+the_divepirate Posted September 1, 2014 Share Posted September 1, 2014 So, I've got a 62s am really sick of the button feature. I'm looking to go touch screen. I've done a bit of research but am still a little puzzled. Montana or Oregon? Is it the weight of the Montana that people don't like? My question is, how is it with on the fly uploads? Also, is the screen really that sensitive on the Montana? What are your experiences and reviews. This is a pretty big chunk of cache... I want to get it right this time. Quote Link to comment
+Walts Hunting Posted September 1, 2014 Share Posted September 1, 2014 What do you mean on the flu uploads. There is no difference on that between the Oregon and the Montana. It is only about an ounce more which given the total weight of the median cacher is insignificant. The screen is the same as the Oregon only larger and great to read I love mine. Perhaps you are referring to the Monterra. Quote Link to comment
+Mockingbird559 Posted September 1, 2014 Share Posted September 1, 2014 (edited) The screen on the Oregon 450 and 550 can be difficult to read under bright light. The screen size on the Montana is a little bigger, which would be nice but the size on the Oregon is livable. Check to see if you will be able to live with the battery options for the Montana. They are different than the Oregon. I like the built in camera in the 550. The Montana has a camera built in too. Edit: I looked at the garmin web site which showed a camera built-in. But after looking on amazon, all models may not have a camera built-in.(?) Cache Happy Edited September 1, 2014 by Mockingbird559 Quote Link to comment
+the_divepirate Posted September 1, 2014 Author Share Posted September 1, 2014 I guess not really on the fly uploading. I guess just ease of manual entry during events and such. Is it just the screen size that eats the batteries? Or is it really even that big of deal? You know what they say about a guy with big hands???? They like a big GPS... LOL :laughing: Quote Link to comment
+Walts Hunting Posted September 1, 2014 Share Posted September 1, 2014 Big screen means easy entry. I don't think it eats batteries. If I am not using my heart monitor I get 8 hours plus. I did buy an extra battery for those real long days but have never used it except since I started using the monitor. I am one who is quick to upgrade and have had it longer than any other Garmin and it is my fifth one. Quote Link to comment
+the_divepirate Posted September 1, 2014 Author Share Posted September 1, 2014 Big screen means easy entry. I don't think it eats batteries. If I am not using my heart monitor I get 8 hours plus. I did buy an extra battery for those real long days but have never used it except since I started using the monitor. I am one who is quick to upgrade and have had it longer than any other Garmin and it is my fifth one. I was checking out your profile. I like the homepage!! Is that an add on? Or just what happens after years served? Which unit is it you use exactly? I'm thinking the 650? Montana? Quote Link to comment
+the_divepirate Posted September 1, 2014 Author Share Posted September 1, 2014 Big screen means easy entry. I don't think it eats batteries. If I am not using my heart monitor I get 8 hours plus. I did buy an extra battery for those real long days but have never used it except since I started using the monitor. I am one who is quick to upgrade and have had it longer than any other Garmin and it is my fifth one. I was checking out your profile. I like the homepage!! Is that an add on? Or just what happens after years served? Which unit is it you use exactly? I'm thinking the 650? Montana? I'm also a Garmin guy. Started with my IV, then my 62s, I have a Good Sam RV GPS which is just a Garmin in Sams' clothes. Was Kinda liking the Montana, but that Montera is looking pretty nice. Blue charts though..... Quote Link to comment
+briansnat Posted September 1, 2014 Share Posted September 1, 2014 Not a geting started issue, moving to the appropriate forum Quote Link to comment
+the_divepirate Posted September 1, 2014 Author Share Posted September 1, 2014 Not a geting started issue, moving to the appropriate forum Sorry..... I looked around a bit and didn't see this area. Just getting started don'tcha know. Anyway.... I think even though I like the option of blue charts, I think I like the wi-fi feature better. Also, being able to have my app's on the GPS as well is a huge plus. Quote Link to comment
+ecanderson Posted September 1, 2014 Share Posted September 1, 2014 The screen on the Oregon 450 and 550 can be difficult to read under bright light.Totally different experience here. Tilted just so, the transreflective screen is positively dazzling in its display. I use a 450 all the time, including on bicycle on sunny days, and have never had that kind of issue. I run into much more trouble in twilight where you can't use the sun to enhance the display, but the backlight isn't quite enough to satisfy unless turned all the way up. Quote Link to comment
+Walts Hunting Posted September 1, 2014 Share Posted September 1, 2014 Big screen means easy entry. I don't think it eats batteries. If I am not using my heart monitor I get 8 hours plus. I did buy an extra battery for those real long days but have never used it except since I started using the monitor. I am one who is quick to upgrade and have had it longer than any other Garmin and it is my fifth one. I was checking out your profile. I like the homepage!! Is that an add on? Or just what happens after years served? Which unit is it you use exactly? I'm thinking the 650? Montana? Project-gc.Com live upd date. I so nothing Quote Link to comment
+coachstahly Posted September 2, 2014 Share Posted September 2, 2014 My suggestion is not to go after the Monterra until it gets more stable (still lots of bugs to fix). I have a Montana and love it. I usually get 8-10 hours and you can adjust the settings on the backlight as well as inactivity to either increase or decrease your battery life. The old Oregon is a really nice unit (lots of friends use them) and the new versions are really nice as well. It comes down to personal choice. I suggest seeing if any of your fellow GCers in the area have a unit you can play with for a bit or go to a store like REI that has them in stock so you can at least get your hands on them. Quote Link to comment
+Red90 Posted September 2, 2014 Share Posted September 2, 2014 This might help. http://www.land-rover-lightweight.co.uk/LRL%20M.html Quote Link to comment
