Questions About The Etrex 10 & 20

[kyote84]

Greetings. Name is David, I hail from the Pacific Northwest, and I am an aspiring adventurer. I'm pretty new to geocaching, but I'm at the point now that I know it's something I'm going to stick with. I love how searching for cashes brings me to new places I wouldn't have otherwise thought to explore, and the hunt it's self is becoming quite addicting. So now I would like to go paperless, taking all that time to write everything down by hand is just too time consuming, and ends up limiting the amount of caches I can go after. I've been thinking of upgrading to the Etrex 10, but I hear you can't download any other maps to it. The only other GPS I have experience with is my Magellan Exlporist 200, which I picked up at a yard sale for a few bucks last year. I find it's base map to be very sparse, to say the least. So I'm wondering how the 10's base map compares to the Explorist, is it much of an upgrade? I also really like the Etrex 20, but it's pretty darn expensive. Even if I did save up for it, it's not likely I could afford the nearly $100 upgraded software. I understand it has a color screen, but is it's base map any better than the 10? Thanks in advance for the help.

[kyote84]

One other question I forgot to add. I go to a lot of yard sales, and while I have become pretty efficient at coming up with my own shorthand, and being able to write complete directions in a single line on a 4.5" wide section of paper. It's once I have a couple dozen or more written down, that I can have a hard time placing them all in my minds eye and figuring out what route I should fallow, especially when some of them have been written down days in advance. What would be really helpful is if I had a GPS which I could type all the directions in and it would then figure out the best route to fallow. Can the Etrex 10 or 20 do that?

[tr_s]

I understand it has a color screen, but is it's base map any better than the 10? Thanks in advance for the help.

 

In short yes. The basemap in the 10 is VERY basic. The 20/30 basemap actually has rough color elevation and some major trails/waterways.

Etrex 10 only country borders and large cities.

Size also tells it all, 20/30 = 50 MB; 10 = 2 MB.

[+Gitchee-Gummee]

Add one thing: Both the 20 and the 30 make use of a microSD card. The 10 does not. This feature alone, greatly increases the mapping and/or storage capabilities.

 

Even with the greater difference in prices, you'll be far happier with the 20 than the 10. Also, it would be easier to sell when that time arrives. The 10 basically would be a brick in your closet.

[+gpsblake]

The Etrex 10 really has no basemap in all purposes. Not even the interstate here shows up on the map. My town of 5,000 people doesn't even appear as a dot on the Etrex 10.

 

If mapping is important, then yea, the Etrex 20 is probably best suited for you. The basemap on the Etrex 20 is very basic, about equal to an Explorist 200 with only major roads shown. However, there are plenty of free maps that will give you detailed maps for the 20.

 

Another unit maybe you could look at for your budget would be the Magellan GC, which comes with a complete map including detailed roads, but it won't auto-route.

[kyote84]

Thanks guys those are some big differences to consider. Is auto route what I would want for my garage sale routes? I'll check into the GC. Anyone got a link to some of the free maps for the 20?

Edited April 12, 2013 by kyote84

[kyote84]

How does the Etrex "WAAS-enabled receiver" compare to the GC's "High-sensitivity SiRFstarIII with 3-meter accuracy"?

[+Gitchee-Gummee]

How does the Etrex "WAAS-enabled receiver" compare to the GC's "High-sensitivity SiRFstarIII with 3-meter accuracy"?

If you believe all you read published by the manufacturer, you could cut hair with them, also.

Most any GPSr is gonna get you to Ground Zero (GZ) -- that is within 15 to 18 meters of the coordinates. After that, you need to search with your other computer and sensory inputs. As an add-on to that thought, remember that the coordinates were determined by using another GPSr (supposedly), and it too has a "margin of error". So getting to the EXACT coordinates (worse yet, the hide itself) is... well... expecting a bit much. Certainly with consumer-grade equipment.

 

I rather doubt that you would notice a meaningful difference between the two.

[kyote84]

I just noticed a GC at my local Bi-Mart on clearance for $89. And if I could get the display model that would be an extra 5% off. Is the map detailed enough to see all the side streets? I decided against the 10, but I can't really afford the 20 right now. GC might be the one I'll have to go with for now.

