Bookmark this page:
- Suggestions-for-new-GPS
- 06-18-2010
   Re: Suggestions for new GPS
| Craig Wallace | 06-18-2010 |
  Re: Suggestions for new GPS
| Mark Illingwort... | 06-18-2010 |
  Re: Suggestions for new GPS
| Mark Illingwort... | 06-18-2010 |
| Re: Suggestions for new GPS
| LightByrd | 06-20-2010 |
 Re: Suggestions for new GPS
| readerquick | 06-20-2010 |
| Re: Suggestions for new GPS
| LightByrd | 06-21-2010 |
| Re: Suggestions for new GPS
| Carl Heinz | 06-21-2010 |
If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
> Klatch wrote:
>> I believe that all of your choices have the same chip set (STM Cartesio).
>> That is still not official on the 62 but early buyers have opened the 78
>> to confirm this. The Gamin web site does say the 62 has a quad helix
>> antenna, while the 78 appears to be a patch antenna. The Oregon and
>> Dakota have something Garmin calls a "ceramic antenna", IIRC. One
>> problem that Garmin is having with this chip set is reliably locking onto
>> WAAS satellites. The latest firmware updates seem to have helped this,
>> but still not as good as the 60CSx (or 76CSx). I believe all of your
>> choices will have much better reception than your current units. The 62
>> and 78 series are not touch screen and should have better daylight
>> visibility without the need to use the backlight. There are some very
>> knowledgeable people on the Groundspeak forums, Technology and Software
>> section. It is a good forum to monitor to keep up to speed on handheld
>> GPS developments. These are mostly geocachers, so features they value
>> may be of little interest to you.
>> Personally, unless you want touchscreen and geocaching features, the
>> 60CSx and the 76CSx are still the most solid units out there, although
>> they no longer are being made with the SirFStar chip, either.
>> (MediaTek(sp?), now).
>> That is still not official on the 62 but early buyers have opened the 78
>> to confirm this. The Gamin web site does say the 62 has a quad helix
>> antenna, while the 78 appears to be a patch antenna. The Oregon and
>> Dakota have something Garmin calls a "ceramic antenna", IIRC. One
>> problem that Garmin is having with this chip set is reliably locking onto
>> WAAS satellites. The latest firmware updates seem to have helped this,
>> but still not as good as the 60CSx (or 76CSx). I believe all of your
>> choices will have much better reception than your current units. The 62
>> and 78 series are not touch screen and should have better daylight
>> visibility without the need to use the backlight. There are some very
>> knowledgeable people on the Groundspeak forums, Technology and Software
>> section. It is a good forum to monitor to keep up to speed on handheld
>> GPS developments. These are mostly geocachers, so features they value
>> may be of little interest to you.
>> Personally, unless you want touchscreen and geocaching features, the
>> 60CSx and the 76CSx are still the most solid units out there, although
>> they no longer are being made with the SirFStar chip, either.
>> (MediaTek(sp?), now).
> Thanks for your extensive answer. I did some further research and
> discovered (while reading the manuals) that the Oregon and Dakota
> do not have the possibilty to look for an address, while the
> 78 and 60 (and so the 62 I assume) have this possibility.
> And since I like that feature, I think my shortlist is
> now narrowed between 78, 78s and 62S (No 62, because 62 can not
> use memory cards; no versions with internal map because I either
> want a free map or a (good) detailed map). But next week I will
> get an opportunity to use a Oregon 450 for some time,
> and maybe that will change my shortlist :).
> Wim
> discovered (while reading the manuals) that the Oregon and Dakota
> do not have the possibilty to look for an address, while the
> 78 and 60 (and so the 62 I assume) have this possibility.
> And since I like that feature, I think my shortlist is
> now narrowed between 78, 78s and 62S (No 62, because 62 can not
> use memory cards; no versions with internal map because I either
> want a free map or a (good) detailed map). But next week I will
> get an opportunity to use a Oregon 450 for some time,
> and maybe that will change my shortlist :).
> Wim
WOW!
Never knew that! THANKS!
Wondered what to go for if my 76CSx ever died!
Use that feature all the time!
After all, a multipurpose GPS should be just that!
Whaddya think Jack Erbes??
--
Regards,
Richard Harison
LightByrd wrote:
> > Klatch wrote:
> >> I believe that all of your choices have the same chip set (STM Cartesio).
