Help! Important GPS Decision!

[danilightning]

(sorry if this is in the wrong section)

 

I am deciding between the:

 

Garmin Etrex 10 handheld gps

and the

Magellan explorist gc gps

 

Opinions of gps owners or anyone for that matter is welcomed.

 

For those of you newbies like me deciding on a new gps with a tight budget these two i found are great. The question is which is better?

 

Thanks

[+stijnhommes]

I don't have either myself, but my father has an Etrex 10. I looked up a review for the Magellan Explorist (

) and if you want to use it to go geocaching, there's really no competition. As far as I know the Etrex 10 has no function that allows you to go the paperless caching route and storing all the cache data on the device while the Explorist was made with this idea in mind.

 

If I had to pick between the two, I'd go for the Explorist, but I'm quite happy with my Etrex 30.

Edited July 8, 2013 by stijnhommes

[danilightning]

I don't have either myself, but my father has an Etrex 10. I looked up a review for the Magellan Explorist (

) and if you want to use it to go geocaching, there's really no competition. As far as I know the Etrex 10 has no function that allows you to go the paperless caching route and storing all the cache data on the device while the Explorist was made with this idea in mind.

 

If I had to pick between the two, I'd go for the Explorist, but I'm quite happy with my Etrex 30.

Thanks. Im leaning toward the explorist even though i dont have a premium membership and cant access all the features. I am still open for all suggestions and comments, in fact, i recommend them. I am hoping to order my first gps tonight or tommorow after using my phone for a half a year.

[+Gitchee-Gummee]

"Better" is subjective.

 

The eTrex 10 has a monochrome screen, the GC is color.

I believe (not for sure though) the GC has better mapping. The eTrex has only base maps -- major roads and little else.

I think the eTrex will hold more caches in memory. Neither unit is expandable memory/storage capable.

 

Aside from those differences, they are near equal.

 

As suggested many times by me, base your decision on "what you want in a GPSr", THEN look for the best price. To base such a purchase solely on the price most always leaves a person wanting, in the end.

 

 

ADDED: It appears the eTrex does support paperless caching according to their (Garmin's) overview:

eTrex 10 supports geocaching GPX files for transferring geocaches. Visit (edited out) to start your geocaching adventure. By going paperless, you're not only helping the environment but also improving efficiency. eTrex 10 stores and displays key information, including location, terrain, difficulty, hints and descriptions, which means no more manually entering coordinates and paper printouts. Simply upload the GPX file to your eTrex 10 and start hunting for caches.

So it seems that going "paperless" is not truly an issue.

Edited July 8, 2013 by Gitchee-Gummee

[+Cardinal Red]

(sorry if this is in the wrong section)

 

I am deciding between the:

 

Garmin Etrex 10 handheld gps

and the

Magellan explorist gc gps

 

Opinions of gps owners or anyone for that matter is welcomed.

 

For those of you newbies like me deciding on a new gps with a tight budget these two i found are great. The question is which is better?

 

Thanks

 

The eTrex 10 is a Paperless unit, though it has MANY limitations. I have recently seen a few Explorist GC units. My Garmin brain could not figure out how to use them, but they seemed to have a lot of good features. The eTrex 10 not so much. Follow this link (to another post with a link) to learn more about the eTrex 10 and why I would not but one: Read This

[danilightning]

"Better" is subjective.

 

The eTrex 10 has a monochrome screen, the GC is color.

I believe (not for sure though) the GC has better mapping. The eTrex has only base maps -- major roads and little else.

I think the eTrex will hold more caches in memory. Neither unit is expandable memory/storage capable.

 

Aside from those differences, they are near equal.

 

As suggested many times by me, base your decision on "what you want in a GPSr", THEN look for the best price. To base such a purchase solely on the price most always leaves a person wanting, in the end.

 

 

ADDED: It appears the eTrex does support paperless caching according to their (Garmin's) overview:

eTrex 10 supports geocaching GPX files for transferring geocaches. Visit (edited out) to start your geocaching adventure. By going paperless, you're not only helping the environment but also improving efficiency. eTrex 10 stores and displays key information, including location, terrain, difficulty, hints and descriptions, which means no more manually entering coordinates and paper printouts. Simply upload the GPX file to your eTrex 10 and start hunting for caches.

So it seems that going "paperless" is not truly an issue.

 

Thanks so much! that really helps!

[danilightning]

(sorry if this is in the wrong section)

 

I am deciding between the:

 

Garmin Etrex 10 handheld gps

and the

Magellan explorist gc gps

 

Opinions of gps owners or anyone for that matter is welcomed.

 

For those of you newbies like me deciding on a new gps with a tight budget these two i found are great. The question is which is better?

