dakota 20.

[+wilko160]

I own the Dakota 10 and the GC. The 20 adds some features that the 10 doesn't have. The Dakota is superior in every possible way except it can hold only 2,000 geocaches (consider I have found only 1240 in ten years of geocaching) and the Dakota 20 doesn't come with a detailed map although plenty of good free ones are out there. The Dakota is quicker, faster, touch-screen, batteries last longer, SD card, auto-routes, boots faster, and far far less button pushes then the GC. Also if you are entering field notes or coordinates for a multi-cache, the Dakota just blows the GC out of the water due to the touch screen.

 

I've been using the GC a lot over the past week testing stuff out for Magellan but Dakota 10 is my main unit. So my recommendation is the Dakota 20.

Thanks your your reply.

 

Does the dakota show the last 20 logs like the gc says it does? Does it have all the same info because having more cache info would be worth more to me than a quick boot time, touch screen etc.

[+kaseym]

If the last few logs show that the cache was found, it is probably still there. That is all you need to know. All those other logs won't help you find it, unless there are spoilers. No need for all that clutter.

[+wilko160]

If the last few logs show that the cache was found, it is probably still there. That is all you need to know. All those other logs won't help you find it, unless there are spoilers. No need for all that clutter.

Depends. I've been looking ages for a cache before now and a clue in the recent logs has helped so I would rather have it there without the need to pull my phone out and have a look.

[+gpsblake]

Does the dakota show the last 20 logs like the gc says it does? Does it have all the same info because having more cache info would be worth more to me than a quick boot time, touch screen etc.

 

I download pocket queries and pocket queries only download the last 5 logs. Both the GC and the Dakota series do this, however it's far easier to read the last logs on a Dakota because you can scroll down just flipping the screen while the GC you have to hold the joystick down. Downloading the caches individually will give you more logs (I think 10 plus your own). A comparison of the GC and the Dakota reveals the same number of past logs shown, so my guess it's equal.

 

Another choice that I would recommend looking into is the Garmin Etrex 20, it's in-between the price range of the GC and a Dakota, but even with more features and an ultra modern unit.

 

If you have a store nearby that has both units, maybe you can usually get your hands on each and compare that way.

[+cx1]

Don't know about logs on the Dakota, on the Etrex 20 you get the last 5.

 

I am curious as to this last five log issue.

 

How do you get the data on to your unit?

 

If you are simply downloading GPX files from PQs then yes you would only have the last 5 logs(if 5 logs have been made) because that is all the Groundspeak server will send in the PQ.

 

I tested this by downloading a small PQ (29 caches)to a new database in GSAK. All the caches only had 5 logs (except one odd one had six /shrug and one only had four since it is new). I then used the GSAK geocaching.com tool to refresh cache data which will allow you to pull up to 30 logs for each cache. After that refresh most of the caches had 30 logs and only four caches had less then 10 logs.

GSAK will allow me to decide how many logs I wish to send in my generated GPX files. I normally opt for 10-20 logs per cache.

 

So what I am getting at is the 5 log limit a result of the unit only being able to display 5 logs even if say 20 logs are in the GPX file or is the 5 log limit because that is all a PQ direct from GC.com will have?

[+wilko160]

Does the dakota show the last 20 logs like the gc says it does? Does it have all the same info because having more cache info would be worth more to me than a quick boot time, touch screen etc.

 

I download pocket queries and pocket queries only download the last 5 logs. Both the GC and the Dakota series do this, however it's far easier to read the last logs on a Dakota because you can scroll down just flipping the screen while the GC you have to hold the joystick down. Downloading the caches individually will give you more logs (I think 10 plus your own). A comparison of the GC and the Dakota reveals the same number of past logs shown, so my guess it's equal.

 

Another choice that I would recommend looking into is the Garmin Etrex 20, it's in-between the price range of the GC and a Dakota, but even with more features and an ultra modern unit.

 

If you have a store nearby that has both units, maybe you can usually get your hands on each and compare that way.

 

Now you mention the etrex 20.

I was looking at the etrex 30 as it has the compass. How would that compare to the dakota 20?

[+gpsblake]

Now you mention the etrex 20.

I was looking at the etrex 30 as it has the compass. How would that compare to the dakota 20?

 

Probably identical as both units have a magnetic compass. The GC does not have a magnetic compass and relies on GPS signals and you being in motion for it to point to the cache location. My Dakota 10 also does not have a magnetic compass. Some geocachers love the magnstic compass on their units (my Triton 500 has it). However, I might be in the minority, but I don't think it will help you find caches any easier. However, if money isn't a factor in the decision, I'd go with the magnetic compass.

 

A good video comparing the display of the Etrex 30 vs the Dakota 20 is here on youtube

[+wilko160]

Now you mention the etrex 20.

I was looking at the etrex 30 as it has the compass. How would that compare to the dakota 20?

 

Probably identical as both units have a magnetic compass. The GC does not have a magnetic compass and relies on GPS signals and you being in motion for it to point to the cache location. My Dakota 10 also does not have a magnetic compass. Some geocachers love the magnstic compass on their units (my Triton 500 has it). However, I might be in the minority, but I don't think it will help you find caches any easier. However, if money isn't a factor in the decision, I'd go with the magnetic compass.

 

A good video comparing the display of the Etrex 30 vs the Dakota 20 is here on youtube

Thanls for your help.

I have just seen an Oragen 300 for sale at a reasonable price. It has the compass and seems similar to the Dakota so may go for that.

[alandb]

Note that the Oregon 300 is a discontinued device while the Dakota 20 is not.

[+wilko160]

Note that the Oregon 300 is a discontinued device while the Dakota 20 is not.

Fair comment, thanks.

[+wilko160]

There is also a 60csx with topo maps.

Would I be right in thinking that's a better model with possibly more accurate signal?

[+GrateBear]

I tested this by downloading a small PQ (29 caches)to a new database in GSAK. All the caches only had 5 logs (except one odd one had six /shrug and one only had four since it is new). I then used the GSAK geocaching.com tool to refresh cache data which will allow you to pull up to 30 logs for each cache. After that refresh most of the caches had 30 logs and only four caches had less then 10 logs.

GSAK will allow me to decide how many logs I wish to send in my generated GPX files. I normally opt for 10-20 logs per cache.

 

Can you explain what the GSAK geocaching.com tool is? One of the macros? Sounds like a good tool to use.

Thanks.

[+GrateBear]

To the OP, I use a Dakota 20, having upgraded from a Legend Cx. I like it, although the screen is starting to show scratches due to dust/etc. getting on it. I happened to win an Explorist GC a year ago and tried it, but didn't care for it. Didn't like the way it mapped and didn't like going back to a joystick.

[+cx1]

 

Can you explain what the GSAK geocaching.com tool is? One of the macros? Sounds like a good tool to use.

Thanks.

 

It is a tool built into the GSAK program

 

[+wilko160]

To the OP, I use a Dakota 20, having upgraded from a Legend Cx. I like it, although the screen is starting to show scratches due to dust/etc. getting on it. I happened to win an Explorist GC a year ago and tried it, but didn't care for it. Didn't like the way it mapped and didn't like going back to a joystick.

Thanks. It's looking like the dakota 20 is the one for me, or an etrex 30, which ever I can find the best deal for the unit or with a map pack or something.