Garmin Dakota 20 or Magellan eXplorist 310

[+ifaref]

So, I've been looking at getting a unit better suited to caching than the Nuvi I was given for Christmas. I think I've narrowed things down to a choice between the Garmin Dakota 20 or the Magellan eXplorist 310. Any thoughts from the gallery?

 

Thanks

[+Mr. Wilson & a Mt. Goat]

I'd go with the Dakota... partly because I've owned one for the last year and a half.

 

If you don't mind a smaller touchscreen, this is a pretty good little unit capable of doing things the more expensive ones can do too.

[+gpsblake]

Dakota 20 if price is no factor, The 310 is about 80 bucks cheaper than a Dakota 20. The only thing the 310 (and it's almost identical twin the GC) can do that the Dakota 20 can't is store more geocaches & comes with a pretty good basemap. However, the features of the Dakota 20 (auto-routes, touch screen, a magnetic compass, easier to read fonts, most customizable, SD card storage, far faster responding unit etc). Plenty of free maps available for the Dakota 20 or you can purchase the Garmin detailed maps. I think the Dakota 20 can store 2,000 geocaches.

 

Have you looked into a Etrex 20 or 30?

[+Mr. Wilson & a Mt. Goat]

If you look on the right sites the price difference is only about 15$.

 

Like gpsblake said, you may want to check out the eTrex 20 or 30 too.

[+cx1]

Personally if I had to choose just between those two I would go with the Dakota.

I don't like touchscreens but I like having lots of different maps more. So I would suffer with the touchscreen to get the maps.

A Garmin is going to give you the widest selection of available maps many at little or no cost.

I cache with a person with a Magellan (not the 310 though but the model below it the GC) and while I am impressed with the battery life and form factor of the device I was not impressed with the maps. Maybe the 310 has a better map. I looked on the website for them(GC vs 310) and they are described almost identical as far as maps but I am not certain.

 

What made you decide just between those two? They are not very similar really.

 

Dakota PROs (IMO)

Many map choices

Turn by turn navigation (admittedly I would never use that feature probably if I had a Nuvi)

Electronic compass (admittedly I have poor luck with these as well)

User storage is expandable with SD cards(only seeing 500MB internal on the 310 and no card slots)

Established firmware so fewer bugs

Larger support base of forums and user groups with Garmin

 

310 PROs

Can hold more geocaches 10000 vs 2000 (I think)

Not a touchscreen (and that is not a pro to many people)

Reference the OS Grid for use in Great Britain (not sure if the Dakota can do that but imagine it probably can but since I'm not sure I'll give it as a slight plus)

 

Personally not seeing a whole lot going for the 310 /shrug

[+gpsblake]

If you look on the right sites the price difference is only about 15$.

 

Thanks, I just checked and the prices have really dropped on the Dakota 20 and the Oregon 550. And even weirder, the prices of the Garmin 60CSX, a discontinued unit, have risen considerably, over $600 on the mega site. Go figure.

 

I really don't need a new GPS but the Oregon 550 at close to $250 is really tempting me.

[+ifaref]

Thanks for the input all. I think I'll be going with the Dakota. The altimeter and the electronic compass sealed the deal. Looks like it's the most bang for the buck.