> >> That is still not official on the 62 but early buyers have opened the 78
> >> to confirm this. The Gamin web site does say the 62 has a quad helix
> >> antenna, while the 78 appears to be a patch antenna. The Oregon and
> >> Dakota have something Garmin calls a "ceramic antenna", IIRC. One
> >> problem that Garmin is having with this chip set is reliably locking onto
> >> WAAS satellites. The latest firmware updates seem to have helped this,
> >> but still not as good as the 60CSx (or 76CSx). I believe all of your
> >> choices will have much better reception than your current units. The 62
> >> and 78 series are not touch screen and should have better daylight
> >> visibility without the need to use the backlight. There are some very
> >> knowledgeable people on the Groundspeak forums, Technology and Software
> >> section. It is a good forum to monitor to keep up to speed on handheld
> >> GPS developments. These are mostly geocachers, so features they value
> >> may be of little interest to you.
> >> Personally, unless you want touchscreen and geocaching features, the
> >> 60CSx and the 76CSx are still the most solid units out there, although
> >> they no longer are being made with the SirFStar chip, either.
> >> (MediaTek(sp?), now).
> >> That is still not official on the 62 but early buyers have opened the 78
> >> to confirm this. The Gamin web site does say the 62 has a quad helix
> >> antenna, while the 78 appears to be a patch antenna. The Oregon and
> >> Dakota have something Garmin calls a "ceramic antenna", IIRC. One
> >> problem that Garmin is having with this chip set is reliably locking onto
> >> WAAS satellites. The latest firmware updates seem to have helped this,
> >> but still not as good as the 60CSx (or 76CSx). I believe all of your
> >> choices will have much better reception than your current units. The 62
> >> and 78 series are not touch screen and should have better daylight
> >> visibility without the need to use the backlight. There are some very
> >> knowledgeable people on the Groundspeak forums, Technology and Software
> >> section. It is a good forum to monitor to keep up to speed on handheld
> >> GPS developments. These are mostly geocachers, so features they value
> >> may be of little interest to you.
> >> Personally, unless you want touchscreen and geocaching features, the
> >> 60CSx and the 76CSx are still the most solid units out there, although
> >> they no longer are being made with the SirFStar chip, either.
> >> (MediaTek(sp?), now).
> > Thanks for your extensive answer. I did some further research and
> > discovered (while reading the manuals) that the Oregon and Dakota
> > do not have the possibilty to look for an address, while the
> > 78 and 60 (and so the 62 I assume) have this possibility.
> > And since I like that feature, I think my shortlist is
> > now narrowed between 78, 78s and 62S (No 62, because 62 can not
> > use memory cards; no versions with internal map because I either
> > want a free map or a (good) detailed map). But next week I will
> > get an opportunity to use a Oregon 450 for some time,
> > and maybe that will change my shortlist :).
> > Wim
I've recently bought an Oregon 450 to replace the eTrex Vista HCx that
> > discovered (while reading the manuals) that the Oregon and Dakota
> > do not have the possibilty to look for an address, while the
> > 78 and 60 (and so the 62 I assume) have this possibility.
> > And since I like that feature, I think my shortlist is
> > now narrowed between 78, 78s and 62S (No 62, because 62 can not
> > use memory cards; no versions with internal map because I either
> > want a free map or a (good) detailed map). But next week I will
> > get an opportunity to use a Oregon 450 for some time,
> > and maybe that will change my shortlist :).
> > Wim
leaked inside when it got wet. (I beat it up pretty hard for 3 years,
so that's not a complaint). Hiking, biking, kayaking. I'm pretty
impressed with the receive sensitivity of both units. Both work well
under tree canopy, and the Vista would even get satellite lock inside
the first floor of my 2 story house - even away from outside windows.
The Oregon doesn't seem quite as good, but it's still not bad at all.
That never would happen with my old eTrex Legend C.
Even though I was happy with the Vista, I thought the upgrade to the
Oregon would be a better choice - more memory, larger screen, touch
screen menus, fancier mapping displays. I'm having some misgivings
now though. The Oregon is clunker, heavier, and has MUCH poorer
screen visibility than the Vista. It also eats batteries much faster
than the Vista. The Vista could always be read on a bike; the Oregon
screen blanks (to save power) which is inconvenient - tap the screen
to bring it back, then it times out. (Yeah, I could keep the screen
on all the time, but then the battery drain is worse - the Vista is
just readable all the time). The touchscreen user interface menus are
a little klugy getting around, and there's a track distance reporting
error that's annoying (10-20% low on hikes)
That's more info than you asked for, but hey, you get what you pay
for.
J
> Klatch wrote:
<snip>
> Thanks for your extensive answer. I did some further research and
> discovered (while reading the manuals) that the Oregon and Dakota
> do not have the possibilty to look for an address, while the
> 78 and 60 (and so the 62 I assume) have this possibility.
> And since I like that feature, I think my shortlist is
> now narrowed between 78, 78s and 62S (No 62, because 62 can not
> use memory cards; no versions with internal map because I either
> want a free map or a (good) detailed map). But next week I will
> get an opportunity to use a Oregon 450 for some time,
> and maybe that will change my shortlist :).
