Added Value Of Base Maps On Gpsr For Geocaching?

[jeanandallen]

New to geocaching & handheld GPS. Here’s my question:

 

I’m trying to figure out how I would actually use (and do I really need) mapping on a GPSr if I’m only using it for geocaching? Are the preinstalled base maps at all useful for geocaching in local parks (ones with short-medium hikes - we don't expect to do many city caches)? Or does the usefulness only begin when you start downloading the additional purchase topo/detail maps of the immediate area you will be walking through?

 

Here’s what I think I would do to plan routes to caches.

1. Choose cache to go to.

2. Type in coordinates on Maptech, print map. Or use a Terraserver frontend to put caches on topo map (read about this in another thread), and print.

3. Get out road map or use Yahoo maps (if it’s an unfamiliar area) and figure out how to drive to best starting point.

 

Would the base map be useful for any part of this? From what I’ve read, the base maps are at a state highway map level and many local roads are omitted, so it probably wouldn’t be able to replace the “get out the road map/use Yahoo maps” part. If I purchase Garmin/Magellan topo or detailed area maps, then I can see how I might replace the “go to Maptech or Terraserver… print map”, with “find topo/detail map on CD, download to GPSr unit”. But can’t you do this just as well as I’ve described with a paper map? WHAT IS the added value of having the map on the GPSr? Is it something to do with seeing your actual current location relative to the map?

 

I’m considering:

Garmin Etrex Legend

Magellan Sporttrak Map GPS – leaning towards this cause of better internal antenna.

Are the base maps on these two units about the same?

 

Thanks all – I look forward to hearing opinions from all sides of the issue.

Real life examples of how you *use* base maps or other maps loaded on the GPSr unit when "in the field" would help us imagine better what we actually need.

[+greende]

You will probably get alot of better answers than mine but here goes. I have a Garmin Legend. I use the Bearing/Course pointer the most for caching. There are alot of people who use the map page for when they get close to the cache. The base maps that come withthe units are somewhat lacking. I put in a better map onto mine and it works great. If you don't want streets and roads, you could load a topo map instead.

You will eventually develop your own style of caching but keep an open mind. Welcome!

[+briansnat]

The base maps are pretty useless. They only have major roads, towns and bodies of water. Adding a topo mapping program like Mapsource makes all the difference in the world. It will tell you if there is a stream, ravine, cliff or mountain between you and the cache. It also tells you which side of stream the cache is on, so you can start out on the correct side.

 

If you have the topo maps you can even figure out the best road to the cache and not have to worry about mapping programs.

 

Regarding the Legend vs. ST Map , the Legend has slightly more memory and the difference between the Legend's patch antenna and the ST's quad helix shoudn't be a deal breaker or maker. The quad helix has a slight advantage under most conditions and the patch outperforms the quad helix under certain conditions, but the difference is minor. The Sportrrak also has a route averaging feature that drives some geocachers bannanas because it sends them well past their destination (its called the Magellan "slingshot effect"). Besides, the eTrex line of GPS's has probably found more caches than every other GPS combined.

[+AuntieWeasel]

I have the Legend, and I found the basemaps pretty useful. Possibly because I was a complete no-hoper about finding my way around.

 

They aren't detailed, but they were more detailed than I expected...if you know what I mean. They do have some topographical data, and most roads. It was very useful, particularly when I was in an unfamiliar area, to be able to see that I was about to cross a highway I knew, or I was about to dead-end myself in a neighborhood.

 

Paper maps were useful too, of course, and far more detailed. But it was still good to be able to glance down and get a quick overview. In other words, it's mostly for driving and the big picture.

 

After some months, I bought enhanced topo maps to download to the unit, and suddenly that's very useful indeed. Now I can see that I'm headed into a marshy patch, or there's a creek over the hill, or I'm about to fetch up on a highway. That's like voodoo!

 

One paradoxical thing: when I got enhanced maps, it became less useful for getting a big overall view of my state. Why? Too much detail. You back out too far, and suddenly it's VERY slow to refresh, and there's so much stuff on it you can't really see anything. You can tell the unit to show less detail, but not quickly and easily.

 

Legends are very popular here. I love mine. Hopefully, a Magellan fan will come along and give you a good comparison.

