+sktqch Posted January 13, 2017 Share Posted January 13, 2017 I think my Garmin 64S is now in the possession of an airport baggage handler with a security key. Thinking of replacing it with an Etrex 30X. Love the feel and heft of the etrex line. Any opinions? What features/abilities would I be missing? Stan Quote Link to comment
+Great Scott! Posted January 13, 2017 Share Posted January 13, 2017 https://buy.garmin.com/en-US/US/catalog/product/compareResult.ep?compareProduct=518048&compareProduct=140022 Quote Link to comment
+sktqch Posted January 13, 2017 Author Share Posted January 13, 2017 https://buy.garmin.com/en-US/US/catalog/product/compareResult.ep?compareProduct=518048&compareProduct=140022 Thanks Scott. Great comparison chart. I am also interested in personal experiences with the 30X. For example I discovered today that the little Etrex 20 I borrowed can be used in cold weather, one handed while wearing gloves. My 64s forced me to take my gloves off to use it, and in subzero weather that was a downside. Any other experiences? For example is the 30x truly waterproof as claimed? I can vouch 100% certainty the 64s isn't, 5 minutes in the bottom of a kayak in 3 inches of seawater ruined my previous one permanently. When I held it up to look at it the water level inside the the 64 was midway up the screen. Stan Quote Link to comment
+Red90 Posted January 14, 2017 Share Posted January 14, 2017 They are all waterproof. There was something wrong with your 64. I've had them all submerged for long periods with no problem. The 30x does most of the same things. You lose bluetooth and it runs a bit slower, but all other features are the same. Quote Link to comment
+Mineral2 Posted January 14, 2017 Share Posted January 14, 2017 also limited to 5000 geocaches. I dunno, the eTrex seems like a big step down from the 64s. Quote Link to comment
+mikeD Posted January 14, 2017 Share Posted January 14, 2017 Digressing on the water'proofness' of the 64s, I dropped mine in a lock on the river Thames. 5 meters down, 15 mins! A magnet to the iron caribiner recovered it. 2/3 oz of water inside. Non functional Took case apart, drained and into a warm place in a bag with a cup of rice grains. 2-3 days later, dry and working , still going after 2 years Quote Link to comment
+Mineral2 Posted January 14, 2017 Share Posted January 14, 2017 I took my Oregon 600 on a canoe trip and it rained hard on the second day, so the GPS got pretty soaked. There were no signs of any water damage and the unit worked fine EXCEPT that I could no longer connect it to a computer. The USB port still provided power, but refused to recognize it as a mass storage device. I can only assume that a tiny bit of moisture got in the USB port and shorted out the data pins. But even after taking it apart and drying it out for a week, it still wouldn't connect. Luckily I was still within a year of purchase and REI replaced it. Honestly there wouldn't be much of a problem if Garmin would add an option allowing data to be written to the SD card instead of the internal storage. Good thing I still had my Oregon 450. I just sent the track over wirelessly to then transfer it to the computer. Quote Link to comment
+sktqch Posted January 15, 2017 Author Share Posted January 15, 2017 I took my Oregon 600 on a canoe trip and it rained hard on the second day, so the GPS got pretty soaked. There were no signs of any water damage and the unit worked fine EXCEPT that I could no longer connect it to a computer. The USB port still provided power, but refused to recognize it as a mass storage device. I can only assume that a tiny bit of moisture got in the USB port and shorted out the data pins. But even after taking it apart and drying it out for a week, it still wouldn't connect. Luckily I was still within a year of purchase and REI replaced it. Honestly there wouldn't be much of a problem if Garmin would add an option allowing data to be written to the SD card instead of the internal storage. Good thing I still had my Oregon 450. I just sent the track over wirelessly to then transfer it to the computer. Both the 64S and the Etrex 30X allow for data transfer via mini sd card. I liked making a couple of different cards with different areas covered rather than one huge .gpx file which slows down the 64S quite a bit. Stan Quote Link to comment