[+gpsblake]

Is the map detailed enough to see all the side streets?

 

The GC, it should be, it's a very detailed map, as long as the roads aren't new (the GC map around here is dated to around 2007).

[+Redwoods Mtn Biker]

Anyone got a link to some of the free maps for the 20?

 

http://gpsfiledepot.com

[+northernpenguin]

Anyone got a link to some of the free maps for the 20?

 

http://gpsfiledepot.com

 

... and http://garmin.openstreetmap.nl

[kyote84]

Thanks guys. Are the free maps as good as the OEM ones?

[mPetreciya]

Even with the higher distinction in costs, you'll be far more happy with the 20 than the 10. Also, it would be simpler to offer when that period comes. The 10 generally would be a stone in your wardrobe. . . . .

[+northernpenguin]

Thanks guys. Are the free maps as good as the OEM ones?

 

That depends where you are in the world. In Europe the OSM maps tend to be better than Garmin's. In USA it's about the same.

You can't get 3D terrain shading (DEM) with the free maps yet. On the other hand, free.

[kyote84]

Thanks for the help so far guys. I'll let you know what I end up with once I have made up my mind.

[kyote84]

Well folks, I have great news. I am the proud owner of an Etrex 20! I was searching CL, and found one a guy got as a gift and only used it once. With a bit of haggling I ended up getting it for $120! Want to know the best part? This is actually the bundle pack, so it has the case, clip, and map SD card! I must say I'm pretty impressed with the map's details. Well, now it's time for me to figure out how this thing works. Soon as I have done that, I will be unstoppable!

Edited April 22, 2013 by kyote84

[+BlackRose67]

Nice score. I have the eTrex 20 and am very happy with it.

[+hydrodis]

playing with it is the best way to workout how to use it.Also ask question in this forum,always some help available

[kyote84]

Thanks guys, I'm very happy with it! Beats my Explorist 200 all to pieces!

[kyote84]

So I just found out I can download caches without being premium member. Which is very cool, but it doesn't look like I can add more details info to the caches manually. Is that right, or am I missing something?

[+BlackRose67]

That's correct, you only get basic cache information as a non-premium member.

[kyote84]

I can understand that, but it seems they would at least allow me to edit caches once they were downloaded to my GPS, so I can type in all the notes and such manually. But I suppose if they allowed that, then they couldn't use their "upgrade and go paperless" slogan. I plan on getting a premium membership, but I just can't afford it right now.

[+northernpenguin]

I can understand that, but it seems they would at least allow me to edit caches once they were downloaded to my GPS, so I can type in all the notes and such manually. But I suppose if they allowed that, then they couldn't use their "upgrade and go paperless" slogan. I plan on getting a premium membership, but I just can't afford it right now.

 

Pretty much none of the GPS products out there allow you to edit geocache details on the GPS. You can create field notes with found/didn't find and a comment but not change the listing text or view your notes with the listing. You CAN edit geocaches if you stick a program like GSAK between your GPS and the Geocaching website. Then again, it's like $30/year for a premium membership so decide for yourself how much your time is worth.

[kyote84]

Much thanks to gpsblake for the pm!

 

I have another one for you guys. I took the Etrex out the other day, and I've noticed that it doesn't seem to be tracking on the roads as it should. In one instance we were right on the side of a main road, but the tracks showed that we were about 150' from it! This one has me concerned considering the unit is suppose to have a 3 meter accuracy. Any thoughts?

[+ngrrfan]

I have another one for you guys. I took the Etrex out the other day, and I've noticed that it doesn't seem to be tracking on the roads as it should. In one instance we were right on the side of a main road, but the tracks showed that we were about 150' from it! This one has me concerned considering the unit is suppose to have a 3 meter accuracy. Any thoughts?

You expect the map to 100% accurate? I'll trust my E20 long before I trust the maps. Besides, it is kinda fun to see that you're actually 4-wheelin' in the field instead of being on the road.

[insig]

Much thanks to gpsblake for the pm!

 

I have another one for you guys. I took the Etrex out the other day, and I've noticed that it doesn't seem to be tracking on the roads as it should. In one instance we were right on the side of a main road, but the tracks showed that we were about 150' from it! This one has me concerned considering the unit is suppose to have a 3 meter accuracy. Any thoughts?

