Montana 600 or Oregon 600: Multiple maps

[+redsox_mark]

My situation: I have been using a Etrex Legend HCx for 5 years. And it still works for me. It's not fully paperless, but I use GSAK to get as much information as I can on to the unit. I supplement that sometimes with paper, and now I also have an iPhone. Due to lack of data signal many places I walk I don't like to rely on the iPhone having a connection, but I do download PQs onto it so I can access the full cache information in the field. I also prefer not to use the iPhone as my main GPS mainly due to battery life, and I also find I seem to do better finding caches with the GPS. I'll use the iPhone for the occasional adhoc find when I don't have my GPS with me or caches loaded for the area.

 

Anyway - my wife suggested maybe I would like to upgrade my GPS for Christmas... and I like the thought of that. I am looking for a unit where I can be fully paperless (so not need to worry about downloading PQs to the phone as well).

 

I'm looking at the Montana 600 and Oregon 600. Functionally they seem similar; the main differences I see is the Montana has a larger screen (but is bigger/heavier), and the Oregon supports GLONASS. I think the choice between the two will come down to how I feel about carrying them and the screen size.

 

Ok... so here is my dumb question. With my Legend HCx, the only way I know of to install maps is to copy a file with a specific name (gmapsupp.img). At least as far as I know I can only have one map "active" at a time. (I can store more maps on the SD card, but only the one named gmapsupp.img is active).

 

I find the manuals of the Montana and Oregon a bit confusing, but it appears they support multiple maps at the same time. This is what I would like to understand better. I.e - could I use a map optimized for road routing to get to the parking location, then switch to a topo map to hike to the cache, and how easy is this to do?

 

The other example would be when I'm travelling. Today I have a map I use while in the UK. If I go to mainland Europe I have a different map. I have to connect the GPS to the PC and fiddle around with filenames to change the map. With the Montana/Oregon, would it automatically choose the appropriate map? Or would I need to specify (and again how easy is this?).

 

I guess what it comes down to is I'm looking for reasons to convince myself I really "need" this...

Edited December 5, 2013 by redsox_mark

[+Triple Crown]

 

I'm looking at the Montana 600 and Oregon 600. Functionally they seem similar; the main differences I see is the Montana has a larger screen (but is bigger/heavier), and the Oregon supports GLONASS. I think the choice between the two will come down to how I feel about carrying them and the screen size.

 

Ok... so here is my dumb question. With my Legend HCx, the only way I know of to install maps is to copy a file with a specific name (gmapsupp.img). At least as far as I know I can only have one map "active" at a time. (I can store more maps on the SD card, but only the one named gmapsupp.img is active).

 

I find the manuals of the Montana and Oregon a bit confusing, but it appears they support multiple maps at the same time. This is what I would like to understand better. I.e - could I use a map optimized for road routing to get to the parking location, then switch to a topo map to hike to the cache, and how easy is this to do?

 

The other example would be when I'm travelling. Today I have a map I use while in the UK. If I go to mainland Europe I have a different map. I have to connect the GPS to the PC and fiddle around with filenames to change the map. With the Montana/Oregon, would it automatically choose the appropriate map? Or would I need to specify (and again how easy is this?).

 

I guess what it comes down to is I'm looking for reasons to convince myself I really "need" this...

 

I looked at the Montana but decided it was too big for my taste, so I went with the Oregon 650.

The screen is great and the touch interface is very similar to a cellphone. Also the rechargeable battery pack charges in the unit, so you can charge while using it in the car if you want.

 

The Montana will hold 12000 caches, but the Oregon 6XX series will hold an almost unlimited number (Millions!) and the new GGZ file type is really slick.

 

With both units you can have as many maps as you want and you can have multiple profiles...for example the Automotive profile is set to on-road routing using my City Navigator maps, while the Geocaching profile is set to direct routing using both topo maps and street maps. Changing profiles is 2 taps.

 

With all of the newer units you can name the maps whatever you want, they still keep the .img extension. Also, you can turn individual maps on or off whenever you want.

 

My setup has the City Navigator North America installed on the unit, then my topos, Europe and Brazil street maps on the microSD card, so I always have maps for wherever I am.