+Mineral2 Posted January 15, 2017 Share Posted January 15, 2017 I took my Oregon 600 on a canoe trip and it rained hard on the second day, so the GPS got pretty soaked. There were no signs of any water damage and the unit worked fine EXCEPT that I could no longer connect it to a computer. The USB port still provided power, but refused to recognize it as a mass storage device. I can only assume that a tiny bit of moisture got in the USB port and shorted out the data pins. But even after taking it apart and drying it out for a week, it still wouldn't connect. Luckily I was still within a year of purchase and REI replaced it. Honestly there wouldn't be much of a problem if Garmin would add an option allowing data to be written to the SD card instead of the internal storage. Good thing I still had my Oregon 450. I just sent the track over wirelessly to then transfer it to the computer. Both the 64S and the Etrex 30X allow for data transfer via mini sd card. I liked making a couple of different cards with different areas covered rather than one huge .gpx file which slows down the 64S quite a bit. Stan But none of the Garmin GPS will let you write new data directly to the card. So if I'm out hiking and recording my track, I can't save it to the SD card. Nor can I save any waypoints I collect out in the field to the SD card. Those get written to the internal memory and can be transferred to the card via basecamp (or more generally via computer). So when my USB port failed on the device, I couldn't retrieve it except by sending it wirelessly to another device. Quote Link to comment
+sktqch Posted January 15, 2017 Author Share Posted January 15, 2017 I took my Oregon 600 on a canoe trip and it rained hard on the second day, so the GPS got pretty soaked. There were no signs of any water damage and the unit worked fine EXCEPT that I could no longer connect it to a computer. The USB port still provided power, but refused to recognize it as a mass storage device. I can only assume that a tiny bit of moisture got in the USB port and shorted out the data pins. But even after taking it apart and drying it out for a week, it still wouldn't connect. Luckily I was still within a year of purchase and REI replaced it. Honestly there wouldn't be much of a problem if Garmin would add an option allowing data to be written to the SD card instead of the internal storage. Good thing I still had my Oregon 450. I just sent the track over wirelessly to then transfer it to the computer. Both the 64S and the Etrex 30X allow for data transfer via mini sd card. I liked making a couple of different cards with different areas covered rather than one huge .gpx file which slows down the 64S quite a bit. Stan But none of the Garmin GPS will let you write new data directly to the card. So if I'm out hiking and recording my track, I can't save it to the SD card. Nor can I save any waypoints I collect out in the field to the SD card. Those get written to the internal memory and can be transferred to the card via basecamp (or more generally via computer). So when my USB port failed on the device, I couldn't retrieve it except by sending it wirelessly to another device. OK now I understand. I was talking about loading .gpx files from GSAK to a mini card. Isn't there some way in a Garmin to redirect waypoints and tracks from the internal memory to the SD card? Stan Quote Link to comment
+sktqch Posted January 16, 2017 Author Share Posted January 16, 2017 (edited) also limited to 5000 geocaches. I dunno, the eTrex seems like a big step down from the 64s. That's not such a big deal with us as we have never used more than 500 waypoints at a time. The capacity to use miniSD cards more than makes up for that. We like to limit our download from GSAK to a couple of hundred waypoints max and if there needs to be more putting them on the mini-sd card in groups is much more usable. One of the plus features that I love is the dramatic increase in pixels, (240x320 vs 160x240). The difference in mapping visibility is remarkable, at least to my eyes in the store environment when compared side by side. The only thing I haven't been able to compare is the satellite reception capabilities in heavily forest settings, however as we're fairly experienced we find our geo-sense taking over more and more as we go. We used to be miffed if a cache was more than half a dozen meters off what our gps reported but that was way back down the log. Now I had my 64s arrival warning set at 50 meters and would put it in my pocket for the search at that point. Stan Edited January 16, 2017 by sktqch Quote Link to comment
Pacific NW Posted January 16, 2017 Share Posted January 16, 2017 I think one thing you will absolutely notice going from the GPSMAP 64 series to the eTrex series is the step-down in processor speed. Panning the map, searching for waypoints, etc. all will take longer on the eTrex. Both units have the ability to tap into GLONASS reception, which really helps at the higher latitudes -- though adding in the quad-helix antenna of the GPSMAP probably gives it the slight edge in heavy canopy. And just to complicate things, there's always the newer touch-screen units, too. Quote Link to comment