[+tirediron]

The basemaps have limited usefulness. If you live in or around a major metropolitan center, you will probably get more benefit from them than those of us in more rural areas. That said, they are a good starting point. Like Auntie Weasel said, when you get too much detail, zooming out to a large area can make the screen all but useless. I use both Mapsource Topo and Metroguide, and like them very much. I would strongly reccomend spending the extra couple of dollars on a mapping unit vice a non-mapping one. If you do get into this sport addiction in a big way, you will probably be sorry for not purchasing a mapping unit in the not too far distant future. Good luck!

[4x4van]

With Magellan's mapsend topo, it includes all the same streets as their mapsend streets & destinations, and all of the street's names are included. Garmin's topo software has all the streets, but only major ones are named. In that sense, I think the Magellan topo software has an edge over the Garmin. On the other hand, I've heard that the actual "topo" info on the Garmin software is a bit more detailed/accurate than Magellan's, so...

 

As far as too much detail when you zoom out, I set the detail on my ST Pro (with mapsend topo) to medium, and when I zoom out, the detail automatically lowers, so it refreshes fast and is still completely readable/usable. As I zoom in, the detail level increases.

 

That said, detail maps are nice, but not necessary for caching. Although I must admit that I'd be hard pressed to delete them from my ST Pro and go back to no maps!

[+Thot]

Map screen yes, maps no.

 

Everybody's different. I have a SporTrak Pro and use the Map screen to guide me close to the cache location. But that’s another function associated with the Map screen. I use real/paper street maps for maps. I essentially never pay any attention to the street maps on the GPSr when caching and, in fact, wish there was a way to turn them off. I’ve set them to minimum detail, but they still clutter up the screen.

 

I have Magellan’s MapSend with North American street level maps and points of interest, which I use when on trips, but not for geocaching. Frankly, I don’t find the gadget very useful for traveling either, except occasionally to help locate a hotel. The screen is too small and to hard to read. If I had one of those large console units in the dash I’d use that. Preferably, if I had a laptop I’d use the gadget with Microsoft Streets & Trips software. If I had this last setup I wouldn’t use/want the street maps in the GPSr at all.

[+Renegade Knight]

...On the other hand, I've heard that the actual "topo" info on the Garmin software is a bit more detailed/accurate than Magellan's, so......

In my experience it's about the same. The Magellan and Garmin both had about the same detail and both had about the same amount of errors. Between both types of software though we had a completly accurate map. Of course you can only tell which was accurate after the fact...

 

While geocaching we actually had a lot of fun figuring this out.

[jeanandallen]

Thanks all for your responses here and in all the other newbie threads. I can see there is limited value in the base maps, more so in the downloaded topos, for our intended use.

 

I went to my local REI and played with the Garmin Legend and the Magellan Sport Trak Map. ***If you can't decide based on the technical specs alone - I highly recommend to other newbies that you get your hands on 'em to help you decide! Sometimes it is the interface to a device that makes all the difference! ***

 

Here are MY impressions (YMMV):

Garmin: unlabeled black buttons on black background - almost invisible - and awkward locations. Hard to push with even a very short fingernail (I am not talking about girlie girl long nails - mine are short but come past the end of my finger just a tiny bit). I could tell in about 10 seconds that the Legend would drive me crazy. The click stick on the top of the unit is also very small and hard to operate. Screen size is smaller than Sport Track, although it does have much better resolution.

Manual entry of waypoints requires negotiating around a tiny onscreen keypad of numbers, which I found cumbersome.

 

I noticed that the higher end Garmins have the buttons on the front, not the side.

 

Sport Track: nice labeled buttons that are easy to push and are on top of the unit where they can be seen and reached with ease. Bigger screen (although poorer resolution than Legend). Manual entry of waypoints done by holding down a button which increments digits 0-10 and you stop at the right digit (like an alarm clock) - much faster than the Legend method.

 

The REI salesperson gushed & gushed about the Garmin, and admitted that he hadn't even bothered to learn how to use the Magellan. Typical, and annoying!

 

So I'm going with the Sport Trak Map. REI has it on sale for $144.93. All the online places have a $30 mail-in rebate so final price is about $140. IS THIS BECAUSE IT IS BEING DISCONTINUED? One other REI salesperson told me on the phone that the SportTrack Map was being discontinued!?!

 

By the way: I noticed in another recent newbie thread that the moderator was interested to know he had arrived here after reading the Parade article. Well, I'm here because of the article too - but I really wish I knew about this hobby years ago. I'm really excited about it, but I'm already getting the feeling that the sport is past its best moment - when it was a relatively small group of nature loving folk. I've spent many hours already looking for interesting cache we might do on an upcoming drive from SF to San Diego and back, and I've found a few caches that are thinly disguised advertisements for "our little tourist town" or a particular restaurant. Not to mention more than a few that are at places that require admission/parking fees. Oh well - I keep looking for the ones that talk about beautiful scenery/vistas/nice hikes/etc.