 

It sounds like you only have the basemap that came with the etrex. It's a very rudimentary map that contains a (comparatively) rough representation of major roads. It's got roads and cities over the entire world in a 90 MB file. For comparison, the road maps that are preloaded on automotive GPS devices are several GB (1 GB is about 1000 MB) in size and only cover a portion of the world (like the US & Canada), so they're much more detailed and represent the roads more accurately. Imagine that the basemap is like someone trying to draw a circle, but they only have eight spots that they can use. The result is something that is shaped like a stop sign rather than a circle. In order to draw that circle, you need much more detailed information. In effect, the map is playing 'connect the dots' to represent a road. The problem is, there aren't that many dots to use, so the road might be off by a hundred feet. More points along the road for it to use makes the map much more accurate. That's the kind of stuff that makes the map take up a whole lot more memory.

 

You can get official Garmin maps like City Navigator, topo 100k, or topo 24k. There are also some free topographical at gpsfiledepot.com or you can go to http://garmin.openstreetmap.nl/ for free street maps. Personally, I lean towards Garmin's topo maps because I think they look nicer. When it comes to street maps, I've found that depending upon the coverage in your area, the free ones are pretty comparable to the official ones as far as road coverage goes. I don't really use them for lots of POI searching, so I'm not that familiar with how good they are there.

[kyote84]

Much thanks to gpsblake for the pm!

 

I have another one for you guys. I took the Etrex out the other day, and I've noticed that it doesn't seem to be tracking on the roads as it should. In one instance we were right on the side of a main road, but the tracks showed that we were about 150' from it! This one has me concerned considering the unit is suppose to have a 3 meter accuracy. Any thoughts?

 

It sounds like you only have the basemap that came with the etrex. It's a very rudimentary map that contains a (comparatively) rough representation of major roads. It's got roads and cities over the entire world in a 90 MB file. For comparison, the road maps that are preloaded on automotive GPS devices are several GB (1 GB is about 1000 MB) in size and only cover a portion of the world (like the US & Canada), so they're much more detailed and represent the roads more accurately. Imagine that the basemap is like someone trying to draw a circle, but they only have eight spots that they can use. The result is something that is shaped like a stop sign rather than a circle. In order to draw that circle, you need much more detailed information. In effect, the map is playing 'connect the dots' to represent a road. The problem is, there aren't that many dots to use, so the road might be off by a hundred feet. More points along the road for it to use makes the map much more accurate. That's the kind of stuff that makes the map take up a whole lot more memory.

 

You can get official Garmin maps like City Navigator, topo 100k, or topo 24k. There are also some free topographical at gpsfiledepot.com or you can go to http://garmin.openstreetmap.nl/ for free street maps. Personally, I lean towards Garmin's topo maps because I think they look nicer. When it comes to street maps, I've found that depending upon the coverage in your area, the free ones are pretty comparable to the official ones as far as road coverage goes. I don't really use them for lots of POI searching, so I'm not that familiar with how good they are there.

 

Thank you for that explanation insig. I do however have the topo 100k map.

[kyote84]

I have another one for you guys. I took the Etrex out the other day, and I've noticed that it doesn't seem to be tracking on the roads as it should. In one instance we were right on the side of a main road, but the tracks showed that we were about 150' from it! This one has me concerned considering the unit is suppose to have a 3 meter accuracy. Any thoughts?

You expect the map to 100% accurate? I'll trust my E20 long before I trust the maps. Besides, it is kinda fun to see that you're actually 4-wheelin' in the field instead of being on the road.

 

Shouldn't I at least expect somewhere along the lines of 3 meter accuracy? I asked my sister if her iphone ever tracks off the road, she says it's never happened to her. And doesn't the Etrex have better GPS capabilities than the iphone?

Edited April 28, 2013 by kyote84

[kyote84]

If you're using it to navigate 'on road' ensure you have Set Up, Routing, Lock on road selected.

 

 

I have tried to program it to fallow the road, but when I do it shows a message saying that the maps can't support it... or something like that.

[kyote84]

But should it be so far off the road so often? I was messing around with it today, and it's not uncommon that it's a good 150' off the road.

