Starter on a budget, GPS 60 vs GPSmap60

[Doorstop_Idol]

Basically my question is in the title of the thread. I'm looking to buy my first GPS to start geocaching in earnest, however I am definitely on a budget. I think I have narrowed by choices down between the GPS60 and GPSmap60 but that is where the confusion begins. The GPS60 is more than a hundred dollars cheaper on most of the sites I have found, and the differences between the two units is only really evident in two key areas: internal memory and basemap.

 

So that is why I bring this question to the people who undoubtedly have more knowledge and experience than I. Which unit should I pursue to get me started. Is the extra money worth it for basemap and expanded memory, or should I just try to save up even more for something even higher up the GPS tier?

 

Thanks in advance.

[+ecanderson]

Basically my question is in the title of the thread. I'm looking to buy my first GPS to start geocaching in earnest, however I am definitely on a budget. I think I have narrowed by choices down between the GPS60 and GPSmap60 but that is where the confusion begins. The GPS60 is more than a hundred dollars cheaper on most of the sites I have found, and the differences between the two units is only really evident in two key areas: internal memory and basemap.

 

So that is why I bring this question to the people who undoubtedly have more knowledge and experience than I. Which unit should I pursue to get me started. Is the extra money worth it for basemap and expanded memory, or should I just try to save up even more for something even higher up the GPS tier?

 

Thanks in advance.

 

I'm a bit confused over your model numbers (it's the 60, MAP60, MAP60Cx and MAP60CSx), but this may help.

 

Unless you are planning for use of your handheld for possible road navigation, too, you may be looking to far up the food chain in the Garmin line. For the minimum gadget with truly necessary features, you might want to have a look at the eTrex Summit HC. Even this unit, without the ability to add an SD card, has considerable memory, and will hold up to 500 caches at a time in addition to the basemap it comes with. The mag compass works well in caching conditions. The actual GPS chipset is equal to that of the 60Cx or 60CSx (SiRFstar III) -- good sensitivity - which can be important under tree cover! You will find that there's a fair difference in how the 60cx behaves vs. the straight 60 in that regard. That's part of the price difference right there. If you go with the 60 series, you will likely WANT the Cx model, or the CSx with the high sensitivity GPS AND a true mag compass. I use my compass a fair bit in this area for triangulation of caches in difficult spots.

 

Here -- this may help. Focus on the sensitivity feature for starters:

 

https://buy.garmin.com/shop/compare.do?cID=...310&ra=true

 

Just don't skimp and get the straight 60 with the lower sensitivity GPS receiver.. unless you'll never be in a spot where satellite reception is ever degraded!

Edited January 10, 2010 by ecanderson

[GermanSailor]

So that is why I bring this question to the people who undoubtedly have more knowledge and experience than I. Which unit should I pursue to get me started. Is the extra money worth it for basemap and expanded memory, or should I just try to save up even more for something even higher up the GPS tier?

Hier is a link which compares both units.

 

My opinion: The basemap is useless. Just save some more money and get a unit with at least the up to date receiver. (High sensitive) That helps a lot!

 

I have the GPSMap 60CSx and I'm quite happy with it for more than two years now. Additionally I have the Etrex H which is good as well, but completely lacks the maps and routing.

 

My advice: Save some more money and get a unit with: - Maps, external Memory, a high sensitive receiver.

 

GermanSailor

[+ecanderson]

My advice: Save some more money and get a unit with: - Maps, external Memory, a high sensitive receiver.

 

GermanSailor

External memory is only needed if you need to add additional maps. It's not like Garmin lets you actually USE any additional memory (or even the 24MB some come with) for more caches. Silly system. Anyway, I'd venture to say that 90% of geocachers can make do with the basemap. A high sensitivity receiver, on the other hand, is a must for too many situations. If the OP is looking to keep the cost down, the 60Cx or CSx is not an inexpensive choice. A good one, perhaps, but a lot more expensive than the Summit HC. When it comes down to the cache site itself, there's nothing the 60 series has that the Summit HC won't do. I can't recommend the 60 series for road navigation unless it's in the hands of a navigator (human variety). Small screen, no spoken direction information -- things a purpose built road nav unit like a Nuvi or TomTom does far better. Edited January 10, 2010 by ecanderson

[+Redwoods Mtn Biker]

I'd stay away from those two units. The Venture HC is an excellent unit and is usually cheaper than the Sumnmit HC.

[+ecanderson]

I'd stay away from those two units. The Venture HC is an excellent unit and is usually cheaper than the Sumnmit HC.

Both good entry level choices. The only reason I selected the Summit HC instead of the Venture HC was for the availability of the mag compass. Apart from that and the baro altimeter, they're virtually identical units.

