Printable View
Ok then you've partially answered my question which was going to be - The Legend HCX is supposed to be just as good under canopy and smaller which I like for hiking/biking etc/ Thoughts?
https://buy.garmin.com/shop/shop.do?cID=145&pID=8701
I'm going to look at both the 60 CX and CSX vs the Legend HCX to how they compare
mostly directed to superchief -
wrap your gps in a shirt or something and strap it on your pack. it should be fine even in the event of a crash. the wrap will keep it from getting to beat up and the pack will cushion a hard blow - all bets are off with a sharp rock impact.
we use those (or similar) units all the time and have dropped them in repeatedly - have lost them in the Arctic Ocean - to find them an hour later - basically we beat the crap out of them and they are still working fine.
although the 76cx is a great and way more powerful unit - we use them for aerial surveys - i prefer those legends for carry around jut to find waypoints and sometimes the way home.
oh nRoute software can be pretty cool too.
Lee: Spent the extra $$ and get the Vista over the Legend. It's worth it for the barometric altimeter.Quote:
Originally Posted by LeeLau
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperChief
for what it's worth, i used a Vista on my MTB for a long time, and I had plenty of crashes. over the years, i broke 2 of the handlebar mounts beyond repair ($10). of course, the right crash could take out your gps...i just never had it happen.Quote:
Originally Posted by wendigo
i did drop the device *plenty* of times on all sorts of surfaces. i used one regular Vista for recording over 1,400 events over a 6-year period before retiring it because the seals broke down & it got water-logged. (i did have an early Vista fail, but it was a fluke + a warranty repair.)
by storing it in your pack (with or without a t-shirt), you lose the ability actually see stats as you're riding. something to consider.
Done more digging and am going to post this here for added info
https://buy.garmin.com/shop/compare....areProduct=310
The newer eTrex Legends and Vista HCX - (note the HCX) has quad-helix antennas. They use the Mediatek chipset. The 60CSX and 60CX also have quad-helix antennas but use the SIRFIII chipsets.
It's my understanding that the quad-helix antennas and the newer improved chipsets are what set these units apart from older Garmin units in sensitivity and reception. This is a priority for me
Both the Etrek Legend and Vista HCX and 60CX and 60CSX use Micro-SD cards and downloadable maps. Another key feature for me
See geek talk but very thorough here http://forums.groundspeak.com/GC/ind...c=168173&st=50
I'm going to take a look at them to see how the user interfaces compare
the interfaces on all these devices are, ahem, not good....but you get used to them. the Legend & Vista share the same interface.Quote:
Originally Posted by LeeLau
it sounds like you confirmed what i was saying above...get an "x" unit, for sure...but whether you choose the Legend HCx, Vista HCx, or 60CSx is your call. i'd humbly suggest that skimping and not getting the barometric altimeter would be a mistake.
in open terrain, my (original) Vista performed just as well as the Vista HCx. if you're talking canyons and tree cover (as you probably are given your location), then the HCx would have more of an advantage. we have alot of deep canyons here, but i haven't yet had the chance to give the HCx the hardcore test in them...yet.
the "x" units seem to hold a signal better once locked (and they lock faster) -- so you can get the lock then put it in your pack/pocket and not worry as much as with the older units. if you don't get a lock or lose it, then the new units seem just as bad as trying to reacquire a lock from a poor position.
all the devices have been capable of using downloadable maps, although the newer devices now using removable storage. does it matter? in my experience, not really. if you travel far, wide & often, then i can see how it might.
this is not a new feature.
on my old vista (non-removable memory), i was able to detailed topos for all of NW wyoming + eastern idaho and a few other random spots (eg yosemite) -- basically all the terrain i spend the most time in. with a 1gb micro SD card and the newer device, i have topos for the entire western 1/2 of the US. will i use oklahoma, texas, etc? probably not.
for those kinds of trips, it would be easy to just selectively load them to my device.
in other words, i don't see it as that much of an advantage. also, i believe garmin made a mistake in not increasing the buffer for track storage. let's say you go on a 2-week trip. i *believe* the newer devices will NOT take advantage of that 1gb card for storing current tracks -- you have the same 10,000 point limit as the old devices. if you *save* the tracks, you can store them to a card....but when you save them, garmin tosses out all of the time data and just retains position. in other words, the save is "lossy". i haven't played around with this that much on the newer device, but i was disappointed in my preliminary checks that they didn't allow a track log to use up all available space. dumb.
I just checked again and
The newer eTrex Legends and Vista HCX - (note the HCX) have patch antennas. They use the Mediatek chipset. The 60CSX and 60CX also have quad-helix antennas but use the SIRFIII chipsets. All the units seem to have good sensitivity
You all seem to have learned a lot. I like what I see since I chimed in last with my previous company's handheld and other stuff. SIRFIII is still what you want for this type of use.
Airplanes are fun with GPS!! :the_finge
Done it plenty using Arcpad just to get elevation, SOG (or the air in this case) and one time I mapped the route on an hour and a half ride. However, with a few hundred dollar Bluetooth GPS receiver, elevation readings suck.
I do miss my access to my old equipment.
so you arrived at the conclusion from a few hours ago, LL? :D :DQuote:
Originally Posted by LeeLau
j/k
No - sorry. I was correcting an older statement which said the HCX had quad-helix antennas . They have patch antennas.