+sktqch Posted January 16, 2017 Author Share Posted January 16, 2017 I think one thing you will absolutely notice going from the GPSMAP 64 series to the eTrex series is the step-down in processor speed. Panning the map, searching for waypoints, etc. all will take longer on the eTrex. Both units have the ability to tap into GLONASS reception, which really helps at the higher latitudes -- though adding in the quad-helix antenna of the GPSMAP probably gives it the slight edge in heavy canopy. And just to complicate things, there's always the newer touch-screen units, too. I'm not a fan of touch screens, I often end up navigating while my geo-partner drives and trying to manipulate a touch screen on a bumpy logging road isn't my cup of tea, ever! I do appreciate that the 30x is lighter than the 64 but mostly what grabs my attention is the significantly higher battery life of the 30x, (25 hours vs 16 on the 64s. Has anyone found the longer battery life claim for the 30x to be exaggerated? Stan Stan Quote Link to comment
+Mineral2 Posted January 16, 2017 Share Posted January 16, 2017 The increased battery life in the eTrex comes from the weaker processor and smaller screen (though the increased resolution ought to negate that). The battery life listed by Garmin is the max you should expect using lithium batteries and all power saving options enabled. For example, when I used lithium batteries in my Oregon, I got close to the 16 hour rating. But as lithium batteries are expensive, I now use Eneloop rechargeables and get about 8-9 hours of good use from a single pair. Since they're rechargeable, I don't really care. I just bring an extra pair or two with me and then charge them back up at night. The only time I do have to consider how many batteries I'm bringing is when I'm backpacking. With regular Alkaline batteries, I would get around 6 hours of use. So if you're not using rechargeables, they're definitely the way to go. For me, the joystick interface and the small screen were deal breakers when it came to the eTrex. Yes, the increased resolution makes for a clearer and more readable screen, but I chose the Oregon route (touch screen) and those also have a higher resolution screen than the gpsMap series. I find I have no problem using it on bumpy forest service roads either. In the end, it comes down to personal preference. If you really like the eTrex, then get one. And if you buy it from REI, you have a year to return it if you decide you really want the more advanced model. Quote Link to comment
+BAMBOOZLE Posted January 29, 2017 Share Posted January 29, 2017 also limited to 5000 geocaches. I dunno, the eTrex seems like a big step down from the 64s. It is. Quote Link to comment
+Halevib Posted March 23, 2018 Share Posted March 23, 2018 sktqch, did you ever make a decision and purchase on this? I've been really stuck between purchasing the 64s or an eTrex30x. However, Mineral2's comments on these forum threads has me reconsidering an Oregon... Quote Link to comment
+colleda Posted March 24, 2018 Share Posted March 24, 2018 We've been using Etrex 20, for the last five years. I now have a 20x and the only difference I can see is screen saving. The 30 has an extra bell and whistle. Notably a magnetic compass and ability to communicate with other 30s. I like the one handed operation of the Etrex. It is very rugged having dropped mine a few times, once it fell from its cradle while riding my bike and bounced along the road. Still working. Can cache all day one pair of rechargeable batteries (not lithium). Processing speed is ok, it seems to slow down if there are a lot of caches loaded. On a recent trip to New Zealand I had over 4000 caches loaded (internally) where I usually only have about a thousand (loaded from GSAK). I don't really need greater screen resolution as I rarely use the maps. Once I select a cache I go to 'compass'. I use the SD cards for maps. I have Garmin maps for Australia/New Zealand, UK/Europe and USA/Canada. Accuracy is also excellent, better than my Android Motorola G4 which I carry as a backup if I need any information from the net - which is not very often. Quote Link to comment
+Mineral2 Posted March 24, 2018 Share Posted March 24, 2018 5 hours ago, colleda said: Notably a magnetic compass and ability to communicate with other 30s. Well, to clarify, it has the ability to communicate with other Garmin GPS units that support ANT+, which I think is now all other Garmin GPS except the eTrex 10. "communicate" simply means it can send and receive waypoints, tracks, and routes to other nearby devices while in the field. It also means that the 30x can be used with sensor devices (heart rate, cadence/speed, temperature) and the Virb action cam (does anyone really use these?) while the 20x cannot. 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.