Second Guess My GPSMAP 62s Choice! :)

[+GeoLeeBea]

I just started geocaching this week along with my 8 y.o. daughter. Great fun, yadda yadda. Short story is that it looks like we'll be doing a bunch more.

 

So far we have ventured out with only the Groundspeak iPhone app, the merits and deficits of which (there are both) needn't be raised here. I will say that the jumping-around of the cache location (e.g., 14 ft. west instantly becoming 22 ft. east then to 8 ft. north) is a growing frustration. All but the most obvious hiding places become flotsam. Nano Cache? Forgettaboutit. Also the app beats down the iPhone battery like it holds a grudge.

 

So I'm in the market for a handheld, and after a cursory search came up with the Garmin GPSMAP 62s as the answer. See if you agree. (I was considering the eTrex 20, but didn't think it would have the same in-woods accuracy.)

 

The factors to be juggled are these:

 

• Looking for spot-on, locked-down accurate readings to the thousandth of a minute. [Correct term? Like "38° 53.246" seen in GC descriptions] I know about WAAS but I'll admit ignorance about GLONASS.

• Waterproof-ish, in case the kid drops it, etc.

• I believe somewhere I have the Garmin MapSource discs for Topo North America. (I bought it ten years ago for a unit which was stolen before I loaded the maps. Maybe I ebay'ed it, but I think it's around.) In any case I can download the maps I need.

• A camera in the GPS is of no real use to me.

• I have a trove of rechargeable AA batteries at the ready.

• I have an 8 GB MicroSD card laying around looking for a new use.

• Importing geocaching data direct to the unit sounds like a nice feature.

• Budget was $200 US, which I am stretching a bit to $250 for the 62s. The $399 base model of the GPS MAP 64 is out of the question.

 

Pundits, please hold forth.

[+cerberus1]

At 14', I'd put the GPS (phone or GPSr) away and start looking.

I don't believe anything would get one within seconds every time.

The CO could be 20 feet off too.

 

Does "beginners caches" come up on the phones? I no longer use one (serves no purpose for me).

Keep track of hide styles and concentrate on small and regulars, no more than 2/2 in difficulty and terrain for now if finding them's difficult.

 

I know you're asking about GPSrs and the 62 series (to me) is tops, but a GPSr isn't gonna help you find them with pinpoint accuracy. You have to do the searching on your own.

[+badger10]

There are 4 cachers in my family and we all have 62's. Three 62s's and I have the 62stc. We have had no problems with them. Once you get the pages set up like you want them then they are easy to use.

[+ADKer]

The eTrex 20 is an excellent choice! I use one myself. The eTrex features GLONASS (which the 62s doesn't have). This means it has about double the satellites to lock on to, which makes reception great just about anywhere. If you're worrying about reception in the woods, don't. My etrex 20 has always been nearly as accurate under heavy tree cover, as in the middle of a field.

 

As for your factors be be juggled:

• I mentioned the accuracy, which bang-for-the-buck, can't be beaten by the eTrex 20
• Waterproof just the same as the 62. One meter for up to 30 minutes. (IPXJ7? or something like that)
• Can download maps to the unit itself, or to a micro-SD card. The unit has 1.7 GB of built in memory.
• 2 AA batteries lasts "up to 25 hours"
• I use an 8 gig MicroSD myself
• It does indeed feature paperless geocaching
• $199 (I got mine for 150 on amazon)

[+GeoLeeBea]

At 14', I'd put the GPS (phone or GPSr) away and start looking.

I don't believe anything would get one within seconds every time.

The CO could be 20 feet off too.

 

Does "beginners caches" come up on the phones? I no longer use one (serves no purpose for me).

Keep track of hide styles and concentrate on small and regulars, no more than 2/2 in difficulty and terrain for now if finding them's difficult.

 

I know you're asking about GPSrs and the 62 series (to me) is tops, but a GPSr isn't gonna help you find them with pinpoint accuracy. You have to do the searching on your own.