 

Also, with the Oregon, you have 2 buttons which are user configurable to do whatever you want with 1 press, double press, or press & hold....and you can have different preferences with each profile if you want.

 

There is a lot of info available at the Oregon 6xx Wiki, so you should check that out too. In my opinion, the Oregon 600 is a great leap forward for geocaching functionality.

[+redsox_mark]

Thanks to you both; that sounds great!

 

Now my only doubt is do I "need" the Oregon (I'm leaning that way over Montana), when the Etrex 20 is still a big improvement in usability from what I have today for considerably less money.

 

But having told my wife the price of the Oregon and her not fainting I'm getting my heart set on that one.....

[+Walts Hunting]

Thanks to you both; that sounds great!

 

Now my only doubt is do I "need" the Oregon (I'm leaning that way over Montana), when the Etrex 20 is still a big improvement in usability from what I have today for considerably less money.

 

But having told my wife the price of the Oregon and her not fainting I'm getting my heart set on that one.....

Your mistake is trying to figure out what you NEED. We're men we buy way over what we NEED. We buy bragging rights.

 

I have the Montana. I keep my 550 around for backup like when I dropped the Montana and had to send it in for repair. I have never needed even close to the 12000 caches it will hold. When I use the Oregon the small screen is very hard to get used to. Most of my caching is hiking/biking and the larger unit really isn't a bother. I looked at the Oregon 650 when it came out but again the small screen size was to hard to go back to.

 

The touch screen interface is so much easier than a joystick.

Edited December 5, 2013 by Walts Hunting

[+BAMBOOZLE]

While I own neither, my vote would be for the Oregon 600 ( I have a 450 so I'm familiar with the operation and screen size of the Oregon)....I handled a 600 in Cabelas awhile back and although I'm a button guy I liked it very much.

My wife and I used a Montana in the field and in our opinion its just too big...its a brick. After a few caches back in the truck it went....there is no way I'd want to spend a whole day caching with a Montana.

 

Re buttons, my wife and I both use the 62S....its my favorite all time unit and they recently sold for $199.

[+Red90]

Thanks to you both; that sounds great!

 

Now my only doubt is do I "need" the Oregon (I'm leaning that way over Montana), when the Etrex 20 is still a big improvement in usability from what I have today for considerably less money.

 

But having told my wife the price of the Oregon and her not fainting I'm getting my heart set on that one.....

 

The comparison should be between an Oregon 450 and an Etrex 30 to be on the same footing.

[+coachstahly]

While I own neither, my vote would be for the Oregon 600 ( I have a 450 so I'm familiar with the operation and screen size of the Oregon)....I handled a 600 in Cabelas awhile back and although I'm a button guy I liked it very much.

My wife and I used a Montana in the field and in our opinion its just too big...its a brick. After a few caches back in the truck it went....there is no way I'd want to spend a whole day caching with a Montana.

 

Re buttons, my wife and I both use the 62S....its my favorite all time unit and they recently sold for $199.

I've done all day runs with my Montana and had no issues, but that's just me. I have a case with a lanyard and it doesn't bother me in the least. That being said, the new Oregons are quite nice and the faster redraws are certainly nice. I don't think you could go wrong with either choice and it's going to come down to personal choice, as it should.

[+redsox_mark]

On the Montana vs Oregon decision; I had a play with a friend's Montana last night. Yes it is substantial, but not as heavy as I thought it would be. I think I would be OK carrying it around on an all day outing.

 

I will try and get my hands on a Oregon 600 and go with what feels best for me. I agree it is a personal decision, both seem to be good units.

[alandb]

If there is any chance you will want to use the device for conventional automotive "on road" navigation, the Montana might be the best choice. With the Montana, you can add the automotive mount with speaker and City Navigator map and get full nuvi-like navigation with voice prompts, lane assist, routing, etc.

Edited December 6, 2013 by alandb

[+redsox_mark]

If there is any chance you will want to use the device for conventional automotive "on road" navigation, the Montana might be the best choice. With the Montana, you can add the automotive mount with speaker and City Navigator map and get full nuvi-like navigation with voice prompts, lane assist, routing, etc.

