+carnivalman Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 Hi we are new to geocaching and need a gpx I see that the Oregon is used a lot, but I like the Montana because of the larger screen. Is their much difference. Quote Link to comment
+Gitchee-Gummee Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 The Oregon has been around a bit longer... so yes, more are in use. Both are good. Do consider though, lugging around a bigger unit is not always the best solution. Some have bought a Montana because of the larger size and ended up hating it (for that reason); others loved it (for that reason). Just sumtin to twirl in your mind... Quote Link to comment
Rock Chalk Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 I bought an Oregon 600 last week (upgrade from the 400), and had a tinge of buyer's remorse when I saw a Montana in the store a few days ago. The larger screen was pretty attractive. But I run and hike a lot while caching, and I think the bigger unit would be a bigger pain to haul around. So the Oregon is probably best for me. Quote Link to comment
+carnivalman Posted November 25, 2014 Author Share Posted November 25, 2014 Thanks I don't do a lot of long hikes and think the larger screen is a better fit. Thanks for your help. Quote Link to comment
+JoeGriffin Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 I like the Montana because of the larger screen. Is their much difference. I have a Montana. Yesterday I did a 13.5 mile walk (picked up a couple of caches en-route). Most of the time the Montana was set to view the map and was in a pouch. I just whipped it out from time to time to check progress/time/distance. When I got near the first cache, I changed to Geocaching mode, to show distance to the cache, etc and hand held it. I have a short lanyard with a clip on the end; I slipped the clip round a finger, so it was "tethered" to me and held the GPSr in my palm. Very simple and it fits snuggly with the thumb on one side and the tip of the fingers just curled around the other side. After finding the second cache, it was just a couple of double clicks to the power button, to return to the Recreation profile so I could again show the route mapping and data. (Shortcuts on the Montana and Oregon make it very simple to switch between modes.) In summary, the Montana is a bit bulky, but IMO the larger screen size is a bigger "plus" that offsets the increased bulk. Quote Link to comment
+coachstahly Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 I really wish people would take the time to actually look at the specifications before saying it's too large or bulky. It's only .5 inches wider, 1.2 inches longer, and .1 inch thicker. It weighs 3 oz. more. Yes, it's larger, but not THAT much larger. Unless you have really big hands, it's only one finger segment longer and half a finger segment wider. I have a case with a lanyard and I rarely carry it in my hand until it either beeps or I feel I'm close to GZ. I have a phone that's bigger (H and W) than the Montana and Oregon but not nearly as thick as either. I think the two biggest differences are that the Oregon uses GLONASS and the Montana doesn't and (not sure about this one) that the Oregon supports .ggz (?) format to load more caches while the Montana doesn't. https://buy.garmin.com/en-US/US/catalog/product/compareResult.ep?compareProduct=113538&compareProduct=75228 Quote Link to comment
+splashy Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 The Oregon model has been along for some time, but you have older and newer models here. I have the Oregon 600 now and had the Montana before. I love both, they both do the same, more or less. Sold the Montana a few month ago because the model got older and once there's a new model the older model is hard to sell for a good price. The Monterra is not considered by me. Once a new good working model with a large screen pops up I will buy the larger model again. Quote Link to comment
+Walts Hunting Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 Have had the Montana since it came out. Do 99% of my caching on foot or bike. I use a carabiner to hook it to me when hiking and love the size. Quote Link to comment
+kunarion Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 Hi we are new to geocaching and need a gpx I see that the Oregon is used a lot, but I like the Montana because of the larger screen. Is their much difference. It depends on which models you're comparing. The Oregon 600 series has a new "tabbed" Geocaching interface, Glonass (may allow faster satellite locks in certain situations), "glove-friendly" touchscreen, and can hold "millions of Geocaches". I especially needed a decent touchscreen, so after comparing features, bought an Oregon 650T. My brother has a Montana, and the car mount is excellent. The Montana speaks during car navigation, just like a regular Nuvi. Pretty sweet, since I spend half my Geocaching time just driving to caches. I place one or two choice caches on my Nuvi to get into an area. I also sometimes use my Oregon for a tricky street routing, and at those times, the Montana would really shine. Quote Link to comment
+carnivalman Posted November 25, 2014 Author Share Posted November 25, 2014 Thanks you all I just bought the Montana and can't wait. See you caching. Quote Link to comment
+Mineral2 Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 The Montana might also be nice in that it's just large enough to double as vehicle GPS. You might not need to buy two units. Quote Link to comment
+splashy Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 In fact you will be also very happy using the unit in the car. Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.