> Wim
<snip>
> Thanks for your extensive answer. I did some further research and
> discovered (while reading the manuals) that the Oregon and Dakota
> do not have the possibilty to look for an address, while the
> 78 and 60 (and so the 62 I assume) have this possibility.
> And since I like that feature, I think my shortlist is
> now narrowed between 78, 78s and 62S (No 62, because 62 can not
> use memory cards; no versions with internal map because I either
> want a free map or a (good) detailed map). But next week I will
> get an opportunity to use a Oregon 450 for some time,
> and maybe that will change my shortlist :).
> Wim
I believe a call to Garmin is in order before you make a purchase decision
based solely on the apparent lack of ability of the Oregon series to look
for an address. As stated in the 78 series manual, that ability comes with
the installation of City Navigator maps. For some reason the Oregon manual
didn't seem to mention optional maps. I have three different map sets
installed on my 76CSx and *only* the City Navigator maps allow me to search
for an address. Not the Topo 2008 and not some free maps I installed. I am
not sure if any of the very good free maps available for Garmin units will
do the address search.
Anyway, hopefully the 450 you will be using has autorouting maps installed
and you can see if what you believe is true.
On 6/21/2010 2:45 AM, Klatch wrote:
> I believe a call to Garmin is in order before you make a purchase decision
> based solely on the apparent lack of ability of the Oregon series to look
> for an address. As stated in the 78 series manual, that ability comes with
> the installation of City Navigator maps. For some reason the Oregon manual
> didn't seem to mention optional maps. I have three different map sets
> installed on my 76CSx and *only* the City Navigator maps allow me to search
> for an address. Not the Topo 2008 and not some free maps I installed. I am
> not sure if any of the very good free maps available for Garmin units will
> do the address search.
> Anyway, hopefully the 450 you will be using has autorouting maps installed
> and you can see if what you believe is true.
> based solely on the apparent lack of ability of the Oregon series to look
> for an address. As stated in the 78 series manual, that ability comes with
> the installation of City Navigator maps. For some reason the Oregon manual
> didn't seem to mention optional maps. I have three different map sets
> installed on my 76CSx and *only* the City Navigator maps allow me to search
> for an address. Not the Topo 2008 and not some free maps I installed. I am
> not sure if any of the very good free maps available for Garmin units will
> do the address search.
> Anyway, hopefully the 450 you will be using has autorouting maps installed
> and you can see if what you believe is true.
Thanks for the hint: I will either call Garmin or try to
to find out if the 450 has those possibility.
Or maybe can some 450/550 owner tell that?
Wim
Klatch wrote:
>> Klatch wrote:
>> Thanks for your extensive answer. I did some further research and
>> discovered (while reading the manuals) that the Oregon and Dakota
>> do not have the possibilty to look for an address, while the
>> 78 and 60 (and so the 62 I assume) have this possibility.
>> And since I like that feature, I think my shortlist is
>> now narrowed between 78, 78s and 62S (No 62, because 62 can not
>> use memory cards; no versions with internal map because I either
>> want a free map or a (good) detailed map). But next week I will
>> get an opportunity to use a Oregon 450 for some time,
>> and maybe that will change my shortlist :).
>> Wim
>> Thanks for your extensive answer. I did some further research and
>> discovered (while reading the manuals) that the Oregon and Dakota
>> do not have the possibilty to look for an address, while the
>> 78 and 60 (and so the 62 I assume) have this possibility.
>> And since I like that feature, I think my shortlist is
>> now narrowed between 78, 78s and 62S (No 62, because 62 can not
>> use memory cards; no versions with internal map because I either
>> want a free map or a (good) detailed map). But next week I will
>> get an opportunity to use a Oregon 450 for some time,
>> and maybe that will change my shortlist :).
>> Wim
>
> I believe a call to Garmin is in order before you make a purchase decision
> based solely on the apparent lack of ability of the Oregon series to look
> for an address.
> I believe a call to Garmin is in order before you make a purchase decision
> based solely on the apparent lack of ability of the Oregon series to look
> for an address.
I posten this question at some GPS forum, and a owner of a Oregon
confirmed that, for example with City Navigator, you can search
for an address. So that puts the Oregon back on the shortlist :).
Wim
- GPS, GLONASS and GALILEO ?
- Satellite Navigation
- 2005-09-08
- Bluetooth GPS
- Satellite Navigation
- 2005-08-29
- Opinion about buying a Gps
- Garmin GPS
- 2009-12-15
- Hacking GPS - Free Book
- Magellan GPS
- 2009-02-09