 

This is one of my considerations. Believe it or not we don't have an ordinary car GPS, so my wife was asking if it was possible to get one that could do both.

 

But I can see potential conflict if I want to go out caching and my wife needs to drive somewhere... maybe I should get her a car GPS for Christmas..

 

I had a play with an Oregon 600 over the weekend and I'm leaning that way. Both are nice units but it just feels right for me

[+Walts Hunting]

If there is any chance you will want to use the device for conventional automotive "on road" navigation, the Montana might be the best choice. With the Montana, you can add the automotive mount with speaker and City Navigator map and get full nuvi-like navigation with voice prompts, lane assist, routing, etc.

 

This is one of my considerations. Believe it or not we don't have an ordinary car GPS, so my wife was asking if it was possible to get one that could do both.

 

But I can see potential conflict if I want to go out caching and my wife needs to drive somewhere... maybe I should get her a car GPS for Christmas..

 

I had a play with an Oregon 600 over the weekend and I'm leaning that way. Both are nice units but it just feels right for me

Or you could be a really nice hubby and get her a new car with built in GPS she can talk to.

[+Red90]

But I can see potential conflict if I want to go out caching and my wife needs to drive somewhere... maybe I should get her a car GPS for Christmas..

 

The Nuvis are still much better and cheaper than any of the dual use units. Get her a 2597LMT. This is the new 5" model and they are a lot nicer than the older units.

[+redsox_mark]

Ok, now I have a more technical question.

 

I have ordered the Oregon 600. I have a friend with a Montana. He has some maps which I would like to install.

 

What my friend has said is:

 

You need a memory card with a folder 'Custom Maps'. The map is put into that folder and there is a limit to the size of map you can use.

 

My questions, if anyone knows:

 

1. Is the procedure for installing maps the same between the Oregon 600 and the Montana?

 

2. I found This Garmin Link which confuses me. What confuses me is it says for the Montana, it supports "500 custom map tiles". For the previous Oregon models, it says it only supports "100 custom map tiles". For the Oregon 600, it doesn't mention "custom map tiles" at all?!

 

I was expecting that the Oregon 600 could handle the same amount of additional maps/map tiles (subject to the size of the SD card) but now I'm confused.

 

Can anyone help?

[+redsox_mark]

They are custom maps. (I think my friend just wasn't precise with the path name, he gave it from memory).

 

I think I found the answer on the Oregon and Montana Wikis. They seem to have the same spec in this regard.

 

The Montana is not without limitation. Consider these guidelines when selecting maps for your Montana GPSr.

IMG: A maximum of 20 maps, not exceeding 4000 map segments in total, will be indexed

KMZ: Must not exceed 500 total map tiles across all KMZ maps

JNX: Support for 250 maps per device

GPX: Limited to 2000 GPX files, 4000 total waypoints, 200 routes and 200 tracks (maximum 10,000 points per track)

 

The Oregon 6xx is not without limitation. Consider these guidelines when selecting maps for your Oregon 6xx:

IMG: A maximum of 20 maps, not exceeding 4000 map segments in total, will be indexed

KMZ: Must not exceed 500 total map tiles across all KMZ maps

JNX: Support for 250 maps per device

GPX: Limited to 2000 total GPX + GGZ files, 4000 total waypoints, 200 routes and 200 tracks (maximum 10,000 points per track)

 

And it seems the path names are also the same. The text below is identical on both the Oregon 600 and Montana Wiki

 

Map Install Direct

 

Not all maps require installation to a host computer before being sent to your Garmin GPSr. Maps in the following formats can be copied directly to your GPSr or µSD card as shown:

IMG: [GPSr]\Garmin\ or [µSD]\Garmin\

KMZ: [GPSr]\Garmin\CustomMaps\ or [µSD]\Garmin\CustomMaps\

JNX: [GPSr]\Garmin\BirdsEye\ or [µSD]\Garmin\BirdsEye\

GPX: [GPSr]\Garmin\GPX\ or [µSD]\Garmin\GPX\

 

Reference

 

Oregon 6xx Wiki