 

Thanks

 

The eTrex 10 is a Paperless unit, though it has MANY limitations. I have recently seen a few Explorist GC units. My Garmin brain could not figure out how to use them, but they seemed to have a lot of good features. The eTrex 10 not so much. Follow this link (to another post with a link) to learn more about the eTrex 10 and why I would not but one: Read This

 

Thanks! I thing i am going to get the gc then. It is green also, my favorite color.

[+6NoisyHikers]

If you are choosing between those two only, definitely get the eXplorist. We love our eXplorist so we are a little biased, but my step-mom bought an eTrex 10 and the mapping is terrible. If you prefer Garmin, spend the extra bucks and get the eTrex 20.

 

But we highly recommend the eXplorist GC. If you are doing urban/suburban/park caching then it is a great unit with decent street maps built in. And it holds 10,000 waypoints (as opposed to the eTrex 10 which only holds 1000 - which sounds like a lot until you want to load it with road trip caches!)

[danilightning]

If you are choosing between those two only, definitely get the eXplorist. We love our eXplorist so we are a little biased, but my step-mom bought an eTrex 10 and the mapping is terrible. If you prefer Garmin, spend the extra bucks and get the eTrex 20.

 

But we highly recommend the eXplorist GC. If you are doing urban/suburban/park caching then it is a great unit with decent street maps built in. And it holds 10,000 waypoints (as opposed to the eTrex 10 which only holds 1000 - which sounds like a lot until you want to load it with road trip caches!)

Thanks for your feedback! I just ordered the Explorist gc and i am so excited!!!!!!!!

[+funkymunkyzone]

I didn't think you could load maps onto the eXplorist GC (but judging from other's comments, I'm wrong). I would have suggested looking at the eXplorist 310.

[danilightning]

I didn't think you could load maps onto the eXplorist GC (but judging from other's comments, I'm wrong). I would have suggested looking at the eXplorist 310.

When you say load maps, do you mean by state, im confused. And i was trying to keep an under 120 dollar price, but thanks for the help!

[+funkymunkyzone]

I didn't think you could load maps onto the eXplorist GC (but judging from other's comments, I'm wrong). I would have suggested looking at the eXplorist 310.

When you say load maps, do you mean by state, im confused. And i was trying to keep an under 120 dollar price, but thanks for the help!

To clarify, my understanding was that the GC comes with a worldwide base map that's not terribly detailed, and that you couldn't load better maps on for your area. The Magellan website seems to agree with me. On the eXplorist 310, you can load more detailed maps on. I have an eXplorist 310 sitting at home as an evaluation/review unit, and while I have barely done more than turn it on, get a satellite lock, and walk around the living room, it looks to be a nice little unit, and really compact too so it fits nicely in your pocket (same would go for the GC on that front). The difference in price between a GC and a 310 is less than a tank of gas!

 

Edit to add that my comment that the worldwide base map is not terribly detailed is entirely conjecture based only on my experience with Garmin worldwide base maps so don't shoot me!

Edited July 8, 2013 by funkymunkyzone

[+6NoisyHikers]

No, you can't load maps onto the GC but the map that is included is pretty decent. It seems to have all the roads and waterways in the areas we cache in

 

If danilightning is looking to do some serious backwoods caching, then a Garmin is the better way to go. But the GC works really well for our family and when we want to take a big hike in the woods, we print out a trail map.

[+6NoisyHikers]

Thanks for your feedback! I just ordered the Explorist gc and i am so excited!!!!!!!!

 

Congratulations! I hope you enjoy it as much as we do One last word of advice - get yourself a Premium membership. Pocket queries = more time to cache!

[+Bushwalker53]

I have a garmin etrex 10, it is great, it doesn't show any roads or such, just an arrow showing you the distance to the cache and what direction. But combined with my car GPS to get me close to GZ I find it great and easy. The only problem is I lost it at a cache today, I spent an hour looking but couldn't find it. I'm going to return tomorrow for one last look. If that fails I'm going to have to look at getting a new GPS. I strongly recommend the etrex 10, it's very accurate and easy to use, and I've lost count of the amount of times I've dropped mine on rocks and concrete, but it still works, and the screen remained uncracked! Good luck with finding a GPS that you like!

[+sparklefingers]

I have the Magellan GC Explorist and I HATE IT.

 

I have tried everything to make it work properly but I can't. I can't get PQ's onto the thing and to put geocaches on it I have to download each cache and then copy paste it onto the GPS one by one. This takes a lot of time.

 

The plus side is when you're actually out caching it gets you to GZ

 

I bought it on sale for £50 off of Amazon... so really I shouldn't be complaining about it.

 

I have just got a Garmin Dakota 20 (from my lovely mumsy as a b-day present) Now that is a good GPS.