+the_divepirate Posted September 2, 2014 Author Share Posted September 2, 2014 This might help. http://www.land-rover-lightweight.co.uk/LRL%20M.html This is EXACTLY what I was looking for!!!! Thanks so much!! Quote Link to comment
+BAMBOOZLE Posted September 2, 2014 Share Posted September 2, 2014 While I don't own either I would go with the Oregon 600 over the Montana......I used a Montana for one day and its just too big and heavy.The size of the 600 is nice and it has a beautiful responsive screen like an iPhone. Quote Link to comment
+coachstahly Posted September 2, 2014 Share Posted September 2, 2014 The Montana is .5 inches wider (half a finger knuckle), 1.2 inches taller (one full knuckle segment plus just a bit more) and .1 inch thicker and weighs a whopping 3 oz. more than the new Oregon. It's really not that much different. In return you get a .5 x 1 inch difference in screen size. https://buy.garmin.com/en-US/US/catalog/product/compareResult.ep?compareProduct=113532&compareProduct=75227 Quote Link to comment
insig Posted September 2, 2014 Share Posted September 2, 2014 I thought the Montana would be too big years ago when i first picked one up. After walking around with it for an hour or two, I got used to it, and its size no longer seemed to be an issue. Quote Link to comment
+splashy Posted September 2, 2014 Share Posted September 2, 2014 Very nice Gps endless possibilities and settings, you get used to the size and in no time everything else will look very small. Quote Link to comment
+BAMBOOZLE Posted September 3, 2014 Share Posted September 3, 2014 The Montana is .5 inches wider (half a finger knuckle), 1.2 inches taller (one full knuckle segment plus just a bit more) and .1 inch thicker and weighs a whopping 3 oz. more than the new Oregon. It's really not that much different. In return you get a .5 x 1 inch difference in screen size. https://buy.garmin.com/en-US/US/catalog/product/compareResult.ep?compareProduct=113532&compareProduct=75227 I've seen these comparisons several times in the past......all I know is when you're handling one on the trail its a brick. If using AA's the extra batteries would add to the weight. I really liked everything else about it. Quote Link to comment
+BikeBill Posted September 3, 2014 Share Posted September 3, 2014 (edited) As far as screen brightness, readability in sunlight, etc., the newer Oregon 6** series is about as good as it gets. It's a step above the earlier Oregons and though not as big as the Montana, is a very nice, high res display; 240 x 400 pixels on a 3" diagonal screen vs. 272 x 480 pixels on a 4" screen. Edited September 3, 2014 by BikeBill Quote Link to comment
+Walts Hunting Posted September 3, 2014 Share Posted September 3, 2014 The Montana is .5 inches wider (half a finger knuckle), 1.2 inches taller (one full knuckle segment plus just a bit more) and .1 inch thicker and weighs a whopping 3 oz. more than the new Oregon. It's really not that much different. In return you get a .5 x 1 inch difference in screen size. https://buy.garmin.com/en-US/US/catalog/product/compareResult.ep?compareProduct=113532&compareProduct=75227 I've seen these comparisons several times in the past......all I know is when you're handling one on the trail its a brick. If using AA's the extra batteries would add to the weight. I really liked everything else about it. At three ounces more I wouldn't call it a brick and the larger screen is heavenly when doing stuff. The amount of icons you can put on the home screen to get to things quickly is fantastic. AA's add weight give me a break. If three AAs are going to weigh you down and reduce your capability you should see a doctor about health and fitness. The battery gets about 8 hours for me and just in case I bought one extra rechargeable to carry which I have only had to use on long days when i wear my heart monitor which seems to drag it down a little. For me I will never have a smaller screen again and I have had mine since it came out. Quote Link to comment
+BAMBOOZLE Posted September 3, 2014 Share Posted September 3, 2014 The Montana is .5 inches wider (half a finger knuckle), 1.2 inches taller (one full knuckle segment plus just a bit more) and .1 inch thicker and weighs a whopping 3 oz. more than the new Oregon. It's really not that much different. In return you get a .5 x 1 inch difference in screen size. https://buy.garmin.com/en-US/US/catalog/product/compareResult.ep?compareProduct=113532&compareProduct=75227 I've seen these comparisons several times in the past......all I know is when you're handling one on the trail its a brick. If using AA's the extra batteries would add to the weight. I really liked everything else about it. At three ounces more I wouldn't call it a brick and the larger screen is heavenly when doing stuff. The amount of icons you can put on the home screen to get to things quickly is fantastic. AA's add weight give me a break. If three AAs are going to weigh you down and reduce your capability you should see a doctor about health and fitness. The battery gets about 8 hours for me and just in case I bought one extra rechargeable to carry which I have only had to use on long days when i wear my heart monitor which seems to drag it down a little. For me I will never have a smaller screen again and I have had mine since it came out. It just shows everybody is different. The OP wants to dump a 62S and I wouldn't use anything but a 62S. It's also about what you use the unit for. I input VERY little data, almost 0. Mostly we walk to the cache using 2, 62S units. I'm quite comfortable driving with it also but use a Nuvi a lot too. My wife and I both concurred that we would not want to carry a Montana all day. I own a 450 but the screen often takes multiple pokes and its a real pain to pan the map as well as use one hand to operate it....if I had to go back to touchscreen it would be with a 600. Quote Link to comment
+splashy Posted September 3, 2014 Share Posted September 3, 2014 I owned a Montana, sold it and use an Or 600 on the moment, I like this Gps very much, BUT if Garmin brings an Or 600 type with a bigger screen I buy it, because once you are used to the Montana screen everything else looks small. Quote Link to comment
+the_divepirate Posted September 6, 2014 Author Share Posted September 6, 2014 Monterra? Quote Link to comment
+coachstahly Posted September 6, 2014 Share Posted September 6, 2014 See the thread on your other post. Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.