Newbie Question... Garmin Vista or GPSMAP76S?

[+CCrew]

Looking for a nice handheld, and don't really need the GPS V as I have a StreetPilot III Deluxe and the 5 duplicates a lot of it.

 

The Vista and 76S appear pretty much the same, with only minor (?) differences. Is one drastically better than the other? I see that the 76S has the Quad-Helix antenna and the Vista doesn't.

 

Or is there a better handheld unit that would be better than both of these? I'd like to stay Garmin as my unlocks for the SPIII allow 2 units, but it's not imperative if there's a much better unit out there.

 

Thanks in advance!

Roger

[+EraSeek]

"the 76S has the Quad-Helix antenna and the Vista doesn't." Pretty big difference. Also the 76 has an excellent tide graphing function. The 76 also is the best unit for the user having the ablity to customize it's displays and data fields, compared to any GPS.

 

[+briansnat]

Both are nice units. The Vista has the advantage of small size, light weight and longer battery life. It's also cheaper (and there is now a $50 rebate for any E-Trex unit). If a lightweight, compact unit is important to you, then the Vista is the way to go. If cost is a factor, then I'd also go with the Vista. I also think the Vista would hold up to getting dropped and knocked around better than the Map76S.

 

The Map 76S has a larger screen and a better antenna than the Vista. If you are going to be doing a lot of Geocaching under heavy leaf cover, then the 76S's antenna gives you an advantage. I'm not fully informed as to all the features of the 76S, but as I understand it, it has some features that the Vista doesn't. Among the ones I'm aware of are audible alarms when you reach your destination, or go off course.

 

If all things were equal, I'd go with the Map76S because of the antenna. I chose the Legend (the Vista's cousin) because a compact, durable and inexpensive unit was important to me.

 

"You can't make a man by standing a sheep on its hind legs, but by standing a flock of sheep in that position, you can make a crowd of men" -Max Beerbohm

[Tahosa and Sons]

I'm satisfied with the Vista, cost & size were very favorable. I use mine for more that caching since I spend most of the summer in the Mtns. plotting trails for the USFS. And it has done real well with that aspect.

 

Tahosa - Dweller of the Mountain Tops.

[BassoonPilot]

quote:

---

Originally posted by BrianSnat:

Both are nice units. ... If cost is a factor, then I'd also go with the Vista. I also think the Vista would hold up to getting dropped and knocked around better than the Map76S.

 

... If you are going to be doing a lot of Geocaching under heavy leaf cover, then the 76S's antenna gives you an advantage. ... If all things were equal, I'd go with the Map76S because of the antenna.

---

 

And yet, I have never noticed any greater accuracy in coordinates from people who place caches using the Map76S or much less costly units ... like the basic e-trex. And from reading the logs of people I know who own each of the units mentioned, it appears to me the people using the more expensive Map76S units (with the better antenna) experience no better reception nor locate caches with less difficulty.

 

Check the Garmin website (garmin.com) where you can do a side-by-side comparison of the models that interest you, and then decide if the (currently more than) $150 difference in price between the Vista and GPSMap76S is worth it to you.

 

I own a Vista, and am very pleased with it. I consider it the ideal size for hiking and geocaching, with a very good selection of features.

[+Criminal]

76S by far. Built in antenna plus a jack for an external. That would do it for me.

[+Alan2]

I have a Vista and enjoy the small size.(pop it in my breast pocket and go anywhere without anyone even knowing I have it on me). While caching I leave it in that pocket and through the lanyard arounf my neck or just let it hang. While I do lose lock in the woods on and off under tree cover, I stop a moment to get the lock again and off I go. I have yet to not be able to get to the cache location (although I have not actually found all caches once there but that wasn't the fault of the Vista).

 

Alan

[+briansnat]

quote:

---

...and from reading the logs of people I know who own each of the units mentioned, it appears to me the people using the more expensive Map76S units (with the better antenna) experience no better reception nor locate caches with less difficulty.

---

 

I was out placing a cache with another Geocacher who had a Map 76. I did notice he got better reception under heavy leaf cover. Several times, I momentarily lost the sats and he still had them, though we were next to each other. On other occassions he seemed to get a stronger signal from them. But this only happened a couple of times during the hike.

 

I do agree with BassoonPilot that I've noticed no difference in the accuracy of cache coordinates based on the brand or model of the unit used to obtain them, and like Alan2, my Etrex ever been the reason I couldn't find a cache.

 

"You can't make a man by standing a sheep on its hind legs, but by standing a flock of sheep in that position, you can make a crowd of men" -Max Beerbohm

[+CCrew]

Edited

[+CCrew]

Thanks for all the input guys. I bought the Vista, if it matters.

 

Now to figure out which are the best maps to buy, since my StreetPilot III maps don't work with it.

 

Garmin says Metroguide, but doesn't even have half my county in it!

[+Alan2]

quote:

---

Garmin says Metroguide, but doesn't even have half my county in it!

---

 

Good lick with the Vista. WHat'd ya mean half your county?

 

Alan

[+CCrew]

Alan,

Seems like the Metroguide maps only have the larger streets in my area. All of the local subdivisions that have been here 10 years have no streets on the maps..

 

This based on the Map viewer on Garmins site, I'm assuming that it's correct.

 

It's a TeleAtlas issue, as Pharos maps don't have them either, although NavTech do.

[+Alan2]

I don't have your area of Metro loaded into my computer so I can't check on my machine. But if you post some info of streets that are missing and coordinates, someone else might be able to check their Metro disk.

 

Also, I have R+R loaded for your area and could check to see if those street are available in R+R.

 

Alan

[+CCrew]

Alan,

Thanks.

 

Home is N39 10.568 W78 06.950 which should be the intersection of Woodrow Road and Emily Lane.Based on Garmin's Map Viewer Utility it's in R&R but not in MetroGuide. It's in City navigator, but alas that won't load in my Vista. Developments all around here, few in the mapping it appears. 1400 houses behind me and not a street on the map.

 

It's my understanding that the Metroguide maps are more accurate than the R&R ones, is that truly the case? Accuracy meaning position I'm assuming rather than concise completeness?

 

Thanks for all the help!!

 

Roger

[shrekTBA]

On R&R, I show you 84 ft from that interesction. As far as I can see, alot of development around you. I have R&R loaded on my Vista and Legend. It is not optimised according to Garmin, but it works great!

 

It's not a sport unless there is something dead in the back of the truck when you get home.

[+CCrew]

wyoduckhunter,

Thanks for the response. That's about spot on, since the coordinates are my front porch, and I know my driveway is 60 feet to the street. Wow!

 

Looks like the streets aren't on Metroguide and are on R&R based on all of your findings and Garmin's site, so I picked up R&R today. Loaded it up and it's exactly what I wanted.

 

Thanks EVERYONE for all your help!!

 

Roger