All the tech mumbo jumbo aside the important question is whether they have good sensitivity
i know -- sorry -- i thought the higher sensitivity was established in my first post (Edit: post #33 -- meant first post since this thread got reheated). sorry! :DQuote:
Originally Posted by LeeLau
Bump for Freezorburn.
Got the Garmin etrex HCX and it works great in dense forest and is small.
Sample map generated in heavy forest
http://www.leelau.net/2007/brew2007_...ail%20copy.jpg
I got the Garmin eTrex Vista HCx coming. Looking forward to comparing to my Magallen Explorist 500. The Explorist may be in Gear Swap soon.
Time for a bump. I'm most likely getting one of the Vista HCx for fun and for backup and I am still a bit confused about whether I can use the National Geographic Topo program with these or if you have to get Garmin's map program??
i've had the garmin 60cs for 4 years now. does great in the backcountry. has altimeter, compass, barometer, and mapping, so i can actually load USGS topos onto it.
I got the eTrex venture HC a month ago and have been really pleased with it. Not to much memory but I can fit topos for all the mountain regions of colorado on it. I think it's the same as the Vista but no removable memory. Also only $135.Quote:
Originally Posted by Joey Joe Joe Junior Shabadoo
I think you have to use the garmin mapsource to load maps. I found all the topos for colorado online, let me know if you want them.
Yes, only Garmin maps (like MapSource/TopoCanada) can be downloaded into Garmin units. Other GPS makers have their own proprietory formats too.
60CSX - anyone use the tides on this? not much difference from my perspective between this and the vista hcx and I'm trying to decide.
I can transfer waypoints to and from my Garmin Geko 201 to and from my NG Topo with ease.Quote:
Originally Posted by Joey Joe Joe Junior Shabadoo
The Geko is simple, very light, very compact, seems to be pretty weatherproof, has no maps (other than a worthless schematic map mode), so downloading maps is a non-issue. Geko 201 is WAAS enabled (Geko 101 is not). The reception in forested areas is better than my old Garmin 45, but I have not experience with other current Garmin units. Most of my GPS use is in alpine or sub-alpine terrain, so reception is seldom on issue for me.
I generally use the Geko for locating pre-loaded waypoints and getting a bearing and distance thereto. I rely primarily on map and compass, and secondarily on watch altimeter and GPS. GPS unit has greatly helped me "thread the needle" through tricky terrain in bad weather, verify position and speed travel. I will download from my NG Topo anywhere from 6 waypoints for a day trip to 100+ waypoints for a multi-day extended traverse. For my use, I don't see any good reason to go with a heavier/larger unit.
I also see no good reason to pay more for a digital compass. A good quality Suunto magnetic compass w/declination adjustment is foolproof and does not require batteries.
60Csx does the best in tree cover but the compass sucks something fierce. Itll tell you "1 mi NW to destination" which will be correct, but the arrow will point you way off. Always bring a regular compass with you as well and itll do just fine.
how do you get map software for f60Csx free or cheap? or if I'm such a cheap bastard is there a different company from garmin that I should be looking at without compromising much performance?
Just got back from a six day backpack trip. Used a Garmin GPSMap 60CSx. Only went through one set of double AA batteries. Held signal the entire time, through thick coverage and all. The nice part is it has a memory card slot, so we can put the 24k topo maps in it for when we're on the trail, then swap the card back to a card with Streets USA on it so we can get driving directions back home...
jong gps/map questions: what size garmin maps do i need for hiking? will 100k maps do the trick or do you need 24k maps? the software choices for garmin are very confusing. basically i would like to use the thing for hiking in adirondacks, teton/yellowstone parks, AK kenai and denali areas, and perhaps northwest nj where i am going this weekend. there is Topo, Topo 24k dvd's. then there are cards as well. i'd also like to use the thing for driving directions to, does that mean i have to buy city navigator as well?
oof.
actually i found most of the answers i've been looking for here:
http://www.tetongravity.com/forums/s...ghlight=garmin
BUMP
anyone used the newer colorado 400t garmin gps units? looking at getting something in the next few weeks...lots of info on the 60 & 76 models, but cant seem to find much feedback on the colorado ones. if it not that much better I'll probably go with a 60csx...seems to have all the options I need and is only $200 compared to the $500-600 colorado units..
Detailed review at backpackinglight.com sez:
-- display is stunning in the right lighting conditions
-- display is difficult to see in many other lighting conditions
-- other features aren't that much of any advantages, some aspects are a disadvantage, and seems targetting more toward geocachers and whereigo (no, I hadn't heard of that either before)
So, seems like the best bets are still the 60Cx/CSx (or 76Cx/CSx for water sports), or the newer H versions of the higher-end eTrex models.
(And in case you're tempted by the Magellan Triton models, google for stunningly negative feedback.)
I have the Garmin Etrex Vista Cx. I have had it for a couple of years now and i absolutely love the thing. I use it during the summer when I am guiding WW canoe trips and it has proven its worth several times over. Started using it when I am skiing and and driving as well. I constantly finds uses for it and pretty much carry it everywhere with me. My brother has the Garmin GPSMAP 60CSx GPS and it gets better reception then mine. If you spend some time of torrent sites you can also get all the maps and product keys you will need. Little hint tho is that Garmin hasn't come out with a MapSource that works with Apples yet.
The new H versions of the Vista (and some other eTrex models) has reception that is supposed to be comparable to that of the 60/76 CSx/Cx (although they do use different chips).