 

Thanks, and I appreciate what you are saying. The searching I'm down for, what I'm trying to shake is a GPS that has inconsistent readings. To answer your question we are focusing on beginner caches, but that does not absolve our directional device from changing frequently while standing in one place. Lack of pinpoint accuracy I can live with, the lack of consistency needs fixing by using a device meant for such purposes.

[+GeoLeeBea]

The eTrex 20 is an excellent choice! I use one myself. The eTrex features GLONASS (which the 62s doesn't have). This means it has about double the satellites to lock on to, which makes reception great just about anywhere. If you're worrying about reception in the woods, don't. My etrex 20 has always been nearly as accurate under heavy tree cover, as in the middle of a field.

 

As for your factors be be juggled:

• I mentioned the accuracy, which bang-for-the-buck, can't be beaten by the eTrex 20
• Waterproof just the same as the 62. One meter for up to 30 minutes. (IPXJ7? or something like that)
• Can download maps to the unit itself, or to a micro-SD card. The unit has 1.7 GB of built in memory.
• 2 AA batteries lasts "up to 25 hours"
• I use an 8 gig MicroSD myself
• It does indeed feature paperless geocaching
• $199 (I got mine for 150 on amazon)

 

Wow, great info, ADKer! Just what I was hoping for. I discounted GLONASS but now see where it really helps. (In your "bang-for-buck" comment I gather you meant "can't be beat by 62s.") Also I didn't know the eTrex was just as waterproof.

 

I guess I yielded to "external antenna envy" in favoring the 62s. I suppose Freud might say, "sometimes an antenna is just an antenna." Thanks again.

[+Walts Hunting]

If yours is accurate to one foot and the COs was 20 feet then that is the determining factor. You increased accuracy won't help.

[+BlackRose67]

I have an eTrex 20 and recently upgraded to a 62s.

 

I'm much happier in the woods with the 62s than I was with the eTrex 20.

[+GeoLeeBea]

I have an eTrex 20 and recently upgraded to a 62s.

 

I'm much happier in the woods with the 62s than I was with the eTrex 20.

 

Interesting…. Is that from any particular features, or do you simply find the 62s to be more accurate?

[+BlackRose67]

I have an eTrex 20 and recently upgraded to a 62s.

 

I'm much happier in the woods with the 62s than I was with the eTrex 20.

 

Interesting…. Is that from any particular features, or do you simply find the 62s to be more accurate?

It has features I discovered I needed that are not available in the eTrex 20;

• The ability to transfer waypoints, and cache info to/from other Garmin devices
  
• The ability to receive CHIRP signals
  
• The ability to use a tempe sensor
  
• It has a 3-axis compass (this is what helps me in the woods when I am moving slow).
  

 

I found over 1500 geocaches with the eTrex 20, so obviously it does work well for Geocaching.

 

As far as accuracy, I don't see much difference between the two units.

The 62s has a big quad helix antenna, whereas the eTrex 20 has a small intenal antenna.

The 62s reports a 2 meter accuracy in clear skies, whereas the eTrex 20 (with GPS, GLONASS, and WAAS enabled) only shows 3 meter accuracy in the same location.

Edited January 21, 2014 by BlackRose67

[+BAMBOOZLE]

We have 3 62S units ( and a couple dozen others)....I just don't think it gets any better. It has the quad-helix ant. which I've always preferred for the woods.You can customize all your pages and menu's in the GEOCACHING PROFILE making the unit really easy to use with only a couple buttons to poke. They had been on sale recently for $199 and probably will be again before they are replaced by the 64.

[+HEADLANDERS]

 

Interesting…. Is that from any particular features, or do you simply find the 62s to be more accurate?

 

When discussing the advantages of higher GPS accuracy for caching remember that where the cache is placed depends on the accuracy of the GPS device used by the Cache Owner. In other words a highly accurate GPS will be best placed to take you to the cache page coordinates but the cache may not be just there.

 

Bill.

[+Gitchee-Gummee]

Thanks, and I appreciate what you are saying. The searching I'm down for, what I'm trying to shake is a GPS that has inconsistent readings. To answer your question we are focusing on beginner caches, but that does not absolve our directional device from changing frequently while standing in one place. Lack of pinpoint accuracy I can live with, the lack of consistency needs fixing by using a device meant for such purposes.