[+J Grouchy]

I'm a little frustrated by my phone and am also looking into getting a GPSr device. I think, however, that one essential feature is the compass. I gather that even though my phone and many GPSr devices have a 'compass' mode, they don't truly work as a compass if one is standing still. I guess that bumps me up into a more expensive category, which is why my search will likely take weeks and numerous attempts on ebay. Even then I'm expecting to spend at least $200.

[+Mudfrog]

I'm a little frustrated by my phone and am also looking into getting a GPSr device. I think, however, that one essential feature is the compass. I gather that even though my phone and many GPSr devices have a 'compass' mode, they don't truly work as a compass if one is standing still. I guess that bumps me up into a more expensive category, which is why my search will likely take weeks and numerous attempts on ebay. Even then I'm expecting to spend at least $200.

 

Not to take this too far off topic, and your mileage may vary,,, I have always checked ebay when shopping for gpsrs but have never found a decent deal on one. Amazon, and even the dedicated online gpsr stores, have always given better prices.

 

The other thing, and i'm thinking i read this on the internet so it must be true,,, is that a person might be taking a chance buying off ebay because the stores there weren't "authorized dealers". Because of this, warranty and any service you might need might be harder to come by.

[+6NoisyHikers]

I have the Magellan GC Explorist and I HATE IT.

 

I have tried everything to make it work properly but I can't. I can't get PQ's onto the thing and to put geocaches on it I have to download each cache and then copy paste it onto the GPS one by one. This takes a lot of time.

 

The plus side is when you're actually out caching it gets you to GZ

 

I bought it on sale for £50 off of Amazon... so really I shouldn't be complaining about it.

 

I have just got a Garmin Dakota 20 (from my lovely mumsy as a b-day present) Now that is a good GPS.

 

If you'd like to get that GC working, visit the Magellan Outdoor page on Facebook. Their rep, Jeff Caufield, is excellent at walking you through things. You can also message me through my account and maybe I can help.

Edited July 9, 2013 by 6NoisyHikers

[ground control 1]

(sorry if this is in the wrong section)

 

I am deciding between the:

 

Garmin Etrex 10 handheld gps

and the

Magellan explorist gc gps

 

Opinions of gps owners or anyone for that matter is welcomed.

 

For those of you newbies like me deciding on a new gps with a tight budget these two i found are great. The question is which is better?

 

Thanks

[ground control 1]

I know exactly where you are coming from. I am also on a tight budget and I decided to go with the etrex 10. I love it. I have just found my first 50 caches using it and it works perfectly for me. Very accurate and easy to use. It doesn't have maps but that's OK. It still leads me to where I want to go!

[+J Grouchy]

I know exactly where you are coming from. I am also on a tight budget and I decided to go with the etrex 10. I love it. I have just found my first 50 caches using it and it works perfectly for me. Very accurate and easy to use. It doesn't have maps but that's OK. It still leads me to where I want to go!

 

My smartphone has already spoiled me...no color maps is a deal-breaker for me.

[+MountainWoods]

I'm not the kind of person who keeps pushing to a bigger/better unit just because of the "toy" aspect, but I would say this about the eTrex 10 versus 20: the 10 does not allow you to add maps, because it does not have a MicroSD slot, which may be a regret in the very near future after obtaining it.

 

With the 20, you can go to GPSFileDepot and the OSM (Open Street Map) pages and download free maps onto your 20, which you cannot do on the 10.

 

So, for example, someone mentioned using their car GPS to get to the vicinity of a cache and then use the eTrex 10 to finish the search. I used to do that with my 20 until I discovered the OSM site.

 

Now I use one GPSr for both the drive and the search. In fact, my poor TomTom 510 is collecting dust locked away. Yes, the 20 doesn't have the display size of a car GPS. But it is legible for driving, and I can spend more time looking for caches instead of having to enter coordinates into a car GPS (or download GPX files into 2 units), and it is less to worry about getting stolen back in the car when tromping around looking for the cache.

 

Anyway, that's something to consider when thinking about an eTrex 10 versus a 20.

Edited July 10, 2013 by MountainWoods

[+sparklefingers]

6noisyhikers cheers for that I may take you up on offer when I get back. It's frustrating as it says everything is up to date and that when you click send to GPS that it all transfers but I unplug the GPS and its empty.

It doesn't work at all like that.

 

The only way I get anything on it is by opening it as a window and copy pasting things across but I have to do that one by one as it doesn't copy if I do a group.

 

Anywho I'm off to Germany soon so it'll have to wait until I get back.

[Tyreless]

No, you can't load maps onto the GC but the map that is included is pretty decent.

You can now load maps on to the GC if you upgrade to Firmware 2.15 (get it here). You can use maps from http://maps4me.net - there is a small charge for this (around $7.00).

 

I have Australian maps on my GC from maps4me.net and they show most trails, as well as contours, roads and waterways, and it is vastly superior to the base map provided on the device. The maps are based on OpenCycleMaps and have great detail.