 

Whether the compass is worth the additional price difference between the units will depend a lot upon where a person is caching. Some who are new to this don't realize how useful the integrated mag compass feature can be if the terrain (urban or boonies) gets weird. I've had to back away from a lot of caches and triangulate to get a reasonable fix on the position of GZ. It can happen in just about any place where you're confronted with a high walls (artificial or natural), bridges, or dense overhead vegetation. Some days a GPSr just won't settle to decent values under those conditions, and if you can back out 35'~50' and get readings from a couple of angles, the search can be a lot briefer. I also appreciate that the compass page provides realtime distance to the target as I close in. I also don't need to keep reducing the radius on the map page to keep the scale making sense as I approach the target. Everyone has their own approach to a cache, but once you're within a few hundred feet, that compass page sure is nice.

[Doorstop_Idol]

Thank you already for all the advice. I'm definitely appreciative of all the varying views on the subject. I guess I just need to keep doing some research but I feel like I've narrowed my choices down again, though not to the two initial units I talked about. Haha my green is certainly showing, but everyone has to start somewhere, right?

[+ecanderson]

Thank you already for all the advice. I'm definitely appreciative of all the varying views on the subject. I guess I just need to keep doing some research but I feel like I've narrowed my choices down again, though not to the two initial units I talked about. Haha my green is certainly showing, but everyone has to start somewhere, right?

You bet, and with the bazillion GPSr units out there for sale, even if you narrow it down to just Garmin, it isn't easy.

 

FWIW: I was just reading another thread here about a new Venture HC owner wondering why he was doing what the community calls "The Drunken Bee Dance" - wandering around in circles trying to chase the blue arrow on the map page as he zoned in on a cache. It's a very rare thing that you'd see me in that kind of motion, and it's how I use the mag compass on my Summit HC that prevents a lot of that. I'll never regret the extra bucks I spent to have that feature. I cache frequently with a friend that has a 60Csx that never used his mag compass until we started caching together. Now that he's seen how it often reduces the "time to find", he wouldn't approach a cache without it turned on and operational! The only downside is Garmin's electronics implementation -- the mag compass is a bit sensitive to the charge on the batteries, so if you plan to drain down below the 1st bar below full, you'll either want to stick in some new batteries (I carry a spare set of NiMH if the day will be long) or use the recalibration procedure. That's true with ALL of Garmin's GPSr units that I've seen to date, including the 3-axis ones like my new Dakota 20.

[+SparkyInCali]

You dont have to have the magnetic compass to use the compass page usally 2-3 steps in the direction will get the compass moving.If you are trying to get to ground zero by zooming in on the arrow and the map page you will have issues wherther you have a magnetic compass or not.I usually switch to the compass screen once I am fairly close to the cache.

[+ecanderson]

You dont have to have the magnetic compass to use the compass page usally 2-3 steps in the direction will get the compass moving.If you are trying to get to ground zero by zooming in on the arrow and the map page you will have issues wherther you have a magnetic compass or not.I usually switch to the compass screen once I am fairly close to the cache.

I find that switching to the satellite "compass" mode (or being stuck with it as the only option) often causes overshoots of the target, and you have to keep moving at a decent clip to keep the results accurate. I've seen just about as many bee episodes using the satellite compass as trying to chase the map, and pretty much for the same reason -- you're getting the same feedback, just in a somewhat different form.

 

Being able to approach slowly and stop just outside the target area, and take a bearing on the target -- works great, and you can't do that with the satellite compass. Slow down or stop with the Venture and you've got no useful information at all. The thing that "looks like a compass but isn't" on the GPS screen has no idea which way you're facing with respect to the target.

 

Until you've spent a hundred or so caches watching the results "side by side", you don't fully appreciate the difference. As I say, my buddy with the 60Csx won't ever go back to his old approach, especially in areas with any signal issues where triangulation can be so helpful in speeding up the find.

Edited January 10, 2010 by ecanderson

[+ecanderson]

You dont have to have the magnetic compass to use the compass page usally 2-3 steps in the direction will get the compass moving.

Almost neglected the specifics of what you wrote. 2-3 steps in any direction will likely not move your position more than 0.001 in any direction, and there's usually that much drift in the GPSr itself as you approach GZ. At that level of resolution, the GPS will be lucky if it correctly identifies a cardinal compass point of motion, much less anything between them. What you are describing is what causes the Drunken Bee Dance regardless of which screen you are watching. Sometimes, the ONLY way to avoid this is to come up with a decent bearing a fair distance before you get begin to close on GZ. (The closer to GZ you get, the greater the angular error in the bearing will probably be.) The mag compass is generally the easiest way to accomplish that task. Edited January 10, 2010 by ecanderson

[+Picnic Monkeys]

For what it's worth we have a GPS60 - i use it on my motorbike on my mountain bike, when walking or kayaking or climbing or driving . . . you get the idea!

 

it's bombproof and simple to use - relatively cheap and it is a nice chunky size so if you have big hands or fingers then it is easy to use!

 

I always walk with a paper map alongside my gps and a normal compass so it is a backup and caching assistant.

 

As a walking and caching nabvigation aid it is brilliant!

 

but as with most gadgets - whatever you will get you will get used to and then like yours best!

 

whatever you get - enjoy!