 

Jean

[4x4van]

By the way:  I noticed in another recent newbie thread that the moderator was interested to know he had arrived here after reading the Parade article.  Well, I'm here because of the article too - but I really wish I knew about this hobby years ago.  I'm really excited about it, but I'm already getting the feeling that the sport is past its best moment - when it was a relatively small group of nature loving folk.  I've spent many hours already looking for interesting cache we might do on an upcoming drive from SF to San Diego and back, and I've found a few caches that are thinly disguised advertisements for "our little tourist town" or a particular restaurant.    Not to mention more than a few that are at places that require admission/parking fees.  Oh well - I keep looking for the ones that talk about beautiful scenery/vistas/nice hikes/etc.   

 

Jean

Some people may say this sport is past it's best days, but I don't think so. To be fair, there have always been lame caches. Are there more of them now? Sure, but that's just a result of numbers. There are way more caches to find now, so the number of lame ones has increased. But that also means that the number of good ones has increased as well. When I started, there were only about 8-10 caches within 20 miles of my house. I can now do a search from my home coordinates and come up with 10 times that number within that same area. I've found over 100, and they include everything from urban micro "cache n dash" types to a 12 mile hike to the second highest point in SoCal (you want beautiful views? Wow!), and everything in between. While there are some caches that I've enjoyed more than others, I have yet to find one that I thought "I should have just stayed home". Even the lame ones gave me something to do with my kids. One of the best parts about caching is being taken to an area nearby my home that I never knew existed, or knew about but really didn't have much of a reason to go to.

 

Keep caching, and you will find good ones as well as bad ones. You'll also often get alot of info by reading the cache page and previous logs. That can help you narrow them down to caches that "you" like and feel are worthwhile. Keep in mind that what you perceive to be "thinly veiled advertisements" may very well be some extremely nice caches. Again, reading past logs can give a good indication.

Edited November 12, 2004 by 4x4van

[+The Walking Man]

The base maps are pretty useless. They only have major roads, towns and bodies of water. Adding a topo mapping program like Mapsource makes all the difference in the world. It will tell you if there is a stream, ravine, cliff or mountain between you and the cache.  It also tells you which side of  stream the cache is on, so you can start out on the correct side.

 

If you have the topo maps you can even figure out the best road to the cache and not have to worry about mapping programs.

 

Regarding the Legend vs. ST Map ,  the Legend has slightly more memory and the difference between the Legend's patch antenna and the ST's quad helix shoudn't be a deal breaker or maker.  The quad helix has a slight advantage under most conditions and the patch outperforms the quad helix under certain conditions, but the difference is  minor.  The Sportrrak also has a route averaging feature that drives some geocachers bannanas because it sends them well past their destination  (its called the Magellan "slingshot effect"). Besides, the eTrex line of GPS's has probably found more caches than every other GPS combined.

I'm relatively new to geocaching and use a Magellan SporTrak Map, but have no experience with other units to compare its performance. What is the "slingshot effect" and since it sounds like a negative, is there a way to compensate for it?

[+Renegade Knight]

...What is the "slingshot effect" and since it sounds like a negative, is there a way to compensate for it?

The averaging effect shows up in three places that I can figure out.

 

1) As you are walking up to a cache you will tend to walk past ground zero then have to walk back as the GPS catches up. A way to work around this I'm told is to take a few steps back as you get close to the cache. I tried it once it seemed to work but once is not a good trial.

 

2) When driving and when it looses it's lock. If you don't have the Sport Track set to notify you when you have lost a lock it will project your position based on some kind of dead reconing algorythem. If you have made a turn...the GPS will not have you oriented correctly. However this averaging will also make this GPS more stable in the woods.

 

2) When marking a waypoint if you don't use the averaging function your point can be 50-60' off.

 

That's what I've noticed.

[+wingryder]

My two cents ... base maps are a lot better than none at all.

Helpful as reference points to get your mind picturing the general location of the

caches your are heading out to get.

 

I have been struggling with no luck to get base maps on a Garmin 72.

(Or any map at all ) Just makes it a tad easier.

 

wingryder

[+JohnnyVegas]

 

The REI salesperson gushed & gushed about the Garmin, and admitted that he hadn't even bothered to learn how to use the Magellan.  Typical, and annoying!