[+Nunavut Taidy]

Speaking of downloading GPX waypoints and maps, do either of these two, or any other GPSrs allow wireless downloading? I'm afraid I've become a little spoiled with my Blackberry and Cachesense, but I know I'm heading out soon to a place where my phone will not allow me to access the satellites for caching purposes. And I've not had a lot of luck using wired downloads on my current GPSr as it is a 32bit device and my 'puter is a 64. Diolch/Thanks

[+ShaunEM]

I have an etrex 20 and have had the GC.

 

Ordering the GC was probably the right option if you were picking between that and the etrex 10.

 

If the lack of detailed maps annoy you, get the etrex 20 or 30 later on (or whatever is down the pipe when the time comes).

 

Shaun

[Mr.Yuck]

No, you can't load maps onto the GC but the map that is included is pretty decent.

You can now load maps on to the GC if you upgrade to Firmware 2.15 (get it here). You can use maps from http://maps4me.net - there is a small charge for this (around $7.00).

 

I have Australian maps on my GC from maps4me.net and they show most trails, as well as contours, roads and waterways, and it is vastly superior to the base map provided on the device. The maps are based on OpenCycleMaps and have great detail.

 

Glad I read all the post before I corrected that horrible quote that you can't load maps into the GC. Just kidding, 6 NoisyHikers, you have only been able to since February 2013, when they came out with Firmware 2.13, which was only out for a couple weeks before they put out 2.15 to correct bugs on 2.13.

 

The Explorist GC is a far superior unit to the Etrex10. I probably couldn't say that about the Etrex20, but I'm thinking the Etrex20 is another $40-$50 more than the GC.

[+6NoisyHikers]

I didn't kmow they had an upgrade beyond 2.13 We didn't upgrade to that version because we heard there were issues. Again, the basemap that came factory installed has worked really well for us so we've never worried about it, but it's nice to know Magellan has added an add-map option for the GC. Thanks for the info!

[+bflentje]

I'd get on eBay and buy a used GPSMap60 for under $150 and call it a day.

[Mr.Yuck]

I didn't kmow they had an upgrade beyond 2.13 We didn't upgrade to that version because we heard there were issues. Again, the basemap that came factory installed has worked really well for us so we've never worried about it, but it's nice to know Magellan has added an add-map option for the GC. Thanks for the info!

 

No problem! In my opinion Magellan knew people were hacking GC's and turning them into 310's (which of course you could always add maps to), so that's why they decided to let people add maps with the new official GC firmware. There are official maps, of course, but you'll save a bundle of money at http://maps4me.net/ Disclaimer, I might add I havne't personally haven't added maps to the GC yet. The basemap isn't really all that bad.

[+AHGoodwin]

I only have the GC so I can only give feedback on that. I am so far very pleased with the unit. I love the color screen and the design of the Cache list and details pages. The list is very visually appealing and gives you lots of useful information on the cache. The details page is good. One thing I would prefer is if you could see the details, hint, and logs on the page by just scrolling and not have to select the options from a menu to view. The main menu isn't bad. I didn't much care for it at first, but have gotten used to it. As of yet, I have not used the dashboard except to see what was there. I like the map, especially how you can see the caches on the map just like you would on the website. I have not used the waypoints yet so no comment there. I am VERY pleased at how quickly the unit finds satellites. My explorist 200 would take 2-3 minutes and the GC on average takes 10-20 seconds. I am rather pleased with the accuracy. Whenever it seems that the coords might be off when searching for a cache, I later find the cache exactly where the unit said I should (within about 3ft). However I do dislike the fact that I cannot view the current accuracy unless I am placing a cache. The biggest complaint I have with the unit is difficulty trying to manually enter information. I love that I can use my computer and GSAK to upload cache info and therefore save a TON of time as apposed to the explorist which I had to enter everything manually, however even though the GC has the option to enter cache logs and field notes, I find myself NOT using the features because it is such a PITA to do so using the stupid joystick to select the letters one by one. Maybe in the future if I have the money, I will look into a touch screen unit, but for now I just use my iphone to enter in the logs & notes. All in all I am happy with the unit, and having gotten a factory refurbished for $80, I am happy with the price as well. I hope some of that helps.

[+funkymunkyzone]

The Explorist GC is a far superior unit to the Etrex10. I probably couldn't say that about the Etrex20, but I'm thinking the Etrex20 is another $40-$50 more than the GC.

I'd definitely agree with this. Magellan is a sponsor of our NZ Mega 2013 event, and is giving us some eXplorist GCs and a 310 to give away. I did look at the specs between the GC and the 20, and I thought the GC compared well, although that was a wee while ago and I'm not looking at them right now. Glad to hear that you can now load maps onto the GC - that makes it a great little GPS unit!