[kyote84]

I see. I can be a little thickheaded at times, thanks for pointing that out to me, a second time. I'm looking back at the cache I mentioned above, and on my map it shows it about 50' from the south side of the road, but on the website it's show it on the north side of the road. That explains why we couldn't find it . So do all maps have this level of inaccuracy then?

Edited April 28, 2013 by kyote84

[kyote84]

Thanks for the help guys. Glad to hear that it's not something wrong with my unit.

[insig]

I see. I can be a little thickheaded at times, thanks for pointing that out to me, a second time. I'm looking back at the cache I mentioned above, and on my map it shows it about 50' from the south side of the road, but on the website it's show it on the north side of the road. That explains why we couldn't find it . So do all maps have this level of inaccuracy then?

 

Ah, I believe the topo 100k map you have is using TIGER2000 road data which is (in)famously known for roads being off by a hundred feet or more in some areas. That's probably why it isn't routable -- it would keep yelling at you for being off the road! As long as you're routinely finding geocaches with it, your device is performing fine.

[+TEAM BULLSGUT]

Make sure you are set up to the WGS84 Datum not any other as they can put you off 150 feet

[kyote84]

I see. I can be a little thickheaded at times, thanks for pointing that out to me, a second time. I'm looking back at the cache I mentioned above, and on my map it shows it about 50' from the south side of the road, but on the website it's show it on the north side of the road. That explains why we couldn't find it . So do all maps have this level of inaccuracy then?

 

Ah, I believe the topo 100k map you have is using TIGER2000 road data which is (in)famously known for roads being off by a hundred feet or more in some areas. That's probably why it isn't routable -- it would keep yelling at you for being off the road! As long as you're routinely finding geocaches with it, your device is performing fine.

 

Well, good thing it isn't routable then, that could get annoying quite quickly, lol.

 

 

Make sure you are set up to the WGS84 Datum not any other as they can put you off 150 feet

 

I checked the Datum, and its set up to said parameters. Thanks for that tip though!

[+northernpenguin]

I find topo maps in general have poor accuracy for roads. I've found Garmin Topo Canada and Garmin City Navigator NT disagreeing by up to 50 metres on the placement of the same road.

Check your accuracy against other map products before assuming the GPS itself is wonky. Though the datum thing can definitely do that effect as well.

[kyote84]

I find topo maps in general have poor accuracy for roads. I've found Garmin Topo Canada and Garmin City Navigator NT disagreeing by up to 50 metres on the placement of the same road.

Check your accuracy against other map products before assuming the GPS itself is wonky. Though the datum thing can definitely do that effect as well.

 

Good to know. Are there any free maps that are better the 100k topo, that are perhaps routeable?

[kyote84]

Btw, I'm curious, how does the "coordinates bounce" on the Etrex 20 compare to other models? Does the WAAS-enable receiver and compatibility with Russian Glonass system make a difference?

Edited April 29, 2013 by kyote84

[+northernpenguin]

I find topo maps in general have poor accuracy for roads. I've found Garmin Topo Canada and Garmin City Navigator NT disagreeing by up to 50 metres on the placement of the same road.

Check your accuracy against other map products before assuming the GPS itself is wonky. Though the datum thing can definitely do that effect as well.

 

Good to know. Are there any free maps that are better the 100k topo, that are perhaps routeable?

 

I use the Garmin Topo Canada product so, I've had no need to source a "free" Topo. Having said that, Ibycus topo comes highly recommended. More of the Canada and USA topo products use the same dataset (Government) anyway.

[+northernpenguin]

Btw, I'm curious, how does the "coordinates bounce" on the Etrex 20 compare to other models? Does the WAAS-enable receiver and compatibility with Russian Glonass system make a difference?

 

I have an eTrex 30 which is the same as an eTrex 20, just with sensors. I have not noticed any particular bouncing going on. Most I've been out is 10 metres and that was in a gorge that was full of wet cedar trees. The accuracy of my eTrex 30 just blows me away compared to my Colorado 400t. Mind you the Colorado had a whole nest of issues on it's own.

[kyote84]

Thanks northernpenguin.