 

That sounds like the REI in my area, I went with a freind who was looking to buy a GPS, they had the sport track map and the legend. The sales person shows the Legend and I asked him about the Sport Trak map, his reply was that Magellan did not make a very good GPS. At this point I took my Sport Trak map out of my pocket and gave him a Magellan demo. including the street names on the TOPO software that Garmin does not include. The trail projections that Garmin does not include. He response was that he had no idea the Magellan offered those feature and that he had never used a Magellan GPS, as a matter of fact his only experiance with Garmin was in the parking lot durring a rep seminar, (These seminars only last about an hour) Part of the problem is that REI does not pay well and you get what you pay for. When I am in any retail shop an a sales person say some brand is crap, I find it means they do not know anything about it. reminds of a time I took my mother to buy a computer because she just wanted to send e-mails, The clown at Best buy told here she needed at least a Pentium Three for $1,000.00 (Pent 3 was new then) to send e-mail- I told him he did know what he was taking about and I told the manager they had idiots working in the store.

 

my freind bought the Magellan.

Edited December 3, 2004 by JohnnyVegas

[+samiaminca]

Figured I would throw in my two cents worth on this one. I found that using mapping (additional maps, not the base maps) helps guide you to the cache quickly. I store all the waypoints that I plan on working on in my GPSr (a Garmin eMap), so if I find myself near one when not out on a special hunt, I can zero in on it quickly. Once I am near the cache, I zoom in to somewhere around a 500ft scale or smaller and am not bothered by the extra clutter of a larger scale. Without mapping, I would probably waste lots of valuable time figuring out how to get to where I want to be.

The best advice is to use the informationon your GPSr as a reference tool to get you close. And then utilize awareness, prior intelligence, and your senses to get you to the cache.

 

Sorry to read about all the bad experiences with the retail sales persons. Obviously they didn't take the time to read up on all the products they offered so they could give intelligent advice. I consult on electronics, including GPS units, all the time, and although I prefer Garmin, I never had a problem guiding someone towards a Magellan if that product fits their needs better.

 

Anyways, it always pays to fully understand the capabilities of your GPSr, so that you can use it effectively for what it can do for you, and so you can work around what it can not.

 

Cache On....

[n0wae]

A map base GPS is the way to go. Get at least 8 meg so you can upload detailed maps like Garmin's MapSource for most of your state. (The map base that comes with the GPS is rather crude). When driving through a large city like Denver Colorado you don't want to be fumbling around with paper maps and bothered with finding street names in heavy traffic. It's so much easier to guide your car to the proper place using the GPS. You don't care what the street names are and if you miss a turn it's not a problem... You just re-direct your 'Pac-man' down a different street to get to your goal.

[+Thot]

The clown at Best buy told here she needed at least a Pentium Three for $1,000.00 (Pent 3 was new then) to send e-mail- I told him he did know what he was taking about and I told the manager they had idiots working in the store.

 

my freind bought the Magellan.

A Magellan to send email? just joking

 

I'd guess the salesman knew exactly what he was doing. The store probably makes a lot of money selling the clueless more computer than they need.

Edited December 5, 2004 by Thot

[+Searching_ut]

Kind of late for this particular thread, but here are my two cents worth for others that may be looking at these two units.

 

Regarding base maps, I have little use for them, but suppose they’re better than nothing.

 

For TOPO maps, I feel the Legend stands head and shoulders above the Sportrak map. To begin with, the current Garmin TOPO map is based on either 1:24,000 scale maps for National parks, or more commonly, the 1:100,000 scale which Garmin provides for the entire US. The Magellan TOPO maps on the other hand are less detailed as far as terrain geography by a factor of two to three times. (approx 1:200,000 scale maybe 1:250,000) It’s a huge difference if you’re trying to use them in the field. Secondly, the resolution of the Legends display is considerably higher, which enables you to more easily obtain a reasonable overview of the terrain. The new 3D Topo Magellan is coming out with should make the maps terrain detail about comparable with Garmins 1:100,000 scale maps, but that’s yet to be seen being as how you can’t buy it at this time.

 

As for which of the two mentioned units I’d choose, I chose both, used them side by side for a little over 300 backcountry hiking/climbing miles, and a hundred plus caches. The legend I kept, and the Sportraks I gave to the Kids…… Both units have pluses and minuses, but on balance I preferred the eTrex for my hiking and occasional geocaching.