I would hesitate to call the readings "inconsistent". For one thing -- a big thing -- is you need to become familiar with how these devices work. Not so much the inner workings, but just what you are seeing and why you are seeing it.

 

You may well be standing still. The Earth is not, nor are the satellites. There are bound to be anomalies.

Not only that, but you are using a consumer-grade instrument. There are devices that can give (fairly) consistent and accurate readings, the problem is that most of us poor souls cannot afford them -- or at least receive some type of compensation or profit from purchasing them. Too, if you are a government busy spending unlimited(?) taxpayer money -- then it wouldn't really matter.

 

I do hope that you have also taken into consideration that the coordinates listed for any particular cache placement just may not be dead-on accurate. This happens for a number of reasons: 1] The CO may or may not have been real careful in obtaining their readings (very common); 2] The cache may not be in its original hiding spot (cache migration is a common phenomenon); 3] Other conditions -- satellite constellation, signal blockage**, satellite down-time, even direction of approach can change things.

 

** Signal blockage -- I'm pretty sure you are aware of canopy (wet canopy, especially), buildings, canyons and trees themselves (heavily forested areas) can lessen the signal reception of the unit. Another factor that many don't think about is "body blockage" -- if you are perpetually holding the unit close to your body, worse yet at the belt-line and bowing over the unit looking at it, you are blocking signal yourself. Hold it up and away from your body.

 

Mentioned before but worth repeating... when you are within thereabouts 6-8 meters (on a good day) from the listed coordinates, you really ought to put the device away. It has done what it is designed to do. The closer you are to those coordinates, the more it is going to jump around. Keep looking at it and you are going to see it jump to and fro... sometimes with dramatic changes. It happens, and you should recognize that as the time to put it away and use your eyes instead of electronics. 3-axis compass or not, it doesn't matter as they will all do that.

 

Unless you have the misfortune of getting a unit that is a lemon (it happens with any man-made item), there is a learning curve associated with these things. You I think, are still grappling with that curve. Don't fret it as many others have also followed in those footsteps... many more to come, too!

[+Lieblweb]

We have a 62 and it's our favorite GPS. We also have an Oregon 450.

 

Accuracy is just about as identical (between the two) as they come - regardless of what 'stuff' they both have. Hand to hand out-in-the-field experience has shown us, they're the same.

 

If you're into splitting hairs & atoms, measuring the wind speed, exact wind direction, the rotational axis tilt of the earth at that exact moment, speed of the earth, plus your left hip is heavier than the other thus over compensating for how you are standing with GPS in hand.... Well then, you might have an accuracy problem.

 

But for me, it's been a pretty dadgum good GPS!! Do some googling and reach reviews.... You can't go wrong.

Edited January 21, 2014 by Lieblweb

[+GeoLeeBea]

Well, I just got my eTrex 20 (a week late -- my mail carrier is afraid of the snow) and took it to the field. All I can say is "What a difference a day makes!"

 

The change from just the iPhone was swift and dramatic. The specificity was greater and the "dancing around" aspect was significantly reduced. It definitely let us know when we were at GZ.

 

I chose the eTrex 20 over the 62s based on all your reports of their comparable features [special props to ADKer & BlackRose] as well as for the price. My daughter loves how the unit fits in her hand as if it was made for it. She insists on holding it and taking the lead. This is fine with dad who can man the iPhone, without which he feels naked anyway. With the eTrex we found our first micro caches yesterday, just like seasoned pros.

 

I added a Pocket Query from here with only minimal suffering. (Surprisingly there are steps that neither this site nor Garmin fill in.) I also located my old Garmin MapSource TOPO 2007 disc, so the only question now is whether I use that or download newer (better?) Topo maps from online. Feel free to chime in on this.

 

Thank you for everyone who contributed to the discussion. It was enlightening and enjoyable to read.

[+ADKer]

I use a good topo map that I got here.

 

I think another map that I have on my GPS came from open street map.

 

Both maps are free by the way.

 

And glad to hear you're happy with the eTrex! I'm sure this is the start of many more caching adventures!

Edited February 3, 2014 by ADKer