 

One other thing I notice last night while I was stomping through sticker bushes, in the rain, is the indicator at the top of the screen that shows how far you are from the cache. Mine seems to be very inconsistent. In one spot it says I'm 20 something feet from the cache, and then later in about the same area it's saying I'm 40 something feet from it. Another area it said I was 9 feet from the cache, later it was saying I was 30 something feet from it. I know I'm not suppose to expect the until to take me right to the cache, but it seems very inconsistent in telling me the distance from it.

Edited April 29, 2013 by kyote84

[+northernpenguin]

Thanks northernpenguin.

 

One other thing I notice last night while I was stomping through sticker bushes, in the rain, is the indicator at the top of the screen that shows how far you are from the cache. Mine seems to be very inconsistent. In one spot it says I'm 20 something feet from the cache, and then later in about the same area it's saying I'm 40 something feet from it. Another area it said I was 9 feet from the cache, later it was saying I was 30 something feet from it. I know I'm not suppose to expect the until to take me right to the cache, but it seems very inconsistent in telling me the distance from it.

 

If you have an eTrex 20 remember that's an inertial compass. You have to move about 10 feet before it can tell which way you are facing. Couple that with signal interruptions/interference and, well, at the 20-40 foot scale that's pretty much expected. The eTrex 30 is a bit better with the compass, as when calibrated it tends to keep you travelling toward the cache. General rule around here (in our caching group) is less than 10 metres (30 feet) we put the GPS away and start looking.

[+GeoTrekker26]

Thanks northernpenguin.

In one spot it says I'm 20 something feet from the cache, and then later in about the same area it's saying I'm 40 something feet from it. Another area it said I was 9 feet from the cache, later it was saying I was 30 something feet from it. I know I'm not suppose to expect the until to take me right to the cache, but it seems very inconsistent in telling me the distance from it.

 

If you have an eTrex 20 remember that's an inertial compass. You have to move about 10 feet before it can tell which way you are facing. Couple that with signal interruptions/interference and, well, at the 20-40 foot scale that's pretty much expected. The eTrex 30 is a bit better with the compass, as when calibrated it tends to keep you travelling toward the cache. General rule around here (in our caching group) is less than 10 metres (30 feet) we put the GPS away and start looking.

 

You are confusing direction and distance. You do not need to be moving for it to tell you how far you are from the target. When holding the device still it will tell you how far and what the crude bearing is to GZ. It will not POINT the arrow in the proper direction unless you have moved enough for it to determine your direction of travel from which it will assume you are holding the GPS properly and point the proper direction.

 

When the distance bounces you are within the margin of error for the current conditions. If you expect the distance to always be accurate then the GPS would be able to lead you to GZ exactly. Note that the accuracy figure displayed on the GPS is actually called EPE, Estimated Probable Error. That label has two fudge factors; how much would you rely on a banker who quoted you an estimated probable loan rate?

 

In summary, the GPS is behaving properly and just like ever other consumer grade general use GPS.

[+northernpenguin]

 

You are confusing direction and distance. You do not need to be moving for it to tell you how far you are from the target.

 

True, I was sort of assuming the bumblebee dance at GZ was getting complicated by the cacher's movements with the "inertial compass". If you are standing still the distance shouldn't be changing (unless you have crappy reception that is).

[+BlackRose67]

Thanks northernpenguin.

 

One other thing I notice last night while I was stomping through sticker bushes, in the rain, is the indicator at the top of the screen that shows how far you are from the cache. Mine seems to be very inconsistent. In one spot it says I'm 20 something feet from the cache, and then later in about the same area it's saying I'm 40 something feet from it. Another area it said I was 9 feet from the cache, later it was saying I was 30 something feet from it. I know I'm not suppose to expect the until to take me right to the cache, but it seems very inconsistent in telling me the distance from it.

You will get some movement.

I was out Sunday afternoon placing my cache for this coming weekend's local caching event.

 

I verified the coordinates I had used when I submitted the cache to make sure they were OK.

I placed my GPS (eTrex 20 running firmaware 2.80, and using GPS+GLONASS+WAAS) on top of the cache for several minutes.

 

With the GPS itself stationary, the marked waypoint moved as much as 8 meters before finally settling down to within 1 meter of where the cache is.

[kyote84]

Thanks guys, I'll check it out at